Open Skies - but not for Ireland
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Open Skies - but not for Ireland
In the immortal words of Capt. Blackadder, "I think the phrase rhymes with clucking bell."
Our government, you know the one that's supposed to defend our interests and maintain our competitiveness - is busily trying to negotiate an "out" clause from the Open Aviation Area deal expected by the end of the year. The govt wants a 2-3 year "short transitional period" to allow SNN to adjust to life without the stopover.
So, the govt - in defence of this specious piece of nonsensical protectionism - is content to hold Aer Lingus and Ireland back for 2-3 years while SNN "adjusts"; every other airport will have to fend for itself, but oh no, not Shannon. It doesn't matter that the last traffic info showed that despite the "help" of the stopover, UK and European airports showed a 60%+ jump in traffic; t/a traffic bounded massively ... by 2%.
I'm wondering how EI will be able to add new US cities with the stopover still in place, or how US carriers will react. I mean, if they can fly to any other airport in Europe (well, possibly not LHR) without restriction, why would they want to increase services to Ireland?
What shocks me even more is that according to the Irish Times article below, the EU Commission doesn't see a problem. Are they blind? What part of Open Skies don't they understand? And why are the Americans, so keen to work towards Open Skies, even negotiating with another country for an exception?
Does anyone know what EI thinks of this (not that the govt cares!). I keep asking if I'm missing something fundamental here, but I can't see what. Here Ireland is, on the precipice of one of the biggest economic gains of its history - being slap, bang in the middle of the world's largest aviation area and it's own govt is saying "oh no you don't"
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/fin...OPENSKIES.html
Our government, you know the one that's supposed to defend our interests and maintain our competitiveness - is busily trying to negotiate an "out" clause from the Open Aviation Area deal expected by the end of the year. The govt wants a 2-3 year "short transitional period" to allow SNN to adjust to life without the stopover.
So, the govt - in defence of this specious piece of nonsensical protectionism - is content to hold Aer Lingus and Ireland back for 2-3 years while SNN "adjusts"; every other airport will have to fend for itself, but oh no, not Shannon. It doesn't matter that the last traffic info showed that despite the "help" of the stopover, UK and European airports showed a 60%+ jump in traffic; t/a traffic bounded massively ... by 2%.
I'm wondering how EI will be able to add new US cities with the stopover still in place, or how US carriers will react. I mean, if they can fly to any other airport in Europe (well, possibly not LHR) without restriction, why would they want to increase services to Ireland?
What shocks me even more is that according to the Irish Times article below, the EU Commission doesn't see a problem. Are they blind? What part of Open Skies don't they understand? And why are the Americans, so keen to work towards Open Skies, even negotiating with another country for an exception?
Does anyone know what EI thinks of this (not that the govt cares!). I keep asking if I'm missing something fundamental here, but I can't see what. Here Ireland is, on the precipice of one of the biggest economic gains of its history - being slap, bang in the middle of the world's largest aviation area and it's own govt is saying "oh no you don't"
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/fin...OPENSKIES.html
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ireland nowadays
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that the US is opposed to doing a special deal for Shannon.
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/fin...OPENSKIES.html (Subscription required)
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/fin...OPENSKIES.html (Subscription required)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, saw that in the IT this morning; sad that we have to rely on the Americans to protect our interests, but at least it stops the govt messing things up.
Although the govt has said it will continue to try for a special transitional period at the next round of talks, from 14/11, I suspect that Cullen & Co. are saying this for political reasons and have effectively given up on it.
Roll on Summer 2006!
Next problem: how does EI get hold of acft it needs to grow capacity? There no 330/340s available and only three 777s in storage ...
Although the govt has said it will continue to try for a special transitional period at the next round of talks, from 14/11, I suspect that Cullen & Co. are saying this for political reasons and have effectively given up on it.
Roll on Summer 2006!
Next problem: how does EI get hold of acft it needs to grow capacity? There no 330/340s available and only three 777s in storage ...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ireland nowadays
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps, take an A319 or two temporarily to open the routes up, while they look for suitable aircraft. It depends how much of a loss they'd be willing to take as they establish the routes.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
840
exactly. Operate smallies out of SNN (319/757/310/762 take your pick depending on what you can get) and leave all the 330s in DUB where they belong. AA are leading the way on this.
exactly. Operate smallies out of SNN (319/757/310/762 take your pick depending on what you can get) and leave all the 330s in DUB where they belong. AA are leading the way on this.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ireland nowadays
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MarkD
That wasn't quite what I meant. I was assuming the Shannon stopover was gone and Aer Lingus' main aim would be to be the first onto a number of routes. It was a way around the lack of suitable planes.
I can't really see that it's possible to run an A319 transatlantic profitably. However, it should be able to make the run to some north-eastern./northern cities - Philadelphia, Detroit, Minneapolis(?) - to establish routes while suitable aircraft are sourced.
After that perhaps they could be used to provide more suitable capacity out of Shannon, but as I said, I have my doubts about whether you could operate an A319 profitably on transatlantic routes.
That wasn't quite what I meant. I was assuming the Shannon stopover was gone and Aer Lingus' main aim would be to be the first onto a number of routes. It was a way around the lack of suitable planes.
I can't really see that it's possible to run an A319 transatlantic profitably. However, it should be able to make the run to some north-eastern./northern cities - Philadelphia, Detroit, Minneapolis(?) - to establish routes while suitable aircraft are sourced.
After that perhaps they could be used to provide more suitable capacity out of Shannon, but as I said, I have my doubts about whether you could operate an A319 profitably on transatlantic routes.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it becomes clear that it's impossible to get the aircraft they want - the 330/340 (and this looks to be likely), then why not go to the other extreme and get a larger aircraft. There are about 20 747-400s in storage; okay, not the most likely option, but if it's a choice between ceding new markets to possible entrants, what do you do? Cede, or get an aircraft bigger than you might otherwise need.
Another possibility might be to wet lease them from Air Atlanta, on the understanding that it would be a short term fix, pending the addition of new aircraft.
Surely, EI would be able to fill these aircraft to JFK, ORD, MCO or BOS. The runway at DUB is obviously a concern, but using a -400 might give EI an opportunity to experiment with long haul low cost services.
Another possibility might be to wet lease them from Air Atlanta, on the understanding that it would be a short term fix, pending the addition of new aircraft.
Surely, EI would be able to fill these aircraft to JFK, ORD, MCO or BOS. The runway at DUB is obviously a concern, but using a -400 might give EI an opportunity to experiment with long haul low cost services.
