UKpaxman you seem to Contradict yourself in your last post. You say that the ATP would have its fair share of problems when operating, but then on your only experience of the 146 you say you had to sit around and wait due to tech problems. Does this not put your point into question. . .As I stated in a post before the ATPs with BWA did have their problems but I seemed to be because BWA Scotland were not getting the engineering support and spares required from HQ. If you look at the other ATP operators that have applied for the work ie BAC Express and Alpine, it would seem sensible to suggest they would be able to give more of their time and money (in terms of spares and engineering support) to these aircraft being their only interests. As one posted above with a bit of TLC the ATP is a great aircraft, more suitable for the job, even as you suggested as one who travels on it. Any operator who is willing to start up and devote their business ONLY towards this route with no other hidden agenda, must be worth their weight in gold.. .You must remember the slump in the airline market is only a tempory one. Six to twelve months down the line it will pick up again and those airlines who have gone into this with the agenda of a short term fix, in terms of gaining capital to survive through this period should be looked apon with caution. Aircraft will make more money operating on an adhoc charter basis on other routes than they will on what seems to be a very tight profit margin, on this route (ie the 146).. .From talking to friends in the industry I must say Flightline are in no better shape financially than BWA were before they went under. From what I can understand it was either them or BWA for the chop. Do the oil consortium really want to take that sort of risk again, to find out 6 months down the line they have to go through this all again. I suppose only time will tell.
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]</p>