When you’re in mid-Atlantic it’s a bloody long way to anywhere! 😉

I think the point is that the parts required were ready and waiting, together with engineers experienced on the type, at LHR.

That probably wouldn’t have been the case at most US airports, for example and certainly wasn’t the case at any of the airports near to the planned route.

Ah, but if your mission is to move passengers up and down the banks of a river then they are exactly equivalent.

A perfect illustration of my point about differing design philosophies producing different solutions to a given mission profile, if ever there were one. 😀

Hmmm….interesting idea, Whiskey Delta. Can it carry as heavy a load as the Chinook, though?

I suppose there’s always the C-160 Transall. It’s closer in size to the An24/26 and it can certainly operate in rough conditions.

If true that means that pilots can officially fly one type of aircraft but not another.?

Got it in one, Joe.

As Sandy says, a pilot has to be “rated” on a type before they can legally fly that type on a commercial flight.

“Type” in this context can, and often does, include different sub-types of the same aircraft depending on the degree of commonality between sub-types. For example, the B737 “Classic” and the B737NG have different type ratings.

They’re a “bucket and spade” charter subsidiary of Alitalia rather than a low cost operator, Steve.

At least the A300s had A330-style avionics and glass cockpits.

I’m afraid that old G-BYDA is a museum piece…….. 😮

Don’t knock it – we might see Finnair MD11s at Ringway yet…. 😉