Brits poised to Invade Canada? Again!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brits poised to Invade Canada? Again!
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.
________________________
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.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: The Deep South (Sussex)
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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).
It's called reciprocity. (If there is such a word).
Join Date: Jul 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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!
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!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
[Edited for typo]
[ 02 December 2001: Message edited by: MarkD ]
I guess this makes Canada more like, say, Puerto Rico
[Edited for typo]
[ 02 December 2001: Message edited by: MarkD ]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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’.
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’.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
That said, there have been plenty of Canadian registered and crewed aircraft based in UK airports (including short haul routes) this summer.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: CYTZ
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Incidentally, I note from the CAA's Official Record Series 2 that Airtours have been given permission to wet lease an A330 C-FBUS from Skyservice between 15 November to 30 April.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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!
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!