Russia's LCC Dobrolet closes...the first victim of sanctions?
Could this be the beginning of bad times incoming to the Russian Aviation World...?:sad:
Aeroflot subsidiary grounded by European sanctions - FT.com Not good news for sure... |
I hope it is just beginning. Airlines, that ignore NOTAMs should be grounded, at least for safety reasons.
|
Aeroflot says it is due to the sanctions, however very low loadfactors might have played a rather large part in it as well, rumours are only 20% of available tickets were payed for.
|
Dobrolet Grounded by Broadened EU Sanctions Against Russia :: Routesonline
No sign up required here. |
To put things into perspective:
Dobrolet was formed to operate flights into annexed Krimea, pretty much for the same reasons why Lufthansa used a Condor painted 744 to operate into Taipei, or why KLM created KLM Asia for the same purpose: to protect the main airline from potential sanctions (which were already anticipated months ago, nothing to do with MH17) The reason for the suspension is because the Bermudan (and by implication UK) registered 738-s have been repossessed by the lessor due to Dobrolet being specificly targeted by the EU sanctions. I'm sure they will find a couple of Tu-204s as replacement, Krimea flights are primarily politically motivated, commercial realities will have little to do with it. |
andrasz, Aeroflot and other major airline Transaero have own flights to Crimea. no sanctions to them...
|
Originally Posted by andrasz
(Post 8594296)
Dobrolet was formed to operate flights into annexed Krimea
|
I'm at a loss why all Russian route licenses are not suspended? Instant impact to Russia and I'm sure, the US, Euro, Japanese legacy carriers could use the surplus capacity profitably elsewhere. I'm obviously missing something here and would look forward to more informed comments.
|
Originally Posted by Chopper69
(Post 8594596)
I'm at a loss why all Russian route licenses are not suspended? Instant impact to Russia and I'm sure, the US, Euro, Japanese legacy carriers could use the surplus capacity profitably elsewhere. I'm obviously missing something here and would look forward to more informed comments.
Energy |
huh, and what happens if Russia suspends its own airspace for western companies? Many flights would suddenly become twice longer...
|
That's exactly what a Russian newspaper is writing about:
ВЕДОМОСТИ - Россия может запретить транссибирские перелеты европейским авиакомпаниям |
Originally Posted by Cyrano
No, actually, it wasn't.
|
I have seen reports that Russia is considering banning overflights over Russian airspace!
that would make lots of routes to Asia either unviable or unpalatable due to flight times |
I have seen reports that Russia is considering banning overflights over Russian airspace! |
I'm with chopper on this. Boeing and airbus can bring putin to heel more quickly than most other avenues if they were so instructed.
|
"Sure and what do you think would happen then to Russian carriers 'overflying' Europe."
they would just go around |
they would just go around While I don't think EU would forbid Russian aircraft to land on their territory - they would slap retaliatory 'landing fees' to make up for the 'Siberian detour'. |
Originally Posted by ciderman
(Post 8595206)
I'm with chopper on this. Boeing and airbus can bring putin to heel more quickly than most other avenues if they were so instructed.
|
It is not true that government employees, including security and police officers are forbidden to leave the country.
They have only been given advice that it might he prudent not to as there have been several cases of agression towards Russian tourists abroad, especially in Turkey, by Europeans. Russian tourists have been given advice to be careful in Turkey and the EU. |
And the sanctions on the USA post Iranair 655 were.........?
|
Buster:
Not exactly comparable, given 1) the USA immediately accepted responsibility and admitted they'd F'd up. 2) the USA paid reparations I'm not holding my breath for either of those to happen with Putin. |
And the sanctions on the USA post Iranair 655 were.........? |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 8595624)
Buster:
Not exactly comparable, given 1) the USA immediately accepted responsibility and admitted they'd F'd up. |
Shooting down an airliner as a "proper defensive action" is hardly the same thing as admitting they F'd up. And it was like the Bay of Tokin all over again, the statements made by US officials (eg. VP Bush at the UN) didn't agree with facts.
US statement - I am saddened to report that it appears that in a proper defensive action by the U.S.S. Vincennes this morning in the Persian Gulf an Iranian airliner was shot down over the Strait of Hormuz. This is a terrible human tragedy. Our sympathy and condolences go out to the passengers, crew, and their families. The Defense Department will conduct a full investigation. We deeply regret any loss of life. The course of the Iranian civilian airliner was such that it was headed directly for the U.S.S. Vincennes, which was at the time engaged with five Iranian Boghammar boats that had attacked our forces. When the aircraft failed to heed repeated warnings, the Vincennes followed standing orders and widely publicized procedures, firing to protect itself against possible attack. The only U.S. interest in the Persian Gulf is peace, and this tragedy reinforces the need to achieve that goal with all possible speed. Interesting read on the actions of the US Navy ships during the event - Naval Science 302: Lesson 20 |
. The USA did no such thing. |
Originally Posted by olasek
(Post 8595687)
They did admit they shot it down which is huge comparing to Russian actions.
|
It is not true that government employees, including security and police officers are forbidden to leave the country. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:05. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.