One rule for US another for the rest

[tocamak]

NEWS from BALPA
British Airline Pilots’ Association
Thursday 11th October 2007
BRITISH PILOTS PROTEST AT FALKLANDS CONTRACT SCANDAL
The British Airline Pilots’ Association (BALPA) today strongly protested to the Government that a contract for flying British troops and their families and provisions between Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and Stanley in the Falklands has been given by the Ministry of Defence to an American airline and not to a British one.
The contract has been given to Omni Air International who will use United States registered aircraft with American crews.
‘This is a scandal which must be rectified’ said Captain Dave Boys, Vice Chairman of BALPA. ‘The Ministry of Defence has proved itself inept and insensitive. The contract started on October 4th and must be cancelled. No British or EU carrier would ever be permitted to run such a service to and from the USA. There is no reciprocity at all.’
BALPA is demanding an explanation in letters sent to the Secretary of State for Defence Des Browne, and Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly.
Dave Boys declared ‘Our pilots are particularly upset about the fact that many British airline pilots fought in the Falklands war when they were in the Forces yet are being denied this flying which is being given to Americans who played no part.The service must be returned to the previous provider – XL Airways or an alternative UK or EU Carrier and Associated Crews. '

[Caudillo]

This just reaffirms my choice not to pay a penny to an organisation that produces navel-gazing and this chest-beating invective crap.

[Propellerhead]

what? at least someone's standing up for uk pilots. Do you really think the US government would let a British Airline do a government contract? I guess it went to the lowest bidder which saves tax payers money but sometimes it's worth paying a bit more!

[M.Mouse]

This just reaffirms my choice not to pay a penny to an organisation that produces navel-gazing and this chest-beating invective crap.

Would your terms and conditions be better if there was no BALPA?

Yours is a good idea though because you are 1% of your salary better off than your colleagues AND get the benefits they pay for. Perhaps we all ought to follow your example.

[bobmij]

bmi did it for a while!

[411A]

Sorry chaps, I expect that Omni can do the flying far cheaper than any UK airline.
Now, if this does not please some folks, why not write to the MoD, and ask that a surcharge be applied to all BALPA members taxes...then perhaps the flying can 'come home'....:E

[fireflybob]

Well I think this is outrageous and I am glad to see that BALPA is protesting!

Surely charity begins at home?

[applevid]

didn't I read that US vehicles bound for Iraq were being transported on russian built planes on some overseas charter?

sad isn't it? its money and not the Flag anymore.

[archae86]

No British or EU carrier would ever be permitted to run such a service to and from the USA.
I'm one US taxpayer who certainly wishes our DOD would take a UK or EU appropriately qualified low bidder for corresponding work.

I'd guess that if our rules forbid it, that those rules were set by our Congressfolk, not by DOD.

[polzin]

To All,
About 1990/91 I worked for a US carrier, Buffalo Airways. We went to Norton and flew a jet engine plus a few other things to the Falklands. I was curious at the time that we and not a British carrier were doing the flight.
I have also flown into Dover AFB in the USA with L1011 and was amazed to see 6 C-5's sitting there. I knew that our company charged the US government 3 times the normal charter rate. I was told it was still much less than what a C-5 would cost.
I live in Denver. A russian carrier flies the Atlas-5 rocket engines into Denver. It maybe because the engines are bought from Russia.
I lean to agreeing with 411A that it may be because of cost that some of these things happen.

[Dream Land]

I'm one US taxpayer who certainly wishes our DOD would take a UK or EU appropriately qualified low bidder for corresponding work. Do you really want our troops on the lowest bidder? :bored:

[BoeingMEL]

these trooping flights cost pennies when compared to the many BILLIONS which the US DOD and various US companies and corporations spend with BAe Systems! C'mon BALPA, find something worthwhile to campaign :ugh:.... bm

[411A]

Do you really want our troops on the lowest bidder?

I suspect that is what many astronauts have thought, while strapped onto a rocket carrying them into orbit...'gosh, this thing was supplied from the lowest bidder.'

Sorry folks, 'tis business.
Want more MoD business for your UK carriers?
Prepare to ante up...:ugh:

Oh yes...BALPA, a paper tiger.:rolleyes:

[Desert Diner]

...fought in the Falklands war when they were in the Forces yet are being denied this flying which is being given to Americans who played no part.


Actually, the US Navy provided quite a bit of support services. And other US units took over British Forces NATO duties for them to go to the Falklands. But that is neither here nor there.


...or EU Carrier and Associated Crews

Yes, I can see how the French helped. Why did BALPA bother with that statement. Why didn't they just say anyone but a US carrier.

It really is about the lowest bidder!

[cwatters]

As a taxpayer I'd hope the MOD went for the best deal. I recognise that best might not mean the cheapest but what would the papers have said if the MOD had NOT gone for the best deal?

[Re-Heat]

Are we sure that perhaps NO EU carrier bid for the work at all?

I am curious how the US crew could be the cheapest, when they are not UK-based, presumably fly an older aircraft, away from maintenance base, and suffer the same or similar other costs (fuel, crew) as other bidders.

Perhaps the contract is so completely ridiculous, that penalties for non-delivery of service due to technical problems (of an older, charter aircraft without the maintenance base support of a UK-based airline) are so low that it does not matter...

Is it that hard to place an order for a cargo/passenger hybird aircraft, maintained by BA/Virgin, at a cost far lower than the aircraft flown/chartered at the moment. (of course the answer is yes...)

[Doctor Cruces]

UK MOD always go for the lowest bid, not necessarily the best.
Hence some of the kit our forces are lumbered with.

Doc C

[411A]

UK MOD always go for the lowest bid, not necessarily the best.
Hence some of the kit our forces are lumbered with.


Oddly enough, Omni has quite well maintained aircraft and it is owned by one family, who have been in the airline business awhile...and oddly enough, been profitable nearly the whole time.
A niche carrier, if you will.

[PantLoad]

I can agree with most of the postings, here, regarding this topic. I have to say, however, that it's a 'global economy'. If we have a problem with that, we should have successfully fought it 20 years ago. To do so now is futile, as it's far too late.

I find that some of the stuff my country does is crazy. In some cases, I'm sure things make sense. In some cases, to say that it's crazy is quite correct.

PantLoad

[two green one prayer]

In purely financial terms it is better to spend money at home. If the UK gives a US contractor a job the money is gone. Give the same contract to a home supplier and you collect tax from the company, the workers, and all the people who support them. I have been told that the difference is about 30%, so unless the foreigner is willing to work at those sorts of discount it is actually less costly in the long run to source at home.

[nivsy]

As part of the MoD Commercial organisation I can state that the MoD do NOT always go for the cheapest tender bid - but do try to evaluate on a pure Value for Money basis. This evaluation process is normally considered well advance, has much criteria for marking matrix and is on many occasions subject to clarification and revise and confirm procedures. the facts will be that any UK company who prepared and submitted a propsal were just not acceptable on all critera.
The Mod budget is however very much stetched and all involved are feeling the pinch.
On another note, Omni have bee operating out of Brize for a number of months now on contracted work.

[gman1911]

I for one shall be keeping a close eye on this new contract.
XL operating the route with the B747 offered a greater payload and cargo carrying capability. It made the ease of getting freight down to MPA a lot easier.
A lot of people are concerned that Omni with there equipment will not be able to carry on the same level of service that has become the norm for everyone concerned.

G man

[reynoldsno1]

Shock, horror - there has been a similar furore recently in NZ after AirNZ carried out a charter of Aussie troops to Kuwait (bound eventually for Iraq). Ironically, it was the NZ govt that got its knickers in a twist - seen to be tacitly supporting the invasion of Iraq - doh.....get over it...:=

[TWApilot]

I am an Omni Air pilot, and I'd just like to throw in a bit of information.
First, it is true that the US DOD contracts with Russian companies to fly equipment into Iraq in Antonov cargo airplanes. I see this happen frequently, and I talk with those Russian crew members in our hotel in the Middle East.

To say that the US DOD would not hire a carrier from another country is false.

Also, I can confirm that Omni Air was NOT the lowest bidder on the Brize Norton - Falklands flying. Omni was selected because of the reliable service record we have provided the British MOD during numerous other flights we've operated for them during the past year or two. They were happy with our performance, and selected us over competitors because they felt we could get the job done best.

There is no cabotage in this case, as alluded to previously, because this is a charter flight. All seats on the airplane are purchased as a group by the MOD, and as a result it becomes an British MOD flight, not a US airline flight. The MOD can then carry whoever or whatever they want, as it is their flight.
Omni would be prohibited from selling tickets on airline flights within the UK, and we are not doing that, nor have we ever done that.

I can also tell you that our maintenance is excellent -- Any time I've written up a problem with an airplane it has always been fixed and fixed correctly. We do not operate airplanes with shoddy maintenance.

Also, our small airline has been more profitable than almost every other airline I can think of in the USA for the last couple years. It is not a little company on a shoestring budget.

BALPA can feel free to protest our winnning of this contract if they like. But, I must say, had the British MOD been happier with the performance of another carrier, they would have chosen another carrier. If a British carrier would like to pick up this contract next time around, perhaps those interested British carriers should improve their own performance enough to make the MOD happy. Omni has lost out on contracts in the past. It happened to win this one. Thats the sort of thing every charter airline goes through.

No airline should ever win a contract because of the Flag it flies. A contract should be won based on good, solid performance, reputation, and of course price will be a factor too. All airlines are free to compete for such contracts. It would be unfortunate if an airline is chosen to do anything just because of it's Flag. Service would definitely suffer if that is the most important criteria.

[Hand Solo]

No airline should ever win a contract because of the Flag it flies. A contract should be won based on good, solid performance, reputation, and of course price will be a factor too. All airlines are free to compete for such contracts

Unfortunately the US Government don't agree with that or the Fly America policy would be history. Foreign airlines need not apply.

[TWApilot]

Fly America policy????? Please enlighten me. I have no idea what that is, and I've been flying for US airlines for 12 years.

If you are referring to Cabotage, that is banned worldwide. No airline is permitted to sell tickets on flights enplaning and deplaning passengers solely within a country other than their own. It cannot, and does not, happen anywhere on earth.

Omni is a Charter carrier. We NEVER sell tickets on any route. We only charter our airplanes to other companies or governments, and those other organizations choose who and what to put on our airplanes. We do not hold out ourselves as an airline operating from point A to point B. We simply charter our jets to whoever wants to purchase them. In this case, it is the MOD.

Therefore, we are NOT engaging in Cabotage. If we were selling tickets to the general public on flights within the UK, taking passengers from London to Glasgow and so forth, yes that would be Cabotage and it would be illegal. We do not do that.

To say that the USA is alone in prohibiting Cabotage is foolish.... It was not the USA which set up the ban on Cabotage in the first place. Cabotage was prohibited when the "Freedoms of the Air" were listed at the time of ICAO's formation in 1944.

Every country affiliated with ICAO has a responsibility to uphold the ban on Cabotage.

What you describe as a Fly America policy is probably nothing more than the USA adhearing to ICAO's prohibition against Cabotage.
Every other country should do the same.

But again, Omni is a Charter Airline. We do not sell tickets on our flights. We have never sold tickets. We simply offer a whole airplane, to be chartered by whoever wants to purchase it, and we then fly from wherever that company wants us to fly to wherever they want to go. That is NOT cabotage.

Also, I already mentioned that the US government charters airplanes from other countries routinely, such as the Russian Antonovs. This "Fly America" idea you put forth doesn't make sense.

[Earl]

Have to agree with TWA pilot it does not make sense, this is a very competitive world and industry.
Come on Guys!
Omni is a very good charter airline, they under bid you, give it a rest.
BALPA is the same as ALPA here in the USA, just talk and collect the union dues from its members.
Quote Gman 911
I for one shall be keeping a close eye on this new contract.
XL operating the route with the B747 offered a greater payload and cargo carrying capability. It made the ease of getting freight down to MPA a lot easier.
A lot of people are concerned that Omni with there equipment will not be able to carry on the same level of service that has become the norm for everyone concerned.
G man
Earl:
When did XL get G registered 747"s
Is this not Air Atlanta Icelandic?
Last I heard Iceland was not even in the EU, has something changed here.
Yet they operate full pax out of the UK with Travel city to Orlando with TF registered aircraft and some non British crews.
Get your facts straight.
Dont see Balpa doing anything here, been going on for years with Travel city and many other contracts.
Perhaps Iceland just knows where to throw the money.
It would seem that Balpa would have bigger Fish to fry here!

[mutt]

No airline is permitted to sell tickets on flights enplaning and deplaning passengers solely within a country other than their own. It cannot, and does not, happen anywhere on earth.

Just to clarify this point...... you are wrong, as a Middle Eastern airline we sell tickets on some of our internal European sectors, ie, Rome to Paris. So you cannot say that it doesnt happen anywhere on earth...

Mutt

[TWApilot]

Last time I checked, Rome and Paris are in two different countries. Of course any airline has the right to sell tickets and fly between Rome and Paris. You just are not permitted to fly within the same country if it isn't your own.

Europe is not a country.

Your airline would not be allowed to fly between Rome and Naples, however. That would be prohibited. Every country prohibits that sort of thing. And that is fine.

[Hand Solo]

No airline should ever win a contract because of the Flag it flies. A contract should be won based on good, solid performance, reputation, and of course price will be a factor too. All airlines are free to compete for such contracts

'Fly America' is a longstanding policy of the US government by which no US government employee may fly on any foreign airline on any route which is served by a US carrier. It matters not whether a foreign airline has a good, solid performance, reputation, or a good price. As long as they don't have a US flag on the tail then they won't get the business if a US operator flies the route. I've no beef with your posts TWApilot, it's just a shame the US government don't share your principles.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

As i understand it the MOD will have put out bids to all UK Airlines (not sure about EU). If the airlines don't bid they can go outside. Maybe XL declined the contract because they are getting rid of their 747 and 767's?:\

[742]

Just to clarify this point...... you are wrong, as a Middle Eastern airline we sell tickets on some of our internal European sectors, ie, Rome to Paris. So you cannot say that it doesnt happen anywhere on earth...

Mutt


Italy and France are not the same country. And of course "Europe" is not a country--at least not yet.

[anotherthing]

Instead of bi**hing about who should be flying who based on patriotism, maybe we should be looking closer at why it has been decided that a US company can provide our troops and our MOD with a better service than any of our own UK bred companies.

Our forces are working their backsides off - far harder and enduring far more hardship than the majority of posters on the civil forums will ever experience.

I for one do not begrudge the troops the best service (both in terms of service provision to them and service provision to the MOD), whether that comes from a Yank a Brit or any other nationality.

If businesses in our country cannot provide the service required, then it should go to someone who can instead of allocating it to some less than ideal company for the sake of patriotism.

Maybe if some of the Brit posters who are whingeing about this actually stopped to think why the above may be happening, they will zip their lips and begin to realise that the problem is not with the MOD contract, but with the service that our once proud nation can provide.

Aplevid wrote .....sad isn't it? its money and not the Flag anymore.

100% correct, but not for the reason you state... it's sad that UK companies cannot see beyond profits and take a bit of a hit in profits on one contract to provide our forces with the support they deserve.

[TWApilot]

I don't mean to sound as if UK carriers are not capable of providing good reliable service.

In this particular case, Omni happened to win out.

You must consider that perhaps one of the reasons the contract went outside of the UK is simply that there is a smaller number of carriers and available airplanes in the UK. Those UK carriers quite possibly had their hands full with other contracts. Nothing wrong with that.

There are more available airplanes for use in the US, so it stands to reason that countries with less of their own airline capacity will hire planes from the States and other places.

We've been hired to fly for Japanese companies as well as companies in Kazakhstan and Iceland and many others. Not that the air carriers are substandard in those countries, they just don't have the available airplanes and the available seat capacity. So they hire outside of their country.

Not a big deal. They just want to get the airplanes in to get the job done.

[anotherthing]

TWA

you keep hitting the nail firmly on the head - Just to clarify - I am merely alluding to the whingeing that goes on.... I bet the ex-service pilots who are now flying civvy would rather their successors in the armed forces got a decent service commensurate with the hard work they (the armed forces) are putting in, and that the ex mil pilots are not the ones who are whingeing about the awarding of contracts!

It's a balance that has to be achieved between service and cost - or would our 'patriotic' civilian pilots rather the MOD blew a larger than required proportion of its already meagre budget on ensuring that British companies secured the contracts, thus denying our servicemen and women the funds required to provide them with equipment needed on the frontline (basics which are still not always getting provided, such as appropriate clothing for the operating environment or body armour etc etc).

Maybe the problem is that the MOD does not have an adequate budget, but until they do, they have to juggle what they have - in the interests of the services, not some civvy company or its employees! :ugh:

[V12]

Earl says it all:

The contract was awarded years ago to XL and they have been running it for years on a TF-regn AAI747 with a mixed of Icelandic non-BALPA subscribing crews, until omni was awarded it

Did XL keep it all-British? I think not...

and now BALPA wakes up to fight for it to be awarded back to XL so they can stick it back on the Icelandic operation??

I'd hate to go to war with BALPA, as they'd spend the first 3 years trying to work out whose side they were on.

Time to cancel by BALPA subs, I think

[FE Hoppy]

I've flow contracts for the US Gov' on EU reg Aircraft with international crews from US mailand to other places. So to say the US would never do it is false.
Someone said the septics didn't help during the Falklands confilct. Maybe not overtly but do a little research and you will find there was lots of covert assistance.
Having flown the route in question for about 5 years when the RAF had the resources to cover it I can only say good luck to Omni. You can keep it. Say hello to the VC club in ASI and avoid the bennies.

[mmeteesside]

Does this mean we'll see Omni back at Durham Tees Valley throughout this winter on the regular flights from Qatar? They did it last winter flying in every day without fail! Until later in the winter (around March) when Air Caraibes joined in the fun.

[Flightrider]

The MOD schedules are such that you have to operate three flights in each 14 day period, with the days changing slightly as the programme rolls forward. It makes it impossible to schedule any other regular activity with the aircraft alongside the Falklands operations.

You therefore end up scheduling three long-haul trips for the aircraft in 14 days, which is hardly high utilisation. As a result, to make it work, you need an aircraft which has relatively low lease/ownership costs. I can't think of one UK long-haul operator which is so equipped at present - gone are the TriStars, 747s etc and everyone now operates aircraft like A330s or 767s which are expensive to lease.

No UK operator with its current fleet could therefore make the contract work given the schedules which the UK MoD requires. The contract has therefore gone to a non-UK operator in the form of Omni, operating its DC10-30s with low capital costs.

Unless or until the MOD schedule changes to enable the aircraft to be used on other things, no operator with third-generation aircraft will be able to compete for the contract. It is therefore tied in to using older aircraft, which Omni have. That said, an old aircraft is not automatically an under-maintained one as some may argue.

[mini]

Chaps, the criteria is not "The Lowest Bidder" its the "Most Economically Advantageous" - Pandora's box when politics gets drawn into it.

Omni seem to have honed their business model on this type of contract so good luck to them.

BALPA need to wake up and smell the coffee, times have moved on. Pick your fights, flapping your wings on a lost cause wins no friends. :(

[polzin]

FE Hoppy,

Curious, what type of flying you did for the US givernment ?

kp

[FE Hoppy]

Hi Ken,
Deportation flights.

How you doing mate!

[euringineer]

I have never read such a load of horse.... in all my life.
The facts are that i am on my notice to compulsory redundancy along with 21 B747 Flight Deck crew because an American carrier was illegally contracted to fly a British civil route by Air Partner to the MOD.All other MOD charters are open to worldwide competition.We have complained and been backed up by the DfT that on the grounds of reciprocity an American carrier doing the route is illegal.The USA refuse to allow any carrier but American TO FLY USA ROUTES,point proven.We want a level playing field so Easy,Ryanair and all the others can put them permanently under serious competition.
Had the Falklands route been purely military Omni would have it without complaint other than more British jobs lost to the lowest bidder.As the route is a civilian route open to the public a British carrier supported by our EU partners must do the route.The BALPA press release has been corrected to match the realistic situation.If British pilots are happy to snipe at us trying to save our jobs then i hope you have a conscience and are not faced with the mess the MOD has got us into.For the record we recognise the right of the MOD to charter the cheapest for purely military but we dispute the advantage of a DC10 over our B747-300 with 30 tonnes belly load and the range without having to offload pax or freight.Never mind the route expertise and comfort.How long before Omni gives up the route depends on our ministry officials.

[Mardavi]

At an exchange rate of 2.05 dollars to every pound you can soon reach a 30% discount!!

[BEagle]

The official Falklands website states the following:

There are over 30 European tour operators featuring tailor-made packages and escorted tours to the Falkland Islands, some travelling to the Islands by Ministry of Defence (MoD) Charter flight from the UK, but many now choose the weekly commercial service from South America, which has seen a steady increase in traffic.

There is a weekly LAN flight to the Falkland Islands from Santiago in Chile. Please visit International Tours and Travel, the LAN Chile agents in the Falklands, www.falklandstravel.com (http://www.falklandstravel.com/).

The MoD Charter flight flies to the Falklands six times per month from RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire. Bookings can be made via the Travel Coordinator, Falkland Islands Government Office, London. T: 020 7222 2542 or email [email protected] ([email protected]).

For further information, please visit: www.visitorfalklands.com (http://www.visitorfalklands.com/)

This, to me, means that anyone can book a seat on a MoD chartered flight; whether or not this is a significant revenue stream for the MoD, I have no idea. The flights are not - and have not been for many years - exclusively military. On many occasions I've paxed between BZN and MPA with civilians on board - either contractors personnel or Falklands residents, plus some tourists.

However, I don't know whether this is still true of the new Omni operation. One thing though - their aircraft look much smarter than those old Icelandic-coded 747s which we used to see.

Before the RAF operated the route with TriStars, it was contracted variously to ba and Virgin. With other calls on the few serviceable passenger TriStars the MoD has, it is natural for the route to be supported by charter airlines.

But the question of flying non-MoD passengers and freight on such aircraft is one for the politicians to answer. Both in the government and in BALPA.

[chornedsnorkack]

Therefore, we are NOT engaging in Cabotage. If we were selling tickets to the general public on flights within the UK, taking passengers from London to Glasgow and so forth, yes that would be Cabotage and it would be illegal. We do not do that.

To say that the USA is alone in prohibiting Cabotage is foolish.... It was not the USA which set up the ban on Cabotage in the first place. Cabotage was prohibited when the "Freedoms of the Air" were listed at the time of ICAO's formation in 1944.

Every country affiliated with ICAO has a responsibility to uphold the ban on Cabotage.

What you describe as a Fly America policy is probably nothing more than the USA adhearing to ICAO's prohibition against Cabotage.
Every other country should do the same.


Wait, does ICAO actually require countries to forbid cabotage, or does ICAO merely permit countries to forbid it?

[shawshank]

From a Brit mil chap:

firstly this is not the first time the FI contract has gone to a none-Brit company; AIR LUXOR anyone. And secondly, beyond a throw away comment from the observant pax (most wouldn't notice what nationality the jet belonged to), as long as the flights operated on time and everyone had a seat then I doubt the troops wouldn't give two hoots about who is operating the flight. We put up with a lot worse, for example 8 hour plus flights packed in the back of a Herc on a canvas seat.

The only time the airline will get grief from the end user is when the flight is delayed or cancelled as this is the worst news you can get after 4-6 months in the Falklands. :mad:

If the troops had their way the airline with the prettiest stewards would get the contract.;)

[411A]

...an American carrier was illegally contracted to fly a British civil route by Air Partner to the MOD.All other MOD charters are open to worldwide competition.
One thing though - their aircraft look much smarter than those old Icelandic-coded 747s which we used to see.

Hmmm, so it seems that is wasn't a UK carrier after all that previously operated the route...or if it was, outsourced aircraft were used.
Since when does BALPA represent Icelandic pilots?
Sounds like sour grapes to me when the MoD have clearly decided that another carrier (Omni) can provide better service...more than likely because the B747 previously used was tech delayed (gee, what an absolute surprise) and/or the 747 was simply too large, and as we all know, if you can't fill a 747 (especially an old one) its operating costs will eat you for lunch.
Of course, even if...
1. A UK carrier(s) had the long range equipment to fly the route
but...
2. Said UK carrier(s) decided not to bid....
Is then the MoD to throw up their collective hands, and give up the route?
One would hardly think so, so Omni is it, like it or not...and apparently some don't.
Tough beans.

[BEagle]

"Tough beans"....

Which is probably not what Omni will say, the first time some clown of a Muppet clouts their aircraft with a lump of ground support equipment - as they did to the 747s with monotonous regularity....:hmm:

Anyway, good luck to them. A regular, reliable carrier to - but particularly from - Bennyland is an enormous morale raiser for people stuck down there at the bottom of the world!

[Wycombe]

From my experience of flying as a pax on this route, and hearing regularly about the operation, there were some tech delays, but most delays (2 days extra "down South" was my record) were down to weather or for other operational reasons, either at ASI, MPA, or the diversions.

Someone mentioned route expertise. Of course Omni will learn it, but have a look at how far ASI is from another suitable airfield and that will tell you something about it's importance.

Oh, and saw some fun when the wind is from the north at MPA.

Omni are welcome to it, I reckon.

[Turn and Burn]

I take issue with those who call the EU our partners. Why are they not partnering us in Afghanistan? I am all in favour of British crews flying British troops to the Falklands or anywhere else for that matter. I am not in favour of giving MOD contracts to so-called EU partners anymore than I am in favour of giving them to US crews.

[euringineer]

We are 22 British licence holders working for XL,PAYING BRITISH TAXES + NI.We fly a TF reg B747-300 on TF validations,same as Virgin 4 years ago when they had 2 operating to Florida.I take it as an insult, to our efforts to keep the route in British hands,when those of you who it does not affect make unfounded comments.There is NO RECIPROCITY with the USA,so take your carrier back to where it belongs.We lose our jobs next month due to British mismanagement in government and a British broker with no loyalty to his country.I forgot to mention our cabin crew being made redundant,approx 50.

[TWApilot]

How exactly is there no reciprocity? The US government hires carriers and airplanes from other countries when necessary. It isn't necessary often because we have such a large supply of available aircraft in our country. But the US government can and does hire foreign aircraft.... most notably Russian Antonovs.
If there were no available US aircraft for a specific trip, and there was an available British aircraft, the US government would hire it. However, due to the large number of available US airplanes sitting around, hiring the Brits isn't the most cost effective solution most of the time, and it hasn't been necessary.
There are not as many available airplanes in the UK. Therefore, they went outside of the UK. That's how things work in a world economy. The US would do the same thing if need be. Don't fool yourself into thinking that it wouldn't.

We have a ton of unused airplanes sitting around in this country, with crews just waiting to fly them. Lots of available lift. That is not true in the UK.

[junior_man]

US Military is now taking delivery of their first of 322 EADS built helicopters. I am sure somebody at Bell and Hughes (Now MD or ? ) helicopters didn't get a job because of this.

Of course like many other things built by Airbus, they do not meet their performance targets either.....

[TWApilot]

. :)

[con-pilot]

When it comes to leasing aircraft the US government has no restriction against the UK. All of the 727s I use to fly with the USMS have been replaced by 737-800 from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,gasp, British Airways.


British Airways was the lowest bidder, go figure. So I guess it is not one rule for us and not another for the rest.

Carry on ranting without the facts. :ok:

[nivsy]

In response to Turn and Burn - I do have sympathy for your thoughts. However lets be clear. MoD contracting officers must be impartial and follow the contracting rules stipulated for contracting activity. Rules are that requirements must be advertised for expressions of interest under Contracts Bulletin and the European Journal. Down selection follows and in many cases companies invited to submit tenders under negotiated contract procedures within very tight financial availability constraints.
If the MoD were found to be not even following the very basic contractual tender procedurers they would be hung drawn and quartered. It is important that the service specification is made clear in the tender documents. From my personal experience it is a shame that there is a definite down turn in UK companies meeting the criteria that is specified and often at a cost that makes further justification a Value For Money solution.
Under competition however, UK companies should have as good a chance as anyone to win and provide a good value for solution to the satisfaction of the MoD and ultimately the UK tax payer. Regretably, this is not always the case.
Nivsy

[Re-Heat]

When it comes to leasing aircraft the US government has no restriction against the UK. All of the 727s I use to fly with the USMS have been replaced by 737-800 from,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,gasp , British Airways.


British Airways was the lowest bidder, go figure. So I guess it is not one rule for us and not another for the rest.
What are you talking about? BA does not own or operate B737-800s

[411A]

We are 22 British licence holders working for XL,PAYING BRITISH TAXES + NI.We fly a TF reg B747-300 on TF validations,same as Virgin 4 years ago when they had 2 operating to Florida.I take it as an insult, to our efforts to keep the route in British hands,when those of you who it does not affect make unfounded comments

Hmmm, now of course we all know who the company is, euringineer, the same company that was grounded by the UKCAA nine years ago, so you might look to your company management for answers to your questions.:rolleyes:
And, read nivsy's post carefully, for therein more answers might be found.:}

[euringineer]

To all the Americans stuck on TRANSMIT!!BZZ-ASI-MPA is a British Civil Route as it carries civilians.I have no argument against purely Military charters,we charter Antonovs as well as other cheap skates like Omni.Of course you are cheaper,your wages are now almost 3rd world.Ask any American contractor flying for non USA airlines around the world and they will tell you they cant afford to work in USA.The RECIPROCITY is about civil air routes not military charters,so please listen out!!!!!Also AIR ATLANTA is by virtue of nationality European as they are members of the extended economic association but not union.In other words they can ply their trade in Europe as well as any other EU member.Therefore they are not illegal.What on earth are you on about 411A that XL was grounded 11 years ago.Your facts require scrutiny so please tell all.You must be affected by the Hubbly Bubbly on the HAJ!!!!!!!

[411A]

What on earth are you on about 411A that XL was grounded 11 years ago.Your facts require scrutiny so please tell all.
Not eleven years ago, euringineer, but nine, just about this time actually, late October.
And, not XL, the parent company, AAI, due to suspected duff maintenance practices...missing serviceable tags, etc.
You must be a newby to have not realised this...:ugh:

[euringineer]

411A Old boy let me please update you on the history of XL and of the British Flight Crew B747 Type rated.We were spun off in 2003 as AAE from AAI just as the AVION GROUP WAS FORMED TO HEAD UP AAI,AAE,AAT and the Maintenance Logistics Group at Manston.The Avion group bought XL Airways in 2004 who assumed control of UK OPS for the group and built a nice new Company HQ at LGW opened by a Minister of the Icelandic government.In 2005 XL Management bought themselves back from the Avion Group and we Brits went to XL who bought Travel City Direct and other travel specialists to form XLLG(LEISURE GROUP).XL brokered the MOD contract and leased another TF B747-300 to fly the route using XL crew backed up by AAI as required.So we had 3 Classic Jumbos maintained by AAI in the UK.The operation has been checked on numerous occasions and has never been grounded.The reason the a/c never became G reg is because it was not economically viable to register the -300(never on G reg).The DfT allows the TF a/c if it is obvious to them that for practical purposes its operation for us is necessary.I think you now have more than enough evidence to withdraw your allegation that we are related in any way to a distant ACMI L1011 Operator.I think you must be an ex AAI contractor who spent too much time in the desert!!!The main base is now Jeddah so why dont you rejoin.

[con-pilot]

What are you talking about? BA does not own or operate B737-800s

Sorry, my mistake, they are 737-300s and 400s. The guys wished that they were 800s. Still leased from BA in any case.