Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canada 3000 - Time To Reconfigure 757s?  
User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2276 times:

Firstly, I LIKE Canada 3000 and my favourite plane is the 757,

Now CMM are flying Trans-Atlantic scheduled services competing with the likes of Air Canada and British Airways on routes to the UK. While their A330s have a "scheduled" 8-abreast, 32" pitch layout, the 757s do not, retaining a charter 29" pitch.

I'm sure CMM's fares will be lower generally than the other airlines, but a scheduled service brings certain expectations. While a Canadian will probably know what to expect on a Canada 3000 757, a European is less likely to know the airline.

Having flown say Air Canada in the past, they'll be pretty shocked when they show up at Manchester to find their scheduled flight to Vancouver will be on a charter-configured 757 with 2 stops (Keflavik and Calgary)

Since Canada 3000 are positioning themselves to be Canada's second international airline, shouldn't they want to make a good impression from the start? If they don't they're going to have to work very hard to create a positive image later. I've only heard good reports on Canada 3000's service and their A320/330 seating, but their 757 seem to let them down.

It's not like in the UK where all the charters cram their planes to capacity, because the passengers know to expect this. When these airlines fly scheduled (a) they only do it on short-haul and (b) since nearly every passenger is British, they know what they're letting themselves in for, because they've had it before

It just seems there is a huge disparity between comfort levels on the 757 and A330, even though they fly the routes side by side. Surely Canada 3000 could have some 757s in "Atlantic" configuration with a bit more legroom. Since they'll make more money from scheduled flights, it shouldn't affect their bottom line, and it'll do wonders for their image!

Also, does anyone know if Canada 3000 is considering "Club 3000" or something similar on it's Atlantic routes. Not a full business class, more likely a premium economy type service.

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineSmoo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2187 times:

All I want to know is....what idiot dreamed up the name "Canada 3000"?!  

It sounds like an action figure for cripes sake!

User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2180 times:

I agree but I think that the entire fleet needs a refit. If C3 is looking to be a full time sched (and they are) Then it is time for a new image, they need a new modern paint scheme, and a refit of their interior and services. I think it is time to put the 757 on only domestic runs, like ROYAL has done, and maybe even time to get something like more A330's and even
some A330-300's (even though i would rather see the order go to Boeing, i am a realist and know it will never happen) Furthermore, there should be a business class offered on all airplanes even the 320's, if C3 wants to make a name for it self in the Canadian Sched market then these are at least a few things that will need to happen. A canadian feeder airline affiliated with C3 would also be a must, maybe even CRA.

Who knows maybe with a partnership with OneWorld some of these things can happen, although I am not a fan of American ownership of Canadian companies.....

"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2178 times:

Oh yeah one other thing dump that stupid name, It is still around from when Air 2000 of Britain had a big stake in the company....

Maybe they should go with CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (That would not be illegal because CP is Canadian Airlines International), or better yet, call themselves TRANS CANADA AIRLINES no one owns that name anymore, see how Air Canada likes that one heheheh....

"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2178 times:

Canada 3000 were originally a subsidiary of Air 2000 of the UK. That airline was so named, beause when it was set up in 1987, they intended to be the airline of tommorrow and set the standards in the UK charter market, which to a large extent they have done.

When they set up their Canadian division in 1988 they simply named it Air 2000 Airlines. Transport Canada objected to this on the grounds it would confuse people with the other Air 2000. So, the name Air 3000 was thought of. Still too similar!

So next was Canada 3000, which was approved. I really think the name should have been Canada 2000 - since it's I don't believe for a second the brief of the airline was to set the service standards for the year 3000!!!!! If it had been Canada 2000 they would have been getting some good publicity this year, as it is they'll have to wait another thousand years!

Well, you did ask 

User currently offlineSmoo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2172 times:

Thanks for the info James, I do appreciate it as I have always wondered about the history of that strange name.

What is Air 2000 going to do post-2000? In the year 2008 for example, isn't "Air 2000" going to sound a little dated? Maybe they could just call it "Air 3000"?

User currently offlineAC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2167 times:

Actually, I look at it the other way around: not that their 757's bring down their image, but their Airbuses bring it up. Basically I've heard of a lot of people who refuse to fly on C3 at all because of their crammed 757's, so the Airbuses are just new improvements to service. But yes, I would like to see them move to a more roomy interior. And a new paint scheme would help their image, too. Recently both Canada3000 and Royal have been advertising in a way that portrays themselves less as charters and more as business airlines, and scheduled carriers, so maybe either the 757's will be replaced on the atlantic flights, or will have better legroom in order to move into the image they are trying to create of themselves.

User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (16 years 20 hours ago) and read 2169 times:

Air 3000? I don't think they're that optimistic!
At the moment they're applying their "Into 2000 with Air 2000" logo to all their aircraft by the entry doors, as they capitalise on their name. After that?

Most likely First Choice Airlines, they already carry the coulors and name of their parent company, so it would be a fairly minor livery change. However, I hate the name!

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © James Laverack

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canada 3000 Workers To Be Paid! posted Thu Nov 22 2001 23:17:20 by Captaingomes
Canada 3000's A330's To The Caribbean posted Fri May 25 2001 05:33:13 by BWIA330
Canada 3000's Passage To India posted Fri Mar 9 2001 05:13:11 by Polaris
Ex-Canada 3000 757s To Mexican Airlines? posted Fri Feb 22 2002 19:26:38 by AM
It's Official:Canada 3000 Plans Return To Skies! posted Sat May 15 2004 21:45:58 by B741
What Happened To Canada 3000's Planes? posted Tue Sep 23 2003 03:36:45 by Adair
Canada 3000 Cargo Sold To Film Producer! posted Fri Feb 1 2002 23:16:20 by Layitontheline
Canada 3000 To Revive! posted Thu Jan 3 2002 19:06:46 by Jiml1126
Canada 3000 Plans Return To Sky posted Thu Jan 3 2002 15:26:40 by Matt
Canada 3000 To Have American Airlines As Investor! posted Sat Nov 10 2001 05:13:38 by Dr.Ho