Official : British Airways Retires Concorde (merged)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7. Captains Wallet - Check! The First Officer, will remove the Captains wallet from his back pocket, to relieve the pressure between his head and the cockpit ceiling thus allowing the vertical electric screw jack to run to its cut off limit, this will avoid the potential for fire and will determine the amount of funds available for the post flight party, whilst the Captain is being separated from his aircraft.
8. Insufficient Funds- The First Officer on establishing that there are insufficient funds to allow a retirement farewell party to the Captain appropriate to his rank, will reengage the CB for a sufficient time to allow the Captain to volunteer the appropriate PIN number for his Cashcard, then pull CB at the same time as wiping it clean of prints.
9. Checklist Completion- Actions An ACARS call will then be made by the First Officer to Crewing to report the unfortunate incapacitation and confirm his new seniority number.
8. Insufficient Funds- The First Officer on establishing that there are insufficient funds to allow a retirement farewell party to the Captain appropriate to his rank, will reengage the CB for a sufficient time to allow the Captain to volunteer the appropriate PIN number for his Cashcard, then pull CB at the same time as wiping it clean of prints.
9. Checklist Completion- Actions An ACARS call will then be made by the First Officer to Crewing to report the unfortunate incapacitation and confirm his new seniority number.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
norodnik:
I guess the reason you have seen so much of OAF in pictures is that it was the first in the "Utopia" livery and, as such, features in most of the current publicity shots. (As was the case with OAG when the "Landor" livery appeared).
Also, of course, Fox was the first to fly post-modification and was subject to more media interest at that time. If and when I hear whether Fox will re-enter revenue service I'll post here.
Nineeighteen:
The non-sentimental reasons I prefer AF are:
1. Better fuel consumption than A,B,C,D,E.
2. Marginally nicer handling than OAG, and without G's systems foibles. (OAG has a slightly different standard of DC electrical system and ASP, amongst other things)
None of which is probably of interest to anyone but me, really, but there you go.
I guess the reason you have seen so much of OAF in pictures is that it was the first in the "Utopia" livery and, as such, features in most of the current publicity shots. (As was the case with OAG when the "Landor" livery appeared).
Also, of course, Fox was the first to fly post-modification and was subject to more media interest at that time. If and when I hear whether Fox will re-enter revenue service I'll post here.
Nineeighteen:
The non-sentimental reasons I prefer AF are:
1. Better fuel consumption than A,B,C,D,E.
2. Marginally nicer handling than OAG, and without G's systems foibles. (OAG has a slightly different standard of DC electrical system and ASP, amongst other things)
None of which is probably of interest to anyone but me, really, but there you go.
The British Airways boss said in a telephone call to channel 4s 'Richard & Judy' programme today that the reason for retiring Concorde was that the manufacturer (Airbus) were no longer going to supply spares for the aircraft. Apparently the earlier reasons (economics/pax numbers) were incorrect. Richard & Judy had been interviewing Sir Richard Branson about Concorde when the BA boss decided to phone in. He also said that the CAA were going to revoke the Concorde's C of A due to lack of spares support.
Any comments anybody.
CC
Any comments anybody.
CC
What was it that Mandy Rice-Davies so famously said?
(Apart, that is, from "Cor, Lord Astor, what a little willy....!"
"He would say that, wouldn't he?"
(Apart, that is, from "Cor, Lord Astor, what a little willy....!"
"He would say that, wouldn't he?"
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Basingstoke
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only things had been different
Well, of course I'm gutted about my favourite aircraft being retired.
I remember watching it during my break time (I was 11, at junior school)
flying around over Basingstoke during the week of Farnborough Airshow 1972
and it was such an amazing sight (and sound).
Even more thrilling was going to the airshow and seeing it close-up - three circuits
(one was a touch and go) at low level - and in those days you could stand a lot closer
to the runway at Farnborough.
More recently (probably 4 years ago) I remember watching from one of the air-side
lounges in Terminal 3 as an Air France Concorde took off bound for Nice,
followed within a couple of minutes by a B.A. Concorde.
At Farnborough 2000 on the final day (Sunday) there were a LOT of spectators,
including myself and my dad, who waited until the very end to see it take off
(it had been part of the static display)
It's a beautiful aircraft, reminds me of a hawk (swooping down) as it comes in
to land at LHR.
Hoping to fly on it to JFK before it retires. I wish we could keep it flying.
Wish I had room in my garden to give one a home.
Sorry, have to go now I'm filling up again......
I remember watching it during my break time (I was 11, at junior school)
flying around over Basingstoke during the week of Farnborough Airshow 1972
and it was such an amazing sight (and sound).
Even more thrilling was going to the airshow and seeing it close-up - three circuits
(one was a touch and go) at low level - and in those days you could stand a lot closer
to the runway at Farnborough.
More recently (probably 4 years ago) I remember watching from one of the air-side
lounges in Terminal 3 as an Air France Concorde took off bound for Nice,
followed within a couple of minutes by a B.A. Concorde.
At Farnborough 2000 on the final day (Sunday) there were a LOT of spectators,
including myself and my dad, who waited until the very end to see it take off
(it had been part of the static display)
It's a beautiful aircraft, reminds me of a hawk (swooping down) as it comes in
to land at LHR.
Hoping to fly on it to JFK before it retires. I wish we could keep it flying.
Wish I had room in my garden to give one a home.
Sorry, have to go now I'm filling up again......
I remember:
Precisely where I was when the Anglo/French SST collaborative design project was launched based on the Sud Aviation Super Caravelle and the Bristol 223. (At home in Somerset)
Where I was when the official agreement was signed in November 1962. (At prep school in Somerset)
A lecture and film from BAC given at my public school in 1965. The brochure was covered in pictures of all the airlines who'd said that they would place orders....
Where I was when 001 first flew in March 1969 (At Cranwell)
Where I was when 002 first flew in April 1969 (Just about to go flying in a Cherokee at Weston super Mare aerodrome)
Seeing the 2 prototypes together at the Paris Air Show, 1969.
Watching the first simultaneous commercial flights on TV in May 1976 (On my Hunter course at RAF Brawdy)
Hearing about the Paris accident as I left the Farnborough Air Show.........
Seeing the crowds at Brize welcoming 'AF back into service. Far more than turned out to greet the US President the same week.
Precisely where I was when the Anglo/French SST collaborative design project was launched based on the Sud Aviation Super Caravelle and the Bristol 223. (At home in Somerset)
Where I was when the official agreement was signed in November 1962. (At prep school in Somerset)
A lecture and film from BAC given at my public school in 1965. The brochure was covered in pictures of all the airlines who'd said that they would place orders....
Where I was when 001 first flew in March 1969 (At Cranwell)
Where I was when 002 first flew in April 1969 (Just about to go flying in a Cherokee at Weston super Mare aerodrome)
Seeing the 2 prototypes together at the Paris Air Show, 1969.
Watching the first simultaneous commercial flights on TV in May 1976 (On my Hunter course at RAF Brawdy)
Hearing about the Paris accident as I left the Farnborough Air Show.........
Seeing the crowds at Brize welcoming 'AF back into service. Far more than turned out to greet the US President the same week.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Near two motorways and two airports
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Likewise - as a younger better looking pongo (!)
I remember being on the London Eye and seeing concorde positioning for a 27 LHR arrival - must have been the first test flight back from NY for a BA bird after Paris. Truely stirring stuff!
I remember being on the London Eye and seeing concorde positioning for a 27 LHR arrival - must have been the first test flight back from NY for a BA bird after Paris. Truely stirring stuff!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: manchester
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For heavens sake forget Bransons silly PR stunt.
He could not possibly operate Concorde even if he could get one for a quid.
He has no spare engines or parts. No engineers qualified to even tough a concorde. No suitable hangar and no essential specialised tools.
Not to mention no flight engineers or indeed, pilots who know how to fly the aircraft. He has no simulators to train crews with and he has no license from the CAA to operate a Concorde.
Even were he to go to such lengthy and crushingly expensive efforts to sort all these problems (God knows how much the pilots alone would want to leave the top of the BA seniority list) he would really struggle to find anyone willing to insure his operation.
Its a pipedream.
Branson championed himself as wanting to break up BA's monopoly and help out the consumer. Strange now he is dead against dropping the BermundaII treaty and really opening up the market. He is quite happy with his duopoly out of LHR thank you very much.
In fact its not. Its a cynical PR exercise whereby Branson muscles in on a story that has got nothing to do with him. I suggest you read the Tom Bower book on Branson to see that this is typical of the man.
I dislike his elbowing in on the end of the Concorde story. Most people won't ever know that he was talking bull**** just to get his name in the papers again. They'll think BA simply gave up whereas in fact their commitment to the aircraft has been immense for decades.
Not fair. Not sporting. Not British.
Typical Branson.
PS Not my post ; but from peterskellan - though I'm sure he wont mind me posting it here because it Sums up Branson nicely.
He could not possibly operate Concorde even if he could get one for a quid.
He has no spare engines or parts. No engineers qualified to even tough a concorde. No suitable hangar and no essential specialised tools.
Not to mention no flight engineers or indeed, pilots who know how to fly the aircraft. He has no simulators to train crews with and he has no license from the CAA to operate a Concorde.
Even were he to go to such lengthy and crushingly expensive efforts to sort all these problems (God knows how much the pilots alone would want to leave the top of the BA seniority list) he would really struggle to find anyone willing to insure his operation.
Its a pipedream.
Branson championed himself as wanting to break up BA's monopoly and help out the consumer. Strange now he is dead against dropping the BermundaII treaty and really opening up the market. He is quite happy with his duopoly out of LHR thank you very much.
In fact its not. Its a cynical PR exercise whereby Branson muscles in on a story that has got nothing to do with him. I suggest you read the Tom Bower book on Branson to see that this is typical of the man.
I dislike his elbowing in on the end of the Concorde story. Most people won't ever know that he was talking bull**** just to get his name in the papers again. They'll think BA simply gave up whereas in fact their commitment to the aircraft has been immense for decades.
Not fair. Not sporting. Not British.
Typical Branson.
PS Not my post ; but from peterskellan - though I'm sure he wont mind me posting it here because it Sums up Branson nicely.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too true shuttle worth, how long will vs survise once the BII agrrement is dead?
Had an argument with the missus over this last night. If it were sooooo commercially viable why aren't there a queue of willing and hyperventilating airlines lining up to take on the ould bird?
He is motivated by purely commercial malice and ba responded in a suitable manner.
Had an argument with the missus over this last night. If it were sooooo commercially viable why aren't there a queue of willing and hyperventilating airlines lining up to take on the ould bird?
He is motivated by purely commercial malice and ba responded in a suitable manner.
Paxing All Over The World
I guess that airlines are not queuing up because they know that Airbus has cancelled support for the bird. Branson may not have known this and Eddington appears narked that everyone thinks it is his bean counters that have shut it down.
Without moving this into a Branson thread ... When BA were setting up the BA/AA thing, I recall him saying some years ago (words to the effect), "I don't like it but if I were BA, I would do something similar. They are just trying to look after their shareholders and their passengers. I am just trying to look after mine." It maybe that going on TV to say how much he would like Conc is just a part of that.
One part of Airbus that was closing down the support for Conc may not have mentioned this to the part of Airbus that was selling A380s to VS. Hence Branson goes on to TV to say something that is wrong. It's called commercial life.
On better moments ...
I, too, remember seeing her for the first time 'in the metal'. She came out to South Africa in (I think) 1971 for Hot & High tests. My mother drove my brother and I out to (then) Jan Smuts Airport (now Johannesburg International). I still have the photographs.
Some 32 years later, on Friday 8th August 2003, my boyhood dream will come true.
Without moving this into a Branson thread ... When BA were setting up the BA/AA thing, I recall him saying some years ago (words to the effect), "I don't like it but if I were BA, I would do something similar. They are just trying to look after their shareholders and their passengers. I am just trying to look after mine." It maybe that going on TV to say how much he would like Conc is just a part of that.
One part of Airbus that was closing down the support for Conc may not have mentioned this to the part of Airbus that was selling A380s to VS. Hence Branson goes on to TV to say something that is wrong. It's called commercial life.
On better moments ...
I, too, remember seeing her for the first time 'in the metal'. She came out to South Africa in (I think) 1971 for Hot & High tests. My mother drove my brother and I out to (then) Jan Smuts Airport (now Johannesburg International). I still have the photographs.
Some 32 years later, on Friday 8th August 2003, my boyhood dream will come true.
DIRECTOR
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone said this is a typical Branson free bit of publicity.
The very idea of Virgin having Concorde as a loss leader to wave the flag is nonsense. Remember Singapore Airlines own 49% of Virgin and so far have poured money into the Airline with still no return on it's investment. SIA are in enough deep mire as it is with the SARS virus and War having a devastating effect on it's profit,although the financial results to 31st March should still be good and no thanks to any contribution from Virgin !!There is not any more money in the SIA kitty to bail out Virgin anymore.
The very idea of Virgin having Concorde as a loss leader to wave the flag is nonsense. Remember Singapore Airlines own 49% of Virgin and so far have poured money into the Airline with still no return on it's investment. SIA are in enough deep mire as it is with the SARS virus and War having a devastating effect on it's profit,although the financial results to 31st March should still be good and no thanks to any contribution from Virgin !!There is not any more money in the SIA kitty to bail out Virgin anymore.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The Times -
1st May:
BRITISH AIRWAYS was forced into retiring Concorde because Air France and Airbus, the French-based manufacturer, refused to continue supporting it, the airline’s chairman said. Lord Marshall of Knightsbridge said that BA would have been keen to continue operating the plane beyond the end of October if the French had been prepared to share the burden of extra maintenance costs.
BA originally said the decision to retire Concorde had been taken jointly, but Lord Marshall told The Times: “Concorde can’t keep flying unless the manufacturer is willing to go on producing the parts. Airbus said they were not willing to support Concorde beyond the end of October. We might well have considered continuing if they hadn’t. It would have made it much more difficult for Airbus if Air France and BA had presented a united front in supporting the continuation of scheduled services.”
Lord Marshall said that Airbus had been determined to redeploy the staff who supported Concorde to more profitable production lines. Airbus told BA that it would have to spend £40 million on maintenance over the next two to five years to keep Concorde flying. Air France said that the decision had been taken “in close conjunction with Airbus”.......
Jock Lowe, BA’s former chief pilot and commercial manager of Concorde in the late 1990s, said......that BA should have invoked the terms of the 1962 treaty on Concorde signed by Britain and France, which obliged them to continue supporting the aircraft even if one wanted to withdraw.......Mr Lowe said that he supported Virgin Atlantic’s attempt to take over BA Concorde services. “They would need a huge amount of expertise but there is a pool of recently retired engineers who would be very willing to help. Virgin has the marketing flair needed to make it work.”
Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin chairman, said: “Concorde was built with taxpayers’ money and handed over to BA and Air France for virtually nothing. BA is only acting as custodian of those planes for the British people.”
5th May:
The Goverment is to discuss with Sir Richard Branson, the chairman of Virgin Atlantic, his proposal to buy Concorde from Bitish Airways. Patricia Hewitt, the Trade and Industry Secretary is, "very interested" in the plan to save the supersonic aircraft due to be grounded in the autumn.......
Sir Richard Branson will this week unveil a team to work on his bid to buy Concorde that will give the Virgin Atlantic boss "more experience than British Airways" on the spersonic jets. Sir Richard said that Virgin was in discussions with "current and former employees of BA" as part of its efforts to take control of the ageing Concorde, which British Airways plans to retire at the end of this year. He said, "We have a formidable team lined up. BA has to realise that there are a lot of people in all sorts of positions, who worked on Concorde, who love Concorde, and who want to see it carry on flying."
1st May:
BRITISH AIRWAYS was forced into retiring Concorde because Air France and Airbus, the French-based manufacturer, refused to continue supporting it, the airline’s chairman said. Lord Marshall of Knightsbridge said that BA would have been keen to continue operating the plane beyond the end of October if the French had been prepared to share the burden of extra maintenance costs.
BA originally said the decision to retire Concorde had been taken jointly, but Lord Marshall told The Times: “Concorde can’t keep flying unless the manufacturer is willing to go on producing the parts. Airbus said they were not willing to support Concorde beyond the end of October. We might well have considered continuing if they hadn’t. It would have made it much more difficult for Airbus if Air France and BA had presented a united front in supporting the continuation of scheduled services.”
Lord Marshall said that Airbus had been determined to redeploy the staff who supported Concorde to more profitable production lines. Airbus told BA that it would have to spend £40 million on maintenance over the next two to five years to keep Concorde flying. Air France said that the decision had been taken “in close conjunction with Airbus”.......
Jock Lowe, BA’s former chief pilot and commercial manager of Concorde in the late 1990s, said......that BA should have invoked the terms of the 1962 treaty on Concorde signed by Britain and France, which obliged them to continue supporting the aircraft even if one wanted to withdraw.......Mr Lowe said that he supported Virgin Atlantic’s attempt to take over BA Concorde services. “They would need a huge amount of expertise but there is a pool of recently retired engineers who would be very willing to help. Virgin has the marketing flair needed to make it work.”
Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin chairman, said: “Concorde was built with taxpayers’ money and handed over to BA and Air France for virtually nothing. BA is only acting as custodian of those planes for the British people.”
5th May:
The Goverment is to discuss with Sir Richard Branson, the chairman of Virgin Atlantic, his proposal to buy Concorde from Bitish Airways. Patricia Hewitt, the Trade and Industry Secretary is, "very interested" in the plan to save the supersonic aircraft due to be grounded in the autumn.......
Sir Richard Branson will this week unveil a team to work on his bid to buy Concorde that will give the Virgin Atlantic boss "more experience than British Airways" on the spersonic jets. Sir Richard said that Virgin was in discussions with "current and former employees of BA" as part of its efforts to take control of the ageing Concorde, which British Airways plans to retire at the end of this year. He said, "We have a formidable team lined up. BA has to realise that there are a lot of people in all sorts of positions, who worked on Concorde, who love Concorde, and who want to see it carry on flying."
One of the major issues restricting the use of Concorde, and discouraging development of a replacement, is the assumed unacceptability of a sonic boom over land.
Could BA and the CAA be persuaded to allow one or two high altitude supersonic flights over the UK in the next few months so that we can see exactly what all the fuss is about?
Probably it will turn out to be unacceptable, in which case we will at least get some idea how much the boom will need to be suppressed to allow overland supersonic transport.
On the other hand it may turn out not to be that big a deal (and Concorde has flown supersonically over many countries in the past), in which case a replacement SST starts to look much more plausible
Could BA and the CAA be persuaded to allow one or two high altitude supersonic flights over the UK in the next few months so that we can see exactly what all the fuss is about?
Probably it will turn out to be unacceptable, in which case we will at least get some idea how much the boom will need to be suppressed to allow overland supersonic transport.
On the other hand it may turn out not to be that big a deal (and Concorde has flown supersonically over many countries in the past), in which case a replacement SST starts to look much more plausible
Last edited by Dr Jekyll; 6th May 2003 at 15:03.
Controversial, moi?
I don't suppose that once Mr. Branson had acquired Concorde and painted the aircraft in Virgin colours that he might then decide not to operate them and place them in museums around the world, still in Virgin colours.
No, far to honourable to do something like that.
No, far to honourable to do something like that.
Mistrust in Management
Sky News reports that Patricia Hewitt (trade and industry secretary) endorses Branson
For all the reasons mentioned in this thread I too think it is unlikely regardless of any political backing.
I wouldn’t underestimate either the will in BA in preventing the aircraft falling into the hands of competition such as Bransons. Understandable in a way when one considers the massive investment BA have made over the years, in partnership with AF, on the development of this magnificent aircraft.
However I’m certain that Branson could count on a number of soon to be ‘ex’ BA F/E’s to support his bid to keep it flying. For their sake I hope Bransons bid is successful.
It would be a very tasty morsel indeed for Branson. I just hope he doesn’t end up choking on it.
Regards
Exeng
I wouldn’t underestimate either the will in BA in preventing the aircraft falling into the hands of competition such as Bransons. Understandable in a way when one considers the massive investment BA have made over the years, in partnership with AF, on the development of this magnificent aircraft.
However I’m certain that Branson could count on a number of soon to be ‘ex’ BA F/E’s to support his bid to keep it flying. For their sake I hope Bransons bid is successful.
It would be a very tasty morsel indeed for Branson. I just hope he doesn’t end up choking on it.
Regards
Exeng
Prior to the retirement announcement, Concorde was reported to quite often fly with a significant number of empty seats. Mr Branson also mentions this in the Sky News report.
Is it the weight saving that stops BA from filling the seats with, for example, first class subsonic passengers? Is it more economic to fly half full than to flog some 'cheap' seats?
Sky News report
Thanks
9:18
Is it the weight saving that stops BA from filling the seats with, for example, first class subsonic passengers? Is it more economic to fly half full than to flog some 'cheap' seats?
Sky News report
Thanks
9:18
Prince of Darkness
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: USA and a Brit
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an interesting article. I think the idea to make Concorde a two class, instead of a one class, aircraft is excellent. The hyper-rich can afford the higher prices upfront, while the seats in the back could come down to first/biz class pricing.
Ozzy
Branson has plans
Ozzy
Branson has plans
It will come as little surprise to anyone that Branson hasn't actually advanced a formal proposal to take over Concorde, as Patricia Hewitt noted this morning in her announcement. There is an incredible amount of publicity value in Virgin's actions but very little substance to show.
It also cannot be a foregone conclusion that Virgin taking over Concorde services is in the public interest. What other services is Virgin going to cancel - reducing competition for the subsonic masses - to create the runway slots needed for Concorde flights?
One cannot help but think that it would be highly amusing for BA to say "yes" to Branson's scheme. Branson would probably need a change of underwear on the spot at the prospect of having to deliver on his promises or face ridicule. It's almost worth persuading BA to agree to his demands just for the sake of watching his face when he hears the news.
It also cannot be a foregone conclusion that Virgin taking over Concorde services is in the public interest. What other services is Virgin going to cancel - reducing competition for the subsonic masses - to create the runway slots needed for Concorde flights?
One cannot help but think that it would be highly amusing for BA to say "yes" to Branson's scheme. Branson would probably need a change of underwear on the spot at the prospect of having to deliver on his promises or face ridicule. It's almost worth persuading BA to agree to his demands just for the sake of watching his face when he hears the news.
Paxing All Over The World
I wonder why folks are so angry at the idea that there is lots of publicity for Branson in this proposal.
Whether he secures the aircraft or not - how will it make people buy seats on existing services? Yes, it brings the name and logo to the fore but I cannot imagine that affecting any number of potential pax.
Biz Pax:
i) If they get no say in their carrier, because of a corporate deal, then it makes no change.
ii) If they get a say - they will already be experienced in long haul travel and have a favourite.
Holiday Pax:
i) If they use a package, there is little choice. If they use a travel agent, they will get a choice of what that agent wants to sell.
ii) If they use on-line, they will get a range of the cheapest from the list on Travelocity etc.
iii) That leaves people booking direct with the carrier, in which case they have already made up their mind.
I suggest that the publicity factor may bring him to people's attention but will that get people on his planes? Nope. If he thinks that publicity for it's own sake is good - then let him try. If he shows up fault lines in the AF/Airbus decision and any other decision, good for him. Equally, he might show up fault lines within his own company. That is daily life in the airline game.
To the outsider, such as myself, the enormous enmity that is felt towards Branson by many in the airline biz, is a mystery. I have no doubt that you could all give examples (in private or in court!) of times when he has gone back on his word and generally made a dog's dinner of matters - but there is not an organisation in the world that has not! One could start with big airways ...
Be they government, charity or commercial (private and public owned), they all are worthy of derision at one time or another. But the insults that you throw at him? I struggle to find words to say how nauseating and unnecessary it is.
Whether he secures the aircraft or not - how will it make people buy seats on existing services? Yes, it brings the name and logo to the fore but I cannot imagine that affecting any number of potential pax.
Biz Pax:
i) If they get no say in their carrier, because of a corporate deal, then it makes no change.
ii) If they get a say - they will already be experienced in long haul travel and have a favourite.
Holiday Pax:
i) If they use a package, there is little choice. If they use a travel agent, they will get a choice of what that agent wants to sell.
ii) If they use on-line, they will get a range of the cheapest from the list on Travelocity etc.
iii) That leaves people booking direct with the carrier, in which case they have already made up their mind.
I suggest that the publicity factor may bring him to people's attention but will that get people on his planes? Nope. If he thinks that publicity for it's own sake is good - then let him try. If he shows up fault lines in the AF/Airbus decision and any other decision, good for him. Equally, he might show up fault lines within his own company. That is daily life in the airline game.
To the outsider, such as myself, the enormous enmity that is felt towards Branson by many in the airline biz, is a mystery. I have no doubt that you could all give examples (in private or in court!) of times when he has gone back on his word and generally made a dog's dinner of matters - but there is not an organisation in the world that has not! One could start with big airways ...
Be they government, charity or commercial (private and public owned), they all are worthy of derision at one time or another. But the insults that you throw at him? I struggle to find words to say how nauseating and unnecessary it is.