Brits poised to Invade Canada? Again! [Archive]

Willie Everlearn

2nd Dec 2001, 20:45

Gentlemen, hold onto your hats. This is going to be interesting.
________________________

British carrier wants to fly Canadians to Caribbean
Last Updated: Fri Nov 30 15:06:20 2001
TORONTO - A British charter company has applied to fly passengers from Toronto to destinations in the south. Air 2000 has formally asked the Canada Transportation Agency for permission.
Canada, like most countries, does not allow foreign carriers to fly passengers to third countries.
Air 2000 wants to provide the service for its sister company, Signature Vacations. After the collapse of Canada 3000, Canadians have been left with fewer choices for warm vacations.
"It's a sample of the creativity we're going to see in the future regarding air travel," said Martha Chapman, spokesperson for Signature.
Air 2000 has described its request as urgent "in order to avoid the disruption of holiday travel plans of hundreds of Canadian passengers."
It wants to operate from Thursday to Sunday out of Toronto to Cancun, Puerto Plata, Puerto Vallarta and Cozumel in Mexico and the Bahamas. More flights may be added.
Air 2000 is applying for "Fifth Freedom" rights which usually involves cargo flights or limited charter flights.
For instance, airlines such as Russia's Aeroflot, Varig Brazilian Airlines and African International Airways, have agreements with the CTA to fly cargo from Canada.
The CTA is gathering input from the Canadian industry first before it makes a ruling.
Denis Jacob, head of Air Transat, says he doesn't like the idea. Jacob says if a British carrier is allowed to do this in Canada, then Canadian carriers should be given the same opportunity in Britain.
Air Canada is also against the idea.
"Given the state of Canada's air industry, Air Canada opposes this application on a matter of principle," says Priscille LeBlanc of Air Canada.
Representatives of the airline division of the Canadian Union of Public Employees say the idea makes no sense especially with thousands of Canadian airline employees out of work.

Lou Scannon

2nd Dec 2001, 23:02

For many years, Canada 3000 had Canadian registered aircraft and crews based in the United Kingdom flying charter flights that carried British passengers on their holidays.

It's called reciprocity. (If there is such a word).

Dirty Harry

2nd Dec 2001, 23:14

Seems fair to me, particularly as many of our North American friends have enjoyed flying in Europe for the past few years, almost without restrictions. Will be interesting to see if they are granted permission.

A Very Civil Pilot

3rd Dec 2001, 00:00

Even if it is a UK based company running the operation, surely it would be more cost effective for them to use Cabnadian based a/c and crew, rather than shipping a load over from the UK. with the cirrent job losses in Canada, there would be both available for hire.

beamer

3rd Dec 2001, 01:34

I thought that with the demise of Canada 3000
there was not much in the way of an airline
business left in the '51st state'. Canadian
aircraft have been operating on behalf of
UK carriers for a number of years and MANY
pilots are still working in the UK along with
hundreds more from the colonies when a greater number of British pilots have been
laid off over the last few months. These
pilots will not lose their jobs because they
are not British nationals BUT do not expect
UK carriers to pass up the opportunity to
seek winter contracts in North America simply
because the locals cry foul. If these contracts do come to fruition it is more than
likely that local cabin staff, engineers,
dispatchers not to mention ground handling
personnel will be utilised so its not all so
bad as it sounds at first.

There are other ways around this one but I'll
let you work that out yourselves and it would
still see British Pilots in British aircraft
but without ANY Canadian employment involved!

aviatter

3rd Dec 2001, 02:36

Bring it on. Most Canadians would love to see another airline (any airline, from anywhere) come to life in Canada to challenge and compete with Air Canada. I am positive Air 2000 would have no trouble filling their planes with Canadians eager to fly with anyone other than Air Canada.

MarkD

3rd Dec 2001, 03:12

I think you'll find Hollywood has decided the 51st State is Britain [as in Samuel L Jackson's new flick].

I guess this makes Canada more like, say, Puerto Rico :D :D :D

[Edited for typo]

[ 02 December 2001: Message edited by: MarkD ]

SunSeaSandfly

3rd Dec 2001, 03:48

S'pose it would be alright,-if Caribbean carriers were allowed to carry Canucks to the UK.
Reciprocity, eh? :cool:

Willie Everlearn

3rd Dec 2001, 05:04

Well, well, well.
Top marks for Signature and Air 2000 for their collaborative and very creative proposal to save the Canadian Tourist Industry this winter. Well done indeed.

I think it’s a great idea.

In fact, I compare it to the AACS setup in Britain. Which I have no problem with. Don’t you?

Let’s see. Air 2000 (AACS) would operate ‘G’ (N) registered aircraft outside the UK (USA) and base them in Toronto (EGSS) with European Crew (European Crew).

Hang on. European crews? Not again! That wouldn’t be cricket.

We could insist that JAA (FAA) licenced aircrew fly these ‘G’ (N) registered aeroplanes, of course. That would be consistent, wouldn’t it? Regs and all.

But, wait a minute! European crews? Got to think about that one.

Surely we’d have to insist on the right to live and work here in Canada. Otherwise, how fair would that be?

It would be better for US if we insisted Air 2000 (AACS) re-register the assigned aircraft on the ‘C’ (G) registry. In fact, if they re-register them, we could further insist on a Canadian (JAA) ATPL for aircrew operating these ‘contracts’ and improve employment prospects for our own unemployed pilots. Wouldn’t that be a good and sensible idea? Indeed it would!

Or, maybe we could leave the aircraft involved in this ‘airlift’ on the ‘G’ (N) registry and still insist on Canadian (European) aircrew, whom the European JAA could licence (validations, of course. Wouldn’t have it any other way). A mere formality, as we’re the ones who have the ‘right of abode’ and who’d be best familiar with and able to deal with the demands of North American accents, airways, procedures, etc. Wouldn’t want to compromise safety. Right?

What the heck? I like the idea.

Maybe I’ll write my MP and support the proposal, with conditions, eh?

Welcome to Canada ‘Jetset’.

SAM 2M

3rd Dec 2001, 05:40

Could be wrong here but wasn't Canada 3000 born out of/sprang from Air2000? Even the colours were the same before they parted company.

Also the owners of Air2000 are First Choice who own Signature who are the source of the traffic.

I stand to be corrected by those more in the know.

I post thses as discussion points. :confused:

pigboat

3rd Dec 2001, 06:15

Never happen unless it's to the benefit of 905 voters. :D

David Hurst

3rd Dec 2001, 11:28

But wasn't Canada 3000 run by a Brit - Angus Kinnear. Where is the line drawn on nationality between the man at the top and the ones further down? Someone must have given him permission to live and work in Canada and therefore permission could be granted to others.

Willie Everlearn

3rd Dec 2001, 13:04

Simple.
Angus Kinnear invested his way in then became a Canadian Citizen.

What's yer point?

ShotOne

3rd Dec 2001, 14:54

It does seem surprising that there is not Canadian capacity to do this -what with all the grounded aircraft and flight crews.

That said, there have been plenty of Canadian registered and crewed aircraft based in UK airports (including short haul routes) this summer.

Tan

3rd Dec 2001, 20:48

aviatter

Get a life....

The Guvnor

3rd Dec 2001, 21:16

Willie Everlearn - don't forget that it was the Yanks that were bleating about AACs, not the Brits.

Canada has always (unlike the States) honoured the reciprocity system - ie Canadians can come over here with their aircraft in the Summer to help out UK carriers; and in the Winter we do the same over there.

Right now, the problem seems to be that with the exception of Air Transat, all the charter carriers have gone bust - so there's no one capable of operating. Having enjoyed fun and games with Transport Canada trying to get them to issue various approvals, there's zip chance of anyone being able to be up and flying in time to give the Canucks their chance of a few days in the warmth of the Caribbean or Mexico.

The Air 2000 proposal is therefore the most logical one.

SunSeaSandFly - true, but I suspect that most Caribbean crews when given the choice between spending Carnival season shuttling between the frozen north and the European steppes would prefer to be at home.

Squawk 8888

3rd Dec 2001, 21:41

Great idea but it won't happen- TS is Montréal based and well-connected to the Liberal Party. If this deal gets approved a lot of federal leadership candidates are going to be scrambling for a new source of funds.

The Guvnor

3rd Dec 2001, 22:00

Incidentally, I note from the CAA's Official Record Series 2 (http://www.atol.org.uk/airlinelic/pdf_files/or2number2.pdf) that Airtours have been given permission to wet lease an A330 C-FBUS from Skyservice between 15 November to 30 April.

RATBOY

4th Dec 2001, 17:55

The reason the US doesn't do reciprocity (sp?) deals is it doesn't make any sense for the US airline industry. US airlines are the 800 pound gorilla and so is the US market. It thus makes no economic sense to the airlines to let every Tom, Dick and Mary (or Nigel) fly into US cities when the only thing there is to offer in return is reciprocity in the form of the UK or euro airports and market.

When it finally gets to the point that there
are only 5 airlines and they are all multinational then it won't matter to the airlines but until then there will be no "open skies" because that would not be good for the ATA, and if it isn't good for the ATA it won't happen.

The Guvnor

4th Dec 2001, 18:34

RATBOY - USA = protectionism at its finest!

Don't forget other protectionist activities such as the 'Fly America' policy and currently of course the ban on all non-US private aircraft - rather strange that one, considering the number of N registered aircraft resident in the UK and elsewhere!

flying monty

4th Dec 2001, 20:10

Sorry folks but I can't see the Canadian government approve this one. Skyservice just hired 77 exC3 pilots, a large number of f/as and mtce types to fly the Caribbean charters for the season. From what I know at least 4 additional 320 to be added to their fleet. Not too sure how permanent this will be. We will have to see.

PaperTiger

4th Dec 2001, 20:56

Guv, the ban was relaxed a couple of days ago. Canadian, Mexican, Bermudan and Cayman registered a/c now allowed into the US. The last two undoubtedly to accomodate all those well-heeled types whose expensive chariots are registered there.

Ole Flashy

4th Dec 2001, 22:42

Air Communist....er sorry...Air Canada is in the process of grovelling and snivelling to the Govt of Canada for millions of dollars to upgrade their failling bilingualism program.
There is the chance for Air 2000 to get some seed money.If
you mention bi-lingualism in Canada the trough is filled with bucks to feast from.
When Air 200 goes belly up, is there an Air 1000?

Willie Everlearn

5th Dec 2001, 00:47

The airline industry in Canada is intent on self-destruction, and for all intents and purposes, has been fataly wounded. Recent events included.

Our Liberal Government, having painted itself into a corner over airline mergers and competition, is running out of, and short of solutions. Despite protests from out of work airline workers, this government refuses to listen. It’s its own boss. For this reason I expect to see Air 2000 operate out of Toronto this winter as a viable solution to the present state of the industry.

And why not?
Perhaps they are welcome more than many care to admit.

We should expect this proposal to meet with ‘token’ resistance in Parliament. The number of ‘out of work’ airline employees is only a fraction of the number found in our Fisheries Industry. Bureaucrats will make that comparison and realize the present airline unemployment situation isn’t that bad by comparison. In fact, there are many within Government on record (during the Air Canada/Canadian Airlines merger) as having called for the allowance of Foreign Carriers to operate within Canada. The rationale being the threat that exists to the consumer is of far greater concern than their concern for the industry through forced and ‘artificial’ competition.

Frankly, with all the Canadian consumer has had to put up with for the past 10 years, there is likely to be a reasonably large number of Canadians who’d support Air 2000 and Signature. Fed by anti-Air Canada attitudes on all fronts.

It will take months for an alternative to arrive on the scene. The hopeful startups already stating their wishes to compete with Air Canada.
Will we ever learn?

Angus Kinear is talking about creating a charter airline from the remnants of Canada 3000.
Michel Leblanc is talking about an Eastern Canada based, low-cost carrier, modelled after ‘Southwest’. (Didn’t CanJet just fail with that idea before C3 rushed in?)

Who knows what we’ll end up with? But this might very well be a timely and sensible short term solution to a problem the industry in Canada is going to face for some time to come.

Whether or not it’s our First Choice, remains to be seen.

;)

Willie Everlearn

5th Dec 2001, 01:27

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/spinjet.gif

Collenette tells Air Canada to reduce market share

By STEVEN CHASE
Globe and Mail Update

Ottawa — Ottawa will re-regulate the airline industry unless Air Canada yields domestic market share to smaller competitors, Transport Minister David Collenette warned Tuesday.
"We have said to them ... we're going to have to find ways to basically reduce your domestic [market] share. Otherwise, frankly, Parliament's going to have to re-regulate the entire industry," he told a Senate transport committee Thursday.
"We cannot have one operator out there without competition."
Mr. Collenette was addressing the fact that Air Canada has a domestic market share of about 80 per cent in the wake of the demise of rival Canada 3000 — a situation he described as "untenable."
Under federal legislation, Air Canada is required to fly smaller routes until the end of next year. Mr. Collenette said smaller airlines could take over those routes, leaving Air Canada to fly the larger ones.
"That's something we have to discuss," he said. "You can't continue to force them to serve those communities and then also say: 'You have to make a deal with us to reduce your market share.'"
Air Canada's market share fell from about 80 per cent at the time it acquired Canadian Airlines to about 70 per cent before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, because of quick growth at WestJet and Canada 3000.

Last month, Mr. Collenette said Canadian travellers shouldn't count on foreign airlines to provide domestic competition.
Mr. Collenette also said that, despite the competition challenges arising from the demise of Canada 3000, he has no immediate plans to open Canada's skies to U.S. carriers.
But he said the Canadian industry still deserves a chance to fix the gap before turning to outside the country. He said he would expect Calgary-based WestJet Airlines Ltd. and Air Transat, a subsidiary of Transat A.T. Inc. of Montreal, to expand services to provide competition for Air Canada.
Air Canada executives, who followed Mr. Collenette at the committee, said they are as anxious as the government to reach a solution.
"Eighty per cent market share is a curse in many ways," said senior vice-president Peter Donolo. "It sets us up as a target, as everybody's favourite whipping boy."

Tan

5th Dec 2001, 01:43

Duke Elegant

What happened Duke, AC turn you down?

AIRLIFT

5th Dec 2001, 02:18

Skyservice is the one that's been doing the flying in the UK for te past few summers. They are also te ones that won the contracts from signature when they were up for grabs. The main reason behide this, is that no one else wanted to agree to the terms of signature ( Air 2000 would fly in canada durring the winter).

As for not enough capacity in YYZ or else where in Canada, It's the bigest joke of the year. Just talk with the hundreds of pilot and other airline employes that are unemployed because the maket could not support the over capacity it had before C3 folded. The botom line is they went out of bisness cause the load factor was too low.

Given the situation of aviation in Canada right now I hope that the govement will let things stablize befor they do anything stupid....

And aviatter Get a life........

[ 04 December 2001: Message edited by: AIRLIFT ]

Web-Footed Flyer

5th Dec 2001, 02:38

Hey Hey Airlift well Said !!! :D :D :D

basil fawlty

5th Dec 2001, 03:15

I can understand the need to limit the traffic rights given to overseas operators in certain countries, by allowing access to a large domestic market with very little worth having in return.
However, let us not confuse the two completely seperate issues of airline operations and the free movement of labour.
It never ceases to amaze me how the most international of businesses (aviation) is one of the most restrictive when it comes to the validation of foreign qualifications (licences). If the UK CAA, or any other aviation regulator elsewhere, considers that a pilot is not competent to operate an aircraft based on a validation of a foreign licence then why are they permitted to operate in UK or national airspace at all, as crew on a foreign registered aircraft? The answer is, unfortunately, well known; FINANCIAL AND REGULATORY PROTECTIONISM, mainly in the interest of the regulators and training organisations. Either a flightcrew member is capable of operating an aircraft safely or he is not. The registration markings painted on the outside are totally irrelevent. This is hypocricy at its finest. I am not suggesting there would be a mass migration of pilots, engineers etc due to cultural and language barriers (This is why the fudamental concept of the JAA is a failure) but at least the system would be fair, which right now it ain't! Perhaps all those who are moaning about the fact that holders of foreign licenses are operating here should consider this point- What if the thousands of British pilots working abroad were given the "silver bullet" because all the work was to go to nationals not expats?? They would flock home and there wouldn't be a flying job to be had in this country for the next ten years!! See, it works both ways. Makes me wonder what ICAO actually does too. This is little more than a luncheon club I think. :D

Airprox

5th Dec 2001, 03:27

If Air 2000 get this contract will I get my job back?

Willie Everlearn

5th Dec 2001, 04:19

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/FMSnon.gif

Basil

I couldn't agree with you more.
But, we'll see.

gumbi

5th Dec 2001, 05:10

SQUACK 8888! where do you get your info as to AT being well connected to the Liberal party? first time I hear that one! and it's funny!

m&v

5th Dec 2001, 05:29

First of all,Air2000,is part of or is owned by 'First Choice',the parent Company for 'Signature Vacations.Signature is on,or has,signed a contract for "SKYSERVICE" to undertake ,or some of,the flying originally to be flown by Canada3000(Financial Post 5th).Air Transat also hopes to fly more,than planned,this winter(their Ads' abound)..
Sky's hired quite a few 'qualified'guys/girls from C3,to cover the expansion(with some aircraft from ex C3).
According to the 'post'there's to be an announcement next few days. :D

RATBOY

5th Dec 2001, 19:19

There WAS a ban on non-US reg non-air carrier operations. something about people flying in with A/C full of who knows what going who knows where (talk about open skies!). The ban on part 91 operations by foreign reg A/C is not total, you have to file a flight plan and get a clearance, kind of like a prior permission authorization for a military airfield used to be.

If other countries want to let N reg aircraft operate, that is their call. Since so many do I guess they just recognize the value/quality/capability/whatever that comes with it.

If Canada is to be considered like a 51st state why don't they harmonize their air regulation and commerce with US, make it one big market rather than one big (US) and one dinky (Canada) and provide the benefits of competition to our neighbors to the north. Let's see, those benefits are lower fares and more choices if you are flying from one big hub to another. If you are flying from East Jeasus to Podunk forget it. Hmmm lots of East Jeasuss and Podunks in Canada so maybe that wouldn't be so hot. But then NAVCANADA could run FAA ATC as a partial privatized organization

Willie Everlearn

6th Dec 2001, 01:58

RATBOY

Great suggestion. When our governments stop fighting over softwood lumber and NAFTA, maybe we'll get it on and North America will end up one market.

With the state of the airline industry up here, not that yours is much better, it seems like a sensible and viable suggestion that many of our elected officials seem to be considering.
;)

But, alas, most licenced pilots up here want protectionist policies and are unlikely to agree with the suggestion.
:confused:

Scud Runner

6th Dec 2001, 04:57

Signature will not sign with Air Transat for the long term because Air Transat owns a tour operator. Why buy lift from your own competitor if there's another alternative? I fully expect that Air 2000 will get the go-ahead to fly in Canada this winter. After that, Signature will sign a contract with Skyservice for several dedicated aircraft, something they had when they were with Royal (may it rest in pieces) Airlines.

Canadians who would protest against this should remember how many Canadian pilots have had the benefit of employment through some U.K. charter carriers for several years now.

Scud

snow storm

6th Dec 2001, 07:40

I have been flying overseas for the last 2 years because there's no job in Canada so .......I can not believe that there is no one up north capable of starting something solid like Transat or Westjet .
:mad: null

tomvanmigem

6th Dec 2001, 16:51

Protectionism is only one of the obstacles every airline has to face, and governments should promote the aviation industry instead of heading in the direction that the Middle East terrorists are hoping for.

Whatever the decisions made by governments to aid the world aviation industry, I hope they keep the most important people in focus: the pilots themselves. Are we not in the best position to navigate? (Based on the current discussion, I'd say yes)

Last line on my CV:
"...Fluent in English, French, Dutch. Will learn Inuit, evade lumberjacks that are "OK" (and other polar predators) and have pledged to re-introduce new elements into the northern DNA-pool."

Wish me luck!

RATBOY

6th Dec 2001, 17:36

Willie- Your name asks the question and I think you know the answer.

The problems Canadian and US airlines have in common are that the bright new jets (even RJs, I think if they can manage to get out of everyone else's way) need lots of punters in the back. To get lots of punters in the back you either get a bunch of paxs in one spot or make lots of stops. Don't think there are more than a half dozen or so places to get enough paxs together in Canada, so you then have to feed with smaller aircraft. The feed with commuter/smaller carriers trick is somewhat disruptive, but does require more pilots.

The economics of the situation don't support many carriers and flights, including charters. Certainly can appreciate a degree of protective/restrictive policy to benefit the locals. Believe the benefit runs mostly to airline owners/operators that want a cozy little monopoly and indirectly but more importantly to the banks and other capital investors that want their investments to be safe. The pilots and staff are on and off work as needed and many want to be mobile internationally so they are on work more than off. This is especially important for staff in a relatively small aviation industry like Canada's. It is somewhat easier for Canadian staff to be mobile, I suppose, because of their rep (well deserved from my experience) of being well trained and well qualified and some even speak english (eh?).

Remember that the best way to make a million $ (even Canadian ones) in aviation is to start with 2 million

Willie Everlearn

6th Dec 2001, 22:25

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/spinjet.gif

Liberals have split personality on airlines

By MATHEW INGRAM
Globe and Mail Update
In the Farrelly brothers' comedy Me, Myself and Irene, Jim Carrey plays a man with a split personality who keeps waking up and discovering that his alter ego has caused all sorts of havoc, which he then has to try and fix. Federal Transport Minister David Collenette would get a terrible sense of deja vu watching this particular movie, because his reaction to the current state of the airline industry is remarkably similar.
"How did Air Canada's market share get so huge?" Mr. Collenette asks himself, upon waking up from a deep sleep. "That isn't right. Why doesn't someone do something? I'm going to have to take strong action to correct this outrageous situation." In reality, of course, it was the Transport Minister and his own government who created the situation that Mr. Collenette now describes as "untenable," by pushing Air Canada to merge with Canadian Airlines and then arranging things so the deal could proceed.
In particular, the Liberals — led by Mr. Collenette — effectively tied up the competition bureau and its commissioner, Konrad von Finckenstein, by suspending the federal Competition Act and preventing them from conducting a comprehensive review of the merger. Now, all of a sudden, Mr. Collenette is saying that firm action must be taken against Air Canada, and Industry Minister Brian Tobin is passing new competition laws that give the bureau more power to levy fines, impose cease-and-desist orders, and so on.
What happened to change Mr. Collenette's mind? Why, Air Canada has used its size, borrowing power and massive fleet to become a hydra-headed beast that competes with virtually every other airline out there. Running a charter like Canada 3000? Air Canada is in that business too, using its money-losing main routes and other operations to subsidize its new Tango unit. Running a discount airline like WestJet? Air Canada will soon be in that business too, doing pretty much the same thing with its new discount operation called Zip (named for how much money it will make, no doubt).
Perhaps Mr. Collenette was under the impression that when Air Canada merged with Canadian, the resulting entity would be subservient to Ottawa — competing just enough to keep prices low, but not enough to put other competitors out of business; flying to every little podunk town in the country, and employing thousands more people than it could afford to pay, but at the same time not raising ticket prices, or firing people in that inconvenient way that private companies do. Instead, this airline version of Frankenstein's monster wreaks havoc — sometimes without even meaning to.
The inconvenient fact is that corporations cannot be turned into instruments of public policy, no matter how much the government wishes they could be. That's what Crown corporations are for, which is why they so often fail by the traditional standards of the business world. Pushing Air Canada and Canadian together may have served all sorts of purposes from Ottawa's point of view, but it is ludicrous to set up such a situation and then expect the company you helped create to refrain from competing with whatever tools it has — which is essentially what Air Canada is trying to do.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Collenette now says he is considering virtually any option, including so-called "sixth freedom" rights that would allow U.S. carriers to pick up Canadian passengers and fly them to Canadian destinations (through a U.S. hub). But at the same time, he says the industry may have to be reregulated. What kind of solution would that be? Even now, conspiracy theorists are putting together the theory that the entire Air Canada/Canadian merger was just a way of making the industry so dysfunctional that Ottawa would have to step in and take the reins again.
Mr. Collenette and his Liberal counterparts are like children whose new puppy grows into a full-sized dog — frustrated that their pet won't do their bidding. Instead of trying the corporate equivalent of gene-splicing to create a company that would serve their purposes, the government should have let Canadian Airlines go under and then restructure itself through bankruptcy proceedings, a route which might have left a smaller, competitive carrier. Between that and WestJet, the market might be a whole lot less imbalanced (although Canada 3000's failure was largely its own doing).
Now, the government is reduced to threatening Air Canada with reregulation, pushing new competition legislation, and muttering about sixth freedoms and cabotage with the United States — as though its own policies had nothing to do with the mess that currently exists in the industry.

Tan

7th Dec 2001, 20:38

Just think how the Canadian Liberal Government could reorganize the world of aviation. Everybody would be broke in short order just as they are trying to do to AC.

Only in Canada you say...pity

doo

8th Dec 2001, 02:34

Go ahead given. www.cta-otc.gc.ca/rulings-decisions/orders/2001/A/2001-A-568 (http://www.cta-otc.gc.ca/rulings-decisions/orders/2001/A/2001-A-568) e.html

Ella

8th Dec 2001, 12:53

I can confirm that Air 2000 are operating two 757's, one out of Toronto, the other out of Winnipeg as from 20th Dec. But only for one month.

Willie Everlearn

8th Dec 2001, 20:21

If past Canadian Gov't behavior is any indication, one month will quickly turn into two (three, four...). This gov't seems intent on deflecting the blame for any incompetence it displays in handling our aviation industry.

I have no qualms about AMM operating in Canada. For one month, or for the winter season. Canada 3000 topped off First Choice demand by wet leasing to Air 2000 and operating out of Manchester for a number of seasons.

I have every confidence in the Canadian travel industry, whom I know from the past, would be using Canadian carriers if Canadian carriers had the capacity available to serve the winter 'snowbirds' travel demands. It simply isn't there.

I've watched the Canadian airline industry self-destruct for at least the past 12 years. It is almost inevitable that we are going to end up with foreign carriers operating in Canada. Re-regulating the industry would not help.

Robert Milton is now on record as calling for 'Open Skies' between Canada and the US.
This just may be the way forward and out of this Collenette whirlpool that is sucking the industry 'down the toilet'.

FcU

9th Dec 2001, 00:16

Here's a thought, the Canadian travelling public get what they deserve. For years they as a whole have used price as a sole factor for which airline they fly on. They have continued to insist that $199 cad (80 GBP)is a fair price to pay to fly 3000 miles return, ignoring the high costs of flying airplanes safely and efficiently. C3 did this better than any of the other lowcost carriers and look where they are now, the rest of the charters should take note as there is always going to be someone to undercut you. The Canadian traveller now thinks that it's not fair that they should have to pay 10 times that amount for the same flight and want the govvies to "make them stop" (read as a whining child) at the same time they don't give a toss about the hard working dedicated airline employees that are in a constant struggle to save their jobs, usually at any cost. I say pay your money and enjoy the monster that has been created in A/C because you deserve it. It's economics stupid. :mad:

Anti Skid On

9th Dec 2001, 00:59

Too true FCJ, but that's on their charter routes where the tour company would (part of the same group) would be screwing every last cent out of the hotel op's, day trips, etc. I recently had to fly long haul (with plenty of notice too) and C3 were far more expensive than regular scheduled carriers (and their A330 was packed sardine like). Perhaps they should have stuck to one thing!

Willie Everlearn

9th Dec 2001, 03:23

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/Planeattitude.gif

FcU

Exactly!!!

Scud Runner

9th Dec 2001, 19:43

FcU:

When you make the statement, "It's economics, stupid", don't forget that the lower prices offered to the consumer by companies like C3, Skyservice, Air Transat et al, have given way to more consumers being able to afford to travel. This in turn has provided more jobs for folks in the industry. That too is economics, stupid!

C3 didn't fail because of the low prices they offered in the charter market. They were profitable in every year but one. Their failure was a direct result of the board of directors vain attempt to become the next Canadian Airlines!

All this whining about Air 2000 coming to Canada for a few winter months is quite something, when one thinks of how many Canucks have been flying in the U.K. for the last decade, every May to October. Maybe you should ask yourselves why it is that Skyservice and Air Transat have not objected to Air 2000's 5th freedom application? It's because they are both courting Signature for a long term contract. They know that making a big stink about Signature's parent company coming here for a few months would simply be more bad economics. Better to stroke the hand that might feed you than to bite it!

I am not unsympathetic to the plight of those who have lost their jobs recently. I've been there and it's no picnic. I just like to look at things from all sides before I go on a rant.

Orca strait

9th Dec 2001, 22:09

Scud,

Have to agree with you. There has been a long tradition of reciprocal agreements on seasonal basis between the Canucks and Brits. Having Air 2000 operate out of Canada should be considered no different than any other season when additional lift was needed. It is a painful but necessary short term solution. Very unfortunate for the folks presently out of work, but keep the faith and look back on the Canadian charter industry; the jobs will come back. :)

The Guvnor

9th Dec 2001, 22:37

Allegedly, there's a new airline due to start in May 2002 called Canada Air Charter. Rumour has it that it's being set up by LeBlanc ... or, wait for it ... Robert Obadia! :eek: :eek: :eek:

They say that they will operate 767's and 747's to Lisbon, Madrid, Reykjavik, Copenhagen, Tunis, Algiers, Kingston, Port-au-Prince, Martinique, Dakar and Abidjan. Ads for cabin crew (but not flight deck; leading to speculation that the aircraft are being provided on an ACMI basis by Air Atlanta) ran in yesterday's La Presse, a Montreal newspaper.

Interesting times ahead for the Canadian industry....

corsaman

9th Dec 2001, 23:05

Didn't Skyservice, the Canadian charter operator use the A330 to fly YYZ-BFS-BCN, picking pax up in BFS for the spanish sector a about three summers ago? Sounds like double standards on the Canadian's part.....

Orca strait

10th Dec 2001, 07:16

Guv,
Robert Obadia! :p The last we'd heard from him he was hitching a ride on an ex Royal L1011 with all his furniture; destination, midnight flight to Chile :D

I love this industry, it doesn't always attract the best and brightest that our management schools have to offer, but it certainly seems to have the market cornered on tenacious "characters) :rolleyes:

The Guvnor

10th Dec 2001, 13:21

Orca Straight - was that before or after he put his mansion on the market for C$12m?! :D

Rick28

10th Dec 2001, 20:39

I sure hope that the Canadian government allows Air2000 and similar companies to operate within Canada. As most of you agree, the airline industry in Canada has been going down the drain the past 10 years. Competition is needed for AC, they are too dominant in the market and westjet, transat and skyservice is enough. The more the better! About 2 years ago when all was good, I had a friend at AC that said...ahh we're not worried about all these charter companies and so on... we cater to the business traveller. Well now that business travel has almost stopped now they cater to the budget traveller. Look at the US...does United, American etc try to compete with Southwest and Jetblue? No they don't... So all AC has managed to do now is fill up their airplanes with those budget travellers which forced some charter companies out of business...who gets screwed? The public... there is less choice and guess what? The prices are already more expensive... I am a controller who used to work in Toronto and if for no other reason, AC needs competition to take them down a notch. A little too arrogant...

gumbi

11th Dec 2001, 07:27

Euro ATC,
Thing is that at AT we have never even wanted to cater solely to the business traveller, that's why we stick to the original plan, ie charter flights, and so far it has done us nothing but good... 15 years of unstopped growth hadn't it been for what happened on 911. Far from us the idea of competing with AC, we've all seen what it's done before! As far as Air 2000 is concerned, AT already has about 70% of Signature's business, not too bad for a competitor. I don't think they want to give us 100% of their business, IMO.

;) :cool:

The Guvnor

12th Dec 2001, 18:27

Request to use British carrier, crews still stands

By: Susan Pigg, business reporter

-----Toronto-based Skyservice Airlines Inc. will take over the leases on two Airbus A320s that have been parked at Pearson Airport since Canada 3000 unexpectedly grounded all its 38 aircraft last month.
The two aircraft will give Signature Vacations a "made-in-Canada solution" to getting thousands of travellers to sun destinations this winter, and fend off mounting opposition to its request for help from a British airline while 14,000 airline workers remain jobless in Canada, Signature said yesterday.

"As far as I'm concerned, it's done now, but it's a matter of dotting the I's and crossing the T's," said Grant DeMarsh, president of tour operations for Signature Vacations.

"We're at the point now where we know all of our customers are going to get their holidays."

Air Canada, Montreal-based Air Transat and Calgary-based WestJet Airlines will also pick up some of Signature's business, almost half of which had been handled by Canada 3000 before it went bankrupt Nov. 9.
But those airlines combined couldn't handle all of Signature's passengers and there were fears that bankruptcy proceedings aimed, in part, at returning Canada 3000's aircraft to their lessors were moving so slowly, Skyservice wouldn't be able to get some of the airplanes in time.

Some work is now being done on the planes, which are expected to fly vacationers to Mexico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Las Vegas between Dec. 20 and the end of April, said DeMarsh.

But, just in case, Signature has no plans to withdraw its controversial application before the Canadian Transportation Agency to have Signature's sister company, British charter carrier Air 2000 Ltd., place two Boeing 757s in Toronto and use its own crews to operate some flights to southern destinations.

"Until there's a bow around the whole thing (the new agreement with Skyservice), you don't want to cut off any avenues," DeMarsh said in a telephone interview yesterday.
That request to Ottawa had outraged other airlines and unions for the 14,000 pilots, flight attendants, baggage handlers, mechanics and other airline employees who are now without jobs because of the grounding of Canada 3000 and layoffs at other Canadian airlines like giant Air Canada and Air Transat.

"I believe it sets a dangerous precedent," said Jim Ballingall, vice-president of marketing and sales for 55-year-old First Air, which had protested the request to have a British carrier fly passengers out of Canada when there are so many carriers here - including First Air - that could help pick up the slack.

"You have a number of potential operators, potential investors, looking at buying parts of Canada 3000," and starting up new, although much smaller airlines, Ballingall said. "If the government allows foreign carriers to come in and take Canadians to sun destinations, which is a good portion of what Canada 3000 did, why would anyone start up (an airline) here?"

Air Canada had opposed the unusual application, saying it could further destabilize Canada's already fragile airline industry.

Willie Everlearn

12th Dec 2001, 21:38

Ahhhhh....a typical Canadian solution.

Nero fiddles whilst Rome burns.

:rolleyes:

Willie Everlearn

14th Dec 2001, 05:23

Air Canada Pilots Oppose Application by British Charter Operator

12/13/2001 9:21:00 AM Yahoo News

The Air Canada Pilots Association (ACPA) announced today that they have written the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) to express their opposition to the application by Air 2000 to operate a charter operation from Canada. Air 2000, a carrier licensed in the United Kingdom, is seeking what is termed as 'fifth freedom' rights to operate in Canada and pick up and fly Canadians on vacation charters.

The Air Canada Pilots Association is concerned that the CTA would even consider such an application at a time the domestic airline industry is suffering from over-capacity and reduced passenger revenues in the wake of the events of September 11th.

PaperTiger

14th Dec 2001, 08:02

Doesn't one have to oppose an application prior to its approval ??

Anti Skid On

14th Dec 2001, 13:29

I suppose the same Air Canada pilots complaining about Air 2000 coming in aren't moaning about the 767's of AC based at AKL doing the QANTAS AKL -SYD and AKL - MEL sectors - seems like they have picked up a nice earner at the demise of Ansett

Willie Everlearn

15th Dec 2001, 21:50

Anti Skid

Air Canada pilots don't breathe the same air as us mere mortals. Doancha know?

Air 2000 are needed over here by the travel industry simply because we don't have the capacity available for the winter exodus from the snow. Industry 'know it alls' won't admit it.

I'd rather have AMM doing the work for a few months to avoid Signature from going bust while some moron starts up yet another airline in this country under the present pathetic market conditions.

That's how we operate over here.

alapt

16th Dec 2001, 23:28

Funny...Obaidia in South America, not a chance. He is working with a so called Azima.. some of you might have heard the name.
Birds of a feather flock together
(I think that's the proper saying!!)
He's still in Aviation, making bucks and denies any wrong doing with Nationair.
Once a con-artist, always a con-artist.. :mad:

jetstream7

18th Dec 2001, 15:10

I see that Airtours have their application in for leasing 4 * A320 for next summer

Following link has details...
http://www.atol.org.uk/airlinelic/pdf_files/or2number1.pdf

The Guvnor

18th Dec 2001, 15:50

Hmmm, Alapt - let's try this on for size and see if I'm right - you mean Farhad Azima, the same bloke that owned Global International Airways as well as Capitol International and Buffalo Airways, and leased Nationair a couple of DC8s through another company he owns, Aviation Leasing Group (ALG) - and leased then sold them the DC8-61 that crashed in Jeddah? (Click here) (http://www.nationair-canada.com/gunrun.html)

The same Farhad Azima that also is the ultimate owner of First International Airways (which curiously uses the same logo/livery as Global, except for the substitution of an 'F' for 'G'? FIA which is domiciled at Ostend, though its aircraft seem to be based out in the UAE?

The same FIA that uses a Ghana flag of convenience AOC (as does MK Airlines and a few other shady operators) where you're guaranteed that safety and operational oversight will not be something to worry about?

The same FIA that's lost at least one Boeing 707 in Africa?

The same Farhad Azima that had a deep involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, with alleged organised crime activities (including alleged money laundering through his companies, including Indian Springs Bank of Kansas City, an S&L in which he was the largest shareholder) and has been under investigation by the DEA and other authorities for alleged involvement with the drugs trade from Azerbaijan (his birthplace) and Central America to Arkansas (the 'Menagate' affair); and with arms trader Adnan Kashoggi (including helping to finance the coup by Samuel K Doe that took over Liberia)? (Click here) (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/S&L_Scandal_CIA.html) (Menagate click here) (http://www.constitution.org/piml/96062510.txt)

The same Farhad Azima that had close links with CIA proprietaries including Southern Air Transport, Intermountain Aviation, Response Air, Consultants International Inc, Lukim Air Services, St Lucia Airways and Seagreen Air Transport? (Click here) (http://www.webcom.com/~pinknoiz/covert/brewton.html)

The same Farhad Azima that also is closely connected with the notorious Des Ayto of Race Aviation (which Azima owned, and used to ship 23 tonnes of TOW missiles to Iran)?

The same Farhad Azima that is the ultimate beneficial owner (contrary to UK and EU law) of HeavyLift aka HC Airlines aka Prime, having provided the US$23.75m required for a management buy out from Kvaerner by Michael Hales and Graham Pearce?

Nope, sorry. Never heard of the bloke! :D :eek: :D

However this link (http://www.pir.org/cgi-bin/nbonlin6.cgi?_AZIMA_FARHAD_) makes seriously fascinating reading, especially if you know the people involved.

Incidentally, you can see that despite being classed as an 'inappropriate contributor' by Clinton in March 1997 and having his donation cheques returned
(click here) (http://clinton6.nara.gov/1997/03/1997-03-03-statement-in-response-to-question-in-brieifng.html); he nevertheless hosted a $1,000 a head afternoon tea fundraiser at his home for Hillary Clinton that was attended by Bill Clinton (click here) (http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/election.pat,local/3774d26a.a09,.html)

Nevertheless, the Clinton Library fund received over $1m from Azima (click here) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-10/19/052l-101999-idx.html)

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]