ARN From Sweden, joined Feb 2001, 259 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2083 times:
Swedish radio reported some minutes ago that SAS has applied for twice weekly Copenhagen - Baghdad flights.
I wonder when services could start and what equipment will be used. I guess the distance is too long for a A321 as a nonstop service though.
The A321s were planned to serve (among others)TLV, before turmoil restarted in that area. So perhaps they could be deployed on Baghdad instead. They are used mostly on intrascandinavian routes so two runs to Iraq could probably be managed as well.
Or is SAS planning to keep the remaining 767s a little longer?
Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 36 Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1930 times:
If AF stops non-stop flights to TLV in order to prevent their crews from staying in Israel overnight, maybe SK will do somthing similar, like stopping at LCA to change crews and add fuel for LCA-SDA-LCA and LCA-CPH respectively.
>>>Why they are not allowed to refuel in Baghdad?
a) to minimise ground time in a country which is basically in the midst of a guerilla war
b) fuel is a scarce commodity in Iraq, so why not carry it in from the outside if you can?
c) lack of security equipment needed to be present when refuelling (fire trucks, ambulances etc.)
Copenhagenboy From Denmark, joined Sep 2001, 592 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1868 times:
I have just heard in the news they want to fly it direct 7 days in the week, but there will be a big competition, because only one company from Europe will be allowed to fly into Baghdad. BA, Lufthansa and KLM is also trying to have the route. Don't know if it is only rumors.
SAS-A321 From Denmark, joined Mar 2002, 401 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1743 times:
If they were allowed to refuel in Baghdad, there would be no problems using the A321. At www.sasflightops.com I found that the max. range for the A321 is 5700km. And the great circle route to SDA is about 4000km.
But if they get the rights I think that they will use the B767...
FBU 4EVER! From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
SAS have only applied for traffic rights.No firm plans for operation in the foreseeable future.
A likely candidate for the operation would bee the A321,if it remains in the SAS fleet,that is.All 8 are now on the "transfer list" for sale or leasing.
The 767 is out of the question as the last one will be phased out at the end of November this year.Maintaining a fleet of one,or possibly two,would be prohibitively expensive for a twice-weekly schedule.
Most likely solution will be a MD-82/737-700 one-stop operation with Beirut,Tel Aviv,possibly Cairo as likely places.
SAS-A321 From Denmark, joined Mar 2002, 401 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1595 times:
"The 767 is out of the question as the last one will be phased out at the end of November this year.Maintaining a fleet of one,or possibly two,would be prohibitively expensive for a twice-weekly schedule."
You are right about that... But until it is phased out they could use it...
The A321 is already flying to Beirut so it would be a possible to make a combination of that route: CPH-Beirut-Baghdad.
Very interesting to see what will happen.
FBU 4EVER! From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
Well,Beirut is a "Snowflake" destination for the time being and the most likely customers initially will be Scandinavian military,UN and diplomatic persons with completely different needs from what they get from a LCC operation like "Snowflake". Besides, SAS says the destination will be operated by SAS Airline,not "Snowflake".
A 767 operation could be technically possible,but with in excess of 200 seats not very economical and,in view of the economic situation here at SAS,highly unlikely.A direct flight with a 737-700 or -800 is possible,but with the temporary restrictions on fuel uplift rules out this option for the time being.When,or IF,the route starts up,it will most probably with a stop outside Baghdad,possibly with a third pilot as relief.
FBU 4EVER! From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 7 Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1387 times:
The Iraqi population would not be on the flights to Baghdad during the early period anyway.By the time they would start to travel,the fuel restrictions would have been lifted and direct flights will take place.
What little fuel is available in Iraq at the moment is reseved for Coalition planes and choppers.Hence the refueling outside Iraq requirement.
TransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 993 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1312 times:
True... But it still would not be a very smart thing to do. In the near future, any incoming passenger liner to Baghdad originating from Tel Aviv will be quite a magnet for SAM's, RPG's, and small arms fire.
I read a report from a aweek or two ago that coalition military aircraft landing in Baghdad still take sparadic small arms fire (in their general direction) on every approach. The way things are now (and seem to be heading), it will be quite a while before any airline in their right mind would fly to Baghdad.