Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5863069/

Topic: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-05 11:27:36 and read 13818 times.

Always wondered about this... why does Emirates refer to itself as Emirates Airline and not Emirates Airlines? Why buck an almost century-old naming convention? Anyone know the story behind this? Thanks!

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: par13del
Posted 2013-09-05 11:50:17 and read 13721 times.

I don't officially know but how about singular and plural?
It is the Emirates and they have an airline not multiple airlines, now they do but whoever got the legacy name first - Emirates - they get to use airline.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Pe@rson
Posted 2013-09-05 11:50:36 and read 13713 times.

Because it is one airline, not more than one.

You could perhaps interpret "Airlines" or "Airways" to mean routes or such.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-05 12:26:11 and read 13542 times.

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 2):
Because it is one airline, not more than one.

But so is British Airways and Japan Airlines.... that is the norm that EK seems to be bucking.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Pe@rson
Posted 2013-09-05 12:45:07 and read 13456 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 3):
But so is British Airways and Japan Airlines....

If we take the singular-versus-plural argument to be valid, they should technically be Airway and Airline, although British Airway sounds hugely odd.  



[Edited 2013-09-05 12:47:04]

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: rlwynn
Posted 2013-09-05 13:07:13 and read 13363 times.

British Airways does not just fly one airway. Thay fly many airways. Airlines being used as a plural for a single company is a bit strange though. Is it used as airlines as in rail lines? I guess since it basically has been used since the start of passenger service.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: airdfw
Posted 2013-09-05 13:17:28 and read 13305 times.

May be because they say Emirate"s" airline? Like Americans Airline?  

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-09-05 13:41:40 and read 13196 times.

It doesn't really matter since EK rarely uses the "Emirates Airline" terminology. It's virtually always just "Emirates".

As a sidenote, for about 4 years after TWA changed it's name from Transcontinental & Western Air in the mid-1940s, it used "Trans World Airline" but changed it to Airlines in 1950.



November/December 1949 timetable, one of the last before they switched from "Airline" to "Airlines".

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: QF2220
Posted 2013-09-05 13:44:09 and read 13174 times.

Quoting rlwynn (Reply 5):
Airlines being used as a plural for a single company is a bit strange though. Is it used as airlines as in rail lines?

If you think back (and refer to some of the old route maps, esp in the USA), air routes used to look a lot like rail routes, with a starting point and a finishing point and many stops in between where pax and cargo was set down and collected. Now, the emphasis is on the discrete stops. An aircraft can be scheduled to operate on a 'line' which will have many flight numbers over many days but we dont see this so much, we more see the origin and destination.

So I agree, the word airlines can refer to the routes and as there are many air lines flown by a company, Id think it more appopriate to refer to them as "Airlines". They are the airlines of the company. Ill be controversial and throw an apostrophe into the mix, but perhaps it should be Emirates' Airlines?  Wow!

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-05 13:47:21 and read 13153 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
It doesn't really matter since EK rarely uses the "Emirates Airline" terminology. It's virtually always just "Emirates".

True. They are using the full form in their stadium banners at the ongoing US Open though, which is where it caught my eye.

[Edited 2013-09-05 14:34:10]

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: MANYUL
Posted 2013-09-05 14:22:02 and read 13026 times.

Perhaps if you take United Airlines as an example they are an amalgamation of airlines, past and present, and have subsidiaries such as Expressjet which carry out some of their routes. So therefore plural would be better placed than the singular. Emirates however are a single entity.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: hotplane
Posted 2013-09-05 14:26:23 and read 12997 times.

'Emirates' from the United Arab Emirates and they are the 'airline' for that country.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2013-09-05 14:28:59 and read 12992 times.

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 8):
If you think back (and refer to some of the old route maps, esp in the USA), air routes used to look a lot like rail routes, with a starting point and a finishing point and many stops in between where pax and cargo was set down and collected.

There was once a railroad here in the US called Seaboard Air Line Railroad. They once tried to start a Seaboard Airlines, but anti-trust laws killed the idea.

In the days before air travel, the term "air line" was a commonly used term for the shortest distance between two points, straight line that ignored any natural obstacles.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-09-05 14:54:08 and read 12875 times.

The sentence -

The Emirates (plural) Airline would be correctly constructed.

[Edited 2013-09-05 14:57:28]

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Speedbored
Posted 2013-09-05 15:35:41 and read 12745 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 3):
But so is British Airways and Japan Airlines.

Actually, no they're not. Both British Airways and JAL are groups of companies.

Quoting sankaps (Thread starter):
Why buck an almost century-old naming convention?

Probably because there is no convention. Granted, the plural is a lot more common (by an approximate ratio of 10:1 - I can't be bothered to count exactly), but if you look at a list of airline names throughout the world, there are plenty that use the singular.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: EmiratesEK231
Posted 2013-09-05 15:43:04 and read 12715 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 12):
They once tried to start a Seaboard Airlines, but anti-trust laws killed the idea.

Well, Seaboard World Airlines already existed... not sure if that has any relevance.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mick Bajcar
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-05 15:46:31 and read 12694 times.

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 14):
Actually, no they're not. Both British Airways and JAL are groups of companies.

Well, it can be argued so is Emirates Airline. They own other businesses including another airline, FlyDubai.

Regardless, I don't thing BA and JAL used the word Airlines to denote their subsidiary airlines (in fact when BA was renamed British Airways from BOAC in the 1970s, I don't think they had any other airlines in their fold). Neither did Singapore Airlines when they were named that, though later Tradewinds / Silkair, Tiger, Scoot came into their group.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: 71Zulu
Posted 2013-09-05 16:12:23 and read 12629 times.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ralf Manteufel

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: SPQR
Posted 2013-09-05 16:43:03 and read 12543 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 12):

Now that you mention rail, most rail companies use the singular form e.g. XYZ Railroad or ABC Railway. Shipping lines also generally use the singular when they have 'line' in the title (e.g. Maersk Line) although there are a few that use 'lines'. long story short, I don't think there is a proper format, just whatever happens to be more popular in a particular industry segment.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: aerdingus
Posted 2013-09-05 16:49:24 and read 12527 times.

Quoting hotplane (Reply 11):
'Emirates' from the United Arab Emirates and they are the 'airline' for that country.

I agree. Now that I think about it, it gives a vibe of exclusivity. This exact topic used to drive me nuts....but I never sat down & thought about it!

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: GT4EZY
Posted 2013-09-05 18:09:20 and read 12324 times.

They aren't the only airline to use airline instead of airlines.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: AyostoLeon
Posted 2013-09-05 19:37:15 and read 11597 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 16):

Flydubai, otherwise known as Dubai Aviation Corporation, is not owned by Emirates airline, nor is it part of the Emirates Group, despite both companies having the same Chairman. The Emirates Group annual reports do not show ownership in any other airlines. Even Emirates Skycargo is listed on the Group's website as being a division of Emirates airline, due to using the belly space of its passenger aircraft as well as dedicated freighters.

The Emirates Group includes about 50 companies, including Emirates airline and dnata. However, the subsidiaries of EK are related to engineering, catering and hospitality and not other airlines.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Gunsontheroof
Posted 2013-09-05 19:47:31 and read 11492 times.

Quoting par13del (Reply 1):
It is the Emirates and they have an airline not multiple airlines, now they do but whoever got the legacy name first - Emirates - they get to use airline.
Quoting hotplane (Reply 11):
'Emirates' from the United Arab Emirates and they are the 'airline' for that country.

Incorrect. Not only is EK not the sole airline in the UAE, they're not even the flag carrier...that title belongs to EY. The decision to use "Emirates Airline" instead of "Emirates Airlines" probably has more to do with marketing preference than anything else...it definitely has an air of sophistication/exclusivity to it.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Pellegrine
Posted 2013-09-05 20:04:13 and read 11342 times.

I think this is strictly stylistic, not grammatical.

'Emirates' is a plural noun, while 'Airline' is singular. "Emirates Airlines" looks decent when reading, but it sounds funny when you speak it.

As Pe@rson stated, you can interpret 'Airlines' to mean multiple routes flown by that airline.

Also "Emirates Airline" can be transposed as "Airline of (the) Emirates". Which makes total sense. Of course EK serves Dubai and not any of the other UAE states, so it is a little presumptuous on their side.





Quoting sankaps (Reply 9):
True. They are using the full form in their stadium banners at the ongoing US Open though, which is where it caught my eye.

Yes.


Courtesy Emirates

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: tortugamon
Posted 2013-09-05 20:16:37 and read 11231 times.

Emirates is a federation of seven emirates. Its plural versus every other example has been singular.

The plural or Attorney General is Attorneys General. Not Attorney Generals or Attorneys Generals.

tortugamon

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: AyostoLeon
Posted 2013-09-05 21:04:11 and read 11136 times.

Quoting Pellegrine, reply=23:
EK serves Dubai and not any of the other UAE states, so it is a little presumptuous on their side.

Perhaps not so much if you consider the history. Emirates was founded in 1985. In contrast, Etihad and Air Arabia were founded in 2003, RAK Airways was founded in 2006 and flydubai in 2008. Prior to the establishment of Etihad, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi had a stake in Gulf Air, now completely owned by Bahrain. So for the first 18 years of its history, Emirates could indeed be viewed as the airline of the emirates.

Of course today, the flag carrier of the UAE is Etihad, as its name suggests.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Pellegrine
Posted 2013-09-05 21:24:54 and read 10960 times.

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 25):
Perhaps not so much if you consider the history. Emirates was founded in 1985. In contrast, Etihad and Air Arabia were founded in 2003, RAK Airways was founded in 2006 and flydubai in 2008. Prior to the establishment of Etihad, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi had a stake in Gulf Air, now completely owned by Bahrain. So for the first 18 years of its history, Emirates could indeed be viewed as the airline of the emirates.

Of course today, the flag carrier of the UAE is Etihad, as its name suggests.

You are right, I defer to your statement.    I should have stopped at my original sentiment, "Airline Emirates."

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: AirIndia
Posted 2013-09-05 22:11:06 and read 10718 times.

A quick look through Emirates' sponsorship pages reveal that Emirates uses "Fly Emirates" as its sponsoring name on almost all major events.
http://www.emirates.com/ae/english/a...tes-sponsorships/sponsorships.aspx

However, US Open is an exception. The key reason that could be driving this deviation from norm is the lack of brand awareness and salience in the US. Through this "Emirates Airline" tag, the aim is to increase awareness of the brand as well as establishing it as an airline brand and not some other random middle eastern sounding brand.

I would not be surprised if the next renewal of US Open sponsorship contracts, (say in 5 years) Emirates shifts to the usual "Fly Emirates" tag......

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: airbuseric
Posted 2013-09-05 23:32:47 and read 10083 times.

easyJet names itself "easyJet Airline Co. Ltd." , which is similar.

The public uses 'I fly easyJet' but they fly 'easyJet Airline'
Same goes with EK, they fly Emirates (Airline)

 

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Pellegrine
Posted 2013-09-05 23:36:43 and read 10031 times.

Quoting AirIndia (Reply 27):
The key reason that could be driving this deviation from norm is the lack of brand awareness and salience in the US. Through this "Emirates Airline" tag, the aim is to increase awareness of the brand as well as establishing it as an airline brand and not some other random middle eastern sounding brand.

I rather like your thinking.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: robbie86
Posted 2013-09-06 00:18:55 and read 9625 times.

It is propably a way for them to say that EK is THE airline of the United Arab Emirates.

If they were to refer to The Emirate of Dubai, they would call themself Emirate Airline, not Emirates

If they were to refer themself as one of many airlines in the UAE the would call themself Emirate Airlines, not Airline.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: directorguy
Posted 2013-09-06 01:15:25 and read 9130 times.

People tend to refer to EK as just 'Emirates', the same way we might speak of Qantas. However, to distinguish Emirates from the (United Arab) Emirates, someone decided to add Airline, almost as an afterthought.
In Arabic, we refer to EK as Tayaran al Imarat. Tayaran is usually the Arabic equivalent of 'air', and is found in the Arabic equivalent of Egypt Air, Gulf Air, Oman Air, Air Arabia.
'Khotout jawiya' (literally air lines) is the Arabic equiv. for airlines like Kuwait Airways, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Sudan Airways etc.
Because in Arabic we refer to Tayaran al Imarat, in keeping with convention, it should be Emirates Air or Air Emirates. However, because they probably want to want their name to be just Emirates, they added the somewhat unconventional Airline, knowing that if they became Air EK, it would stick more with the public.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Bongodog1964
Posted 2013-09-06 02:24:51 and read 8561 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 3):
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 2):Because it is one airline, not more than one.
But so is British Airways and Japan Airlines.... that is the norm that EK seems to be bucking.

By dictionary definition, Airways refers to routes flown, airline refers to the operating company, hence the following examples quoted are correct:
British Airways is one airline that flies a number of routes
Emirates Airline is one airline representing the Emirates
United Airlines is the amalgamation of a number of airlines

Emirates Airlines or British Airway would be grammatically incorrect.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-09-06 02:45:47 and read 8411 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 12):

There was once a railroad here in the US called Seaboard Air Line Railroad. They once tried to start a Seaboard Airlines, but anti-trust laws killed the idea.

In the days before air travel, the term "air line" was a commonly used term for the shortest distance between two points, straight line that ignored any natural obstacles.

The Seaboard Air Line Railroad was created in 1916 to put some perspective on the above statement when talking about the historical context that it was in fact created through a merger of Carolina, Atlantic and Western Railway and the Seaboard Airline.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 03:10:21 and read 8215 times.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 32):
British Airways is one airline that flies a number of routes
Emirates Airline is one airline representing the Emirates
United Airlines is the amalgamation of a number of airlines

Emirates Airlines or British Airway would be grammatically incorrect.

Why? Emirates is also one airline that flies a number of routes.

I can however see the grammatical issue you allude to, in that it would then be more correct to call it "Emirati Airlines", just like British Airways or American Airlines or Indian Airlines. But then that would imply that Japan Airlines and Singapore Airlines are grammatically incorrect (as in they should then be Japanese Airlines and Singaporean Airlines).

[Edited 2013-09-06 03:18:14]

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: gkirk
Posted 2013-09-06 03:15:33 and read 8189 times.

Quoting airbuseric (Reply 28):
easyJet names itself "easyJet Airline Co. Ltd." , which is similar.

The public uses 'I fly easyJet' but they fly 'easyJet Airline'
Same goes with EK, they fly Emirates (Airline)



Should it thus be easyJets? Because they have many jets?      

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: RyanairGuru
Posted 2013-09-06 03:18:04 and read 8140 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 34):
Why? Why can't Emirates is also one airline that flies a number of routes.

If it was Emirates Airways that would be correct - because they fly more than one route.

But, as pointed out several times, because the word "Emirates" is plural, Emirates Airlines is grammatically wrong. As suggested, Attorneys General is a good comparison.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 34):
that would imply that Japan Airlines and Singapore Airlines are grammatically incorrect (as in they should then by Japanese Airlines and Singaporean Airlines).

Sorry, I don't follow you logic here?

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 03:20:51 and read 8125 times.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 36):
Sorry, I don't follow you logic here?

Logic is that the Airlines and Airways I the stated examples refer to a nationality -- British, American, Indian -- and not the country name - Japan, Singapore. If country names were used, then they would be UK Airways, America or USA AIrlines, and India Airlines.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 03:23:17 and read 8117 times.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 36):

But, as pointed out several times, because the word "Emirates" is plural, Emirates Airlines is grammatically wrong. As suggested, Attorneys General is a good comparison.

That probably is the best explanation. Can't think of any other plural name examples that could be counter examples. Would Trans States Airways be a counter example?

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Aesma
Posted 2013-09-06 04:54:15 and read 7398 times.

As many here have said, airlines plural makes sense when talking about several air lines being served. So using "airlines" in the name of the company is logical.

What I really wonder about is rather, when airlines the companies started to be called as such. Not air transportation company or whatever, but "airline" for one and "airlines" for several like "the airlines of Europe" (which could easily be understood as the "air lines of Europe", a very different meaning).

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: breiz
Posted 2013-09-06 05:28:12 and read 7128 times.

I am not sure if Emirates, the airline, does use "Emirates Airline" in any way.
Their website, aircraft, marketing material,..., are all labelled "Emirates".
A Google search tends to confirm this.
Associating "Airline" to "Emirates" is most probably used to clarify that you are talking about the airline and not about the emirates.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 05:34:43 and read 7076 times.

Quoting breiz (Reply 40):
I am not sure if Emirates, the airline, does use "Emirates Airline" in any way.

See post 23 above.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: 3rdGen
Posted 2013-09-06 06:20:41 and read 6698 times.

In the past an "AirLine" referred to a route that a company with airplanes would fly. Hence United had many routes i.e. airLINES which it flew, so it came to be known as United Airlines. Same with Airway, which is synonymous to airline, and so you have companies which fly many different Airways

Later on it became convention that a company providing transport on heavier than air flying machines be known simply as "an airline". No one says "which airlines are you flying on today", or "in your opinion which is the best airlines to fly on?".

Emirates, being a new comer on the aviation scene is just one of those which used this latter convention in naming itself. Perhaps because they did not really think about it or because the word Emirate in "United Arab Emirates" is itself plural, and Emirates wanted to come across, at least in the public eye as being the flag carrier of the nation of 7 emirates, which at that time had only one "official" airline, Gulf Air, serving it. GF was owned by Abu Dhabi but was also co-owned by Bahrain, Qatar and Oman, neither of which were part of the UAE. This is further evidenced by the fact that Emirates airlines proudly flies the flag of the UAE on its tail even though it is only the national airline of one Emirate and not the other 6.

Please also note that there is no official Emirati flag carrier. Each Emirate has its own carrier or none. As of right now we have Emirates for Dubai, Etihad for Abu Dhabi, Air Arabia for Sharjah, and RAK Airways of Ras Al Khaimah

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: pilotanthony
Posted 2013-09-06 06:21:17 and read 6705 times.

Because EMIRATES = UAE, United Arab Emirates. therefore Emirates is the airline of the UAE

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 06:37:31 and read 6544 times.

Quoting 3rdGen (Reply 42):
Please also note that there is no official Emirati flag carrier. Each Emirate has its own carrier or none. As of right now we have Emirates for Dubai, Etihad for Abu Dhabi, Air Arabia for Sharjah, and RAK Airways of Ras Al Khaimah

Interesting then that Etihad refers to itself as "Etihad Airways, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates" on its web page.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-09-06 06:50:59 and read 6386 times.

Quoting sankaps (Thread starter):
Always wondered about this... why does Emirates refer to itself as Emirates Airline and not Emirates Airlines? Why buck an almost century-old naming convention? Anyone know the story behind this? Thanks!

I don't know if there's a story behind it. To me it's just basic grammar.
- Emirates Airline referes to the airline of the Emirates. The focus is on "Emirates". Gramatically, there's no mistaking where this airline is from.
- When you use "Airlines" or "Airways", it's refering to the route network or reach of said airline. The focus is on its size and scope, not so much where the airline is from. For example: Delta Airlines could be the name of an airline anywhere in the World. JetBlue Airways, same thing. And the list goes on and on.

Of course there are exceptions to both but I think that's what it is.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 06:56:57 and read 6332 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 45):
I don't know if there's a story behind it. To me it's just basic grammar.

The grammar is fine in both examples you provide, but the meaning changes slightly as you point out... though I would think even British Airways wants to convey "airline of Great Britain" rather than "we fly on many airways from Britain".

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: ytz
Posted 2013-09-06 07:15:12 and read 6125 times.

It's the same way how the plural of aircraft is aircrafts in that part of the world. The English language has local pecularities everywhere.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: FlyPIJets
Posted 2013-09-06 07:18:06 and read 6085 times.

I'm I correct that grammatically it make no difference since they are all trademarks?

But if it did need to be correct, Air Lines =/= Airlines. The former is a collection of routes, the latter a collection of companies that fly service of some type?

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Bongodog1964
Posted 2013-09-06 07:28:08 and read 5969 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 34):
Emirates Airlines or British Airway would be grammatically incorrect.
Why? Emirates is also one airline that flies a number of routes.

Emirates Airlines would suggest that the company was an amalgamation of more than one airline which it isn't.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: musang
Posted 2013-09-06 08:14:54 and read 5545 times.

Interesting topic.

The earliest I can think of is Instone Air Line, Cardiff - London - Paris, 1919 (absorbed into Imperial Airways). I side with QF2220 reply 8 and those who take an air line or airway to be the line on a map in an early linear route network.

The use of "line" probably has roots in shipping, when many companies had names ending in "...Line" e.g. White Star Line, Clan Line, Onedin Line. Some shipping companies branched out into aviation, but it was logical to transfer the terminology (and indeed operating procedures) from seafaring to aviation.

As an aside,

Quoting sankaps (Reply 16):
(in fact when BA was renamed British Airways from BOAC in the 1970s, I don't think they had any other airlines in their fold)

BA = BOAC + BEA + Cambrian Airlines + Northeast Airlines.

(wiki. and thebasource.com)

Regards - musang

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: dynkrisolo
Posted 2013-09-06 08:38:05 and read 5304 times.

Since the usage of "Line/Lines" originated from martime usages, I did a quick search on the web. It appears in the shipping world, the singular version is more common than the plural version.

Quoting musang (Reply 50):
Quoting sankaps (Reply 16):
(in fact when BA was renamed British Airways from BOAC in the 1970s, I don't think they had any other airlines in their fold)

BA = BOAC + BEA + Cambrian Airlines + Northeast Airlines.

But the "A" in BOAC stood for "Airways".

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-09-06 09:19:02 and read 4926 times.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 46):
British Airways wants to convey "airline of Great Britain" rather than "we fly on many airways from Britain".

You need to go further back in history. To me British Airways representes the links between all territories in the British Empire, rather than "the airline of Britain". Although I undertand that for most people in present day it represents an airline of England. The meaning is very subjective anyway.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-09-06 09:19:41 and read 4942 times.

Emirates is not alone. IKt is also "EasyJet Airline"

Quoting sankaps (Reply 37):
Logic is that the Airlines and Airways I the stated examples refer to a nationality -- British, American, Indian -- and not the country name - Japan, Singapore. If country names were used, then they would be UK Airways

England, Scotland and Wales - all countries - comprise Great Britain. Their inhabitants are English, Scottish and Welsh as well as British. The UK is formally the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. What that means to the Irish domiciled in Northern Ireland is mostly self explanatory.

The complicating factor is that citizens of Northern Ireland are entitled to both British and Irish nationality. They can also opt to have dual nationality. At birth, by default, they are British. However immediately after birth their parents can elect for them to be registered as Irish nationals, giving up their British citizenship, or to be registered as Irish nationals while retaining British citizenship. My former son-in-law carried both a British and Irish passport.

So possibilities are "English Airways", "Scottish Airways", "Welsh Airways" and "British Airways".

Once upon a time we did have:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Spijkers



It became "KLM Cityhopper" after adopting the business strategy of focussing on linking provincial UK airports with AMS and later being bought by KL.

We also had the less well known:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yuan Le



"Air" was probably preferred to "Airways" because it could be directly linked to the appropriate country name rather than its nationality.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: flyingdoc787
Posted 2013-09-06 09:44:04 and read 4683 times.

On a similar note, what is the difference between "Air Lines" and "Airlines"? The current "Swiss International Airlines" started out in the 1930's as "Swiss Air Transport, Ltd." and carried "Swiss Air Lines" titles on its planes. It became more popularly known as "Swissair", and later aircraft (1960s - 2000s) carried just this word ("Swissair"). After the collapse of Swissair in 2001, it became "Swiss International Air Lines", and now it is "Swiss International Airlines".

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 10:00:26 and read 4535 times.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 49):
Emirates Airlines would suggest that the company was an amalgamation of more than one airline which it isn't.

Well then we have Singapore Airlines which was not the amalgamation of many airlines as a counter-example (it was in-fact created by the disambiguation of Malaysia-Singapore Airlines). Sure there are several other similar examples.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 52):
To me British Airways representes the links between all territories in the British Empire, rather than "the airline of Britain".


Interesting interpretation and certainly makes for an inclusive context, but then again you have many other airlines from countries that had no empires - Singapore Airlines again being a good example.


Quoting musang (Reply 50):
BA = BOAC + BEA + Cambrian Airlines + Northeast Airlines.

Sure, but there was no longer a group of airlines after BA came about (the example was in response to those who suggest the term refers to an airline group).

Quoting musang (Reply 50):
But the "A" in BOAC stood for "Airways".

Good point.

Great discussion, a.netters. Appreciate all the interesting possibilities. To me it seems there was a general tradition of naming national airlines starting with Air or ending with Airlines or Airways, regardless of the origin of the airline. Which is why the few exceptions stand out.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: DTW2HYD
Posted 2013-09-06 10:01:12 and read 4534 times.

Couldn't find their full legal name anywhere. Lot of places they have Emirates (airline). Airline in parenthesis seems to be an afterthought not to confuse with emirates (territories,plural) or United Arab Emirates (group of territories). It is quite possible banner printer got it wrong.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: gdg9
Posted 2013-09-06 11:15:23 and read 3915 times.

Delta Air Lines
American Airlines

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: longhauler
Posted 2013-09-06 13:38:56 and read 3664 times.

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 57):
Delta Air Lines
American Airlines


In addition ....


Trans-Canada Air Lines ... was one company, not a merger.

Trans World Airline ... was actually the merger of multiple companies.

Oh, the confusion continues.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-09-06 14:35:24 and read 3581 times.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 58):

Trans World Airline ... was actually the merger of multiple companies.

Sounds like you're referring to more than two mergers. I'm only aware of the original 1930 merger of Transcontinental Air Transport (TAT) and Western Air Express which became Transcontinental & Western Air (TWA) which later changed its name to Trans World Airline/Airlines, conveniently keeping the TWA acronym.

Only other merger involving TWA before their demise was their 1986 acquisition of Ozark.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-09-06 14:43:24 and read 3570 times.

Quoting flyingdoc787 (Reply 54):
The current "Swiss International Airlines" started out in the 1930's as "Swiss Air Transport, Ltd." and carried "Swiss Air Lines" titles on its planes. It became more popularly known as "Swissair", and later aircraft (1960s - 2000s) carried just this word ("Swissair"). After the collapse of Swissair in 2001, it became "Swiss International Air Lines", and now it is "Swiss International Airlines".

It's Swiss International Air Lines (not Airlines). All legal references in their website use "Air Lines" not "Airlines".

And the current LX is not the former Swissair which your description implies. Swissair went bankrupt, shut down, and their remaining assets were liquidated. A new carrier, Swiss, built on the foundations of former regional carrier Crossair, was created to replace Swissair.

Many people, especially those a long way from Switzerland, think Swiss is just a renamed Swissair, but that's far from correct.

[Edited 2013-09-06 14:47:39]

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-09-06 14:51:29 and read 3547 times.

Quoting ytz (Reply 47):
It's the same way how the plural of aircraft is aircrafts in that part of the world.

It is never correct to use the word "aircrafts" anywhere in the world. It's a very common error among non-native English speakers but it's wrong. Aircraft is both singular and plural, unlike airplane and airplanes.

Even many airlines frequenly make that error in their publications and websites.

Topic: RE: Why Emirates Airline And Not Airlines?
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-09-06 16:49:05 and read 3428 times.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 56):
Couldn't find their full legal name anywhere. Lot of places they have Emirates (airline). Airline in parenthesis seems to be an afterthought not to confuse with emirates (territories,plural) or United Arab Emirates (group of territories). It is quite possible banner printer got it wrong.

On the contrary, you find references to "Emirates Airline" in plenty of places if you look carefully. Even in their annual report, their CEO is listed as "CEO, Emirates Airline". The airline is one business within the airline group, and is also listed in the annual report as Emirates Airline.

The banner printer at the US Open getting it wrong, and Emirates not doing anything about it? I'd say the chances of that are pretty close to zero.

[Edited 2013-09-06 16:53:41]


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/