I’m ok…this is something I know NOTHING about! My comments stand LOL
My dear British folks, can you please tell me, which aircraft belong to the “Queens Fleet”?
If the British Government fly with commercial aircrafts, how do they communicate with the world outside?
I presume, the Prime minister can’t communicate secure to the troops or to London in in case of an emergency.
Thanks in advance!
The Queens Flight uses 2 (I think they still have 2) BAe-146-200s, and used to have access to HS125s. Neither type though is particularly suitable for a non-stop to South Africa ;). The RAF have VC-10 and L1011s which can be configured for VIP roles, including transporting the queen.
I have NO idea regarding the communication issue. I assume onboard RAF transports they’d be ok, but I’m not sure about on the BA 772s that the PM usually uses.
Many years ago there was a helicopter link…although I’m too young to remember that đ
I haven’t picked up a copy yet, does it mention Loughborough? I went there (http://www.lboro.ac.uk) its a top 10 university, with Air Transport Management as a course. Teaching at Lboro is rated number 2 after Cambridge, and ahead of Oxford (or the other way round I can never remember). I think the entry points for the course have gone up slightly, but not sure. A good uni though.
Plenty of options out there if you fancy such a course.
Sorry, this news came out yesterday morning, and I didn’t think to post..here is what I received…
Cathay defers HK-Moscow-Manchester launch
Nicholas Ionides, Singapore (09Feb06, 09:02 GMT, 196 words)Hong Kongâs Cathay Pacific Airways has deferred the planned 27 March launch of passenger services to Moscow and Manchester as a result of regulatory issues.
The Oneworld alliance carrier says in a statement that it now hopes to launch the thrice-weekly services, which will operate on a Hong Kong-Moscow-Manchester return routing, âlater in the yearâ.
Cathay announced plans for the new route in December when it said Aeroflot would codeshare on its flights. A spokesman in Hong Kong will not say specifically what the regulatory problems are, although it is thought that they are related to Aeroflot and rights for the Moscow-Manchester leg.
âPreparations for a new service typically need to be completed well in advance of the launch date. Unfortunately, we continue to await the completion of regulatory formalities regarding Manchester, which is taking longer than originally anticipated, so the airline has made the decision now to postpone,â Cathay says.
âWe are continuing to work hard with our partners to resolve these issues.â
Cathay has served Manchester in the past and has been talking about launching services of its own to Moscow for years. It currently codeshares on Aeroflotâs flights between Moscow and Hong Kong.
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
The sad loss of a pioneer who was ahead of his time. He proved, with a number of airlines (not just Skytrain, but BUA for example), that there is more than one business model in the industry.
They only use 777s for 5 services per week, the remaining two are still with 747-400s, and I’m not sure that this is changing for the summer schedule (my colleague who would know for definite isn’t around to check with). Currently the 744s fly out on a Tuesday and Thursday and make a stop in Europe. If you’re flying on either of these days you may want to consider this type aswell. SIA used to have very good seat maps on their own website..although I think they used ot be well hidden, not sure anymore.
They were the ‘regional jet’ of their day, ten a penny wherever you looked. Glasgow Airport used to be full of BA and Dan Air examples back in the 70’s and 80’s…
Incidentally, didn’t Charles and Di head off on honeymoon in a Queen’s Flight 748 after their wedding ? And isn’t the Andover a slightly longer version with a Hercules style diagonally sloping rear fuselage with a cargo ramp ?
Yes the Andover was slightly longer, and also the rear bogies could be lowered so that it ‘knelt’ to allow a lower loading deck level.
it seems so mate were they heavily used at one point
They were heavily used throughout the UK full stop! LOL.
[QUOTE=airportsexpress]low cost carriers have only been successful in truely deregulated markets and asia is not even close, QUOTE]
Thats two of us saying that now. I really think you need to focus on this issue, do some work on the growth of LCCs in Europe and the US, and highlight the points of deregulation, then move the principle across to Asia, and look in depth at the regulations in Asia.
The markets in which LCCs have been most succesful have been the most deregulated, and currently Asia does not have that luxury. They trade in competitive markets, and in my view they ideally they need to be:
1. Free of bilaterals and other capacity/price constraints;
2. Free to move into and out of markets which are not proving succesful, in heavily regulated markets entering and exiting markets is not so simple;
3. In markets where competing airlines are not subsidised and held up by governments because these markets are distorted.
Other problems in Asia include the distances between major centres, and the result of this means that the major carriers tend to use widebodied aircraft, which offer economics that traditional low cost aircraft types simply cannot match. In addition the distances covered by these flights means that many passengers want complimentary food/drink/ents.
HOWEVER, I think there is potential in Asia for several reasons:
1. There is a growing middle class in many countries, which have growing disposable income, and an economic effect of that is the desire to travel;
2. The markets are gradually becoming more liberated, and will help meet some of the criteria in which I believe LCCs must operate.
3. The LCC model has been well proven elsewhere, in markets which had a lot of competitors, in Asia due to the regulated markets there is very little competition against flag carriers, and when deregulation takes place it should be boom time for the LCCs because there will be very little competition.
4. The surface transport infrastructure is very basic in many countries, and so air transport can offer a fast, relatively cheap alternative.
Hope this gives you a few ideas to think about. I can write more if you like.
What’s the operating profit/loss?
For the full year it was an operating profit of $47.6m for the year, but an operating loss for the final quarter of $31.5m. They announced yesterday that they anticipate a loss for the first quarter of this year, and also for 2006 overall. They blame fuel prices, which is fair enough, suggesting that their business model is suited to $40-45 per barrel, but currently they’re paying $70 per barrel. However they also stated that last year they had a 7% increase in Revenue per Avaliable Seat Miles, whilst capacity increased 25%!!!
If your university library has Flight International archived then you could go through EITHER, their maintenance directories (of which there are three annually, covering areas of the world, but published at three points through the year), or you can look at their World Airline Directory (again, three publications, although all follow each other over a three week period), through those you will get addresses.
To be honest, if you need to phone or e-mail then do so, I’m not sure what you can say in a letter that you cannot in an e-mail?! If you have to ring them then simply as them if they do placements, and if so whether they would be happy to receive a copy of your CV. When I looked for my placement I fired off ALOT of letters because not many companies run such schemes, and in particular airlines tend not to because of the added cost burden, especially within a specialism such as yours. Perhaps you may be better considering one of the specialist maintenance companies rtaher than an airline?
I’ll ask a question….
I’ll ask a question….