Aluminium shuffler
I'm inclined to agree with you on this, but it looks like a close call, I gather Norwegian have hired lobbyist to push their case in the US. My own view is that it's slightly positive that the application (route licence) under open skies has not yet been rejected. I suspect that this is a legal minefield, if they reject an operator who holds a EU state AOC then i suspect there will be a big question mark over whether the AOC should have been issued at all? simply rejecting the application because union or airline pressure on both sides of the Atlantic will not be sufficient.
There is no question about safety or indeed quality, the use of crews based out of Bangkok & Thai cabin crew is easily resolved and that seems to be the core issue, many airlines use overseas based cabin crew in part because of the logistics of off days plus language skills.
I would think the DoT are keen to find a way out on this that does not involve saying NO to Norwegian, but at the same time addresses the unions concerns, the easiest way given that Norwegian now has US based cabin crew is to ensure that only US or EU based nationals operate these services, pilots are a bigger problem in part because they would need to hold an EASA licence to fly on a EU AOC so hiring a few Americans might not be a quick fix.
Of course if the USA was a little more liberated on foreign ownership rights then Norwegian could set up a US subsidiary company.
+ large in service fleet of Boeing aircraft, firm orders for MAX are 100 +100 options, firm orders for 787 are now around 17 current NG fleet is 88 with a sizeable number to come before the MAX in 2017.
+excellent product reviews despite all the 787 reliability issues
+ Irish AOC, rejecting the application will be akin to saying to Ireland that your a flag of connivence
- Complicated business structure
- Thai cabin crew or non EU cabin crew
- Bangkok based pilots who are EU national or EASA licence holders
Count down is on for LGW US flights