WINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 69 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7040 times:
Quoting TAP340 (Reply 3): Not again...... It's because of the government and alleged bribery that TAP got the 340's in the first place.
No TAP340, Tap got those 4x A340-300 so that they could start services to the Far East (MACAU). This route proved to be unprofitable and so they cancelled it. The 4x A340 have actually proven to be efficient in Taps fleet, especially for the South African route and South America.
Manni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23 Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6752 times:
Yes, I'm aware of that. That'w why I am asking, what (wich would have been more clearer) airlines need governement approval, meaning wich airlines are (partially) owned by their respective governement.
WINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 69 Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6713 times:
Does anyone know if the following carriers can be excluded from the list?
Tap Portugal- very possible
Air Lingus- Very possible
Thai- Very possible
Olimpic- nearly bankrupt
Alitalia- Nearly bankrupt
Finnair- very possible
Mexicana - possible
Saudi Arabian Airlines- ?
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12166 posts, RR: 35 Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6564 times:
AER (note spelling!) Lingus has been mentioned on Irish bulletin boards as a possibility, but over the past few months, amid the considerable number of rumours about new long haul aircraft, there has been one consistent factor: no interest in the A350 evident whatsoever.
Of course, one can't discount the fact that rumours have been "placed" as a means of putting pressure on Airbus to provide a better deal, BUT I do get the very distinct impression that Boeing is favoured. It would surprise me (and not pleasantly!) if it were EI, but I guess we'll see.