Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Flag Carriers And Their Responsibility?!  
User currently offlineAdicool From Netherlands, joined Apr 2007, 302 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2694 times:

I was wondering if you guys think that flag carriers have a certain responsibility in order to live up to their name.
For me, a flag carrier for example is LH, AF, KL...all those carriers serve their country meaning you can reach basically any big city in those countries with max. one change at their respective hubs.
BA on the other hand does not fulfill the name "flag carrier" IMHO. They don't fly to BEL for example respectively to any city in Northern Ireland.
I hope you people understand what I am trying to say. For me, a flag carrier also has to provide service to its hubs - even, and this is very important I think - if the route might not be profitable. A flag carrier should not only act in order to gain the most profit but also provide the country with a decent network. I know, especially in these days, when aviation has become less and less glamours, it might be a very naive opinion - but does anyone agree with me on this one? BA really has become a LON-Airway in my eyes.

just my two cents

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25372 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2680 times:

BA is no more a British flag carrier than VS. Flag carrier is a meaningless term these days. And the only responsibility of privately-owned airlines is to generate the best returns for their shareholders. Serving unprofitable markets is certainly not one of their responsibilities.

User currently offlineRivet42 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 818 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2631 times:

I'm afraid you are not living in the present. Your definition of this archaic term, 'flag-carrier', implies that such an airline must be state-owned, as it somehow has social responsibilities that do not afflict a purely commercial enterprise.

There are very few such airlines left in the western world, certainly not LH, nor KL, although AF may still receive some indirect state funding (I'm not certain of that, though).

Without state funding, and the associated notional 'social responsibility' vis-a-vis public transport, why should any airline, BA or LH or AA or anyone else have any 'duty' to their home counrty other than turning a healthy profit in order to provide jobs and assist the economy?

This flag-carrying concept is a legacy of the dinosaur era, and has no place in the contemporary aviation industry, unless you want to go back to the dark days of government control, high airfares, restrictive routes, and generally poor (indifferent) service levels.

Riv'



I travel, therefore I am.
User currently offlineBicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2544 times:

Get over this "flag carrier" fixation. All airlines are registered/head quartered in a country. They carry that country's flag. The term "flag carrier" carries no added significance or responsibility. Southwest is a flag carrier and it never leaves the the United States.

Quoting Adicool (Thread starter):
For me, a flag carrier also has to provide service to its hubs - even, and this is very important I think - if the route might not be profitable. A flag carrier should not only act in order to gain the most profit but also provide the country with a decent network

I have sympathy for the poor taxpayers of those countries that support money losing industries. Airlines have no business providing welfare. If you can't afford the true cost of traveling from Point A to Point B, tough luck. Life isn't fair. Don't expect me to subsidize your travel.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2443 times:

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 2):
Without state funding, and the associated notional 'social responsibility' vis-a-vis public transport, why should any airline, BA or LH or AA or anyone else have any 'duty' to their home counrty other than turning a healthy profit in order to provide jobs and assist the economy?

While this is absolutely correct in the commercial sense, and as an advocate of the free market economy I have no problem with this. I have however been quite vociferous on other threads regarding BA's in particular, quasi-flag carrying status. In my opinion BA misuse the title British and frankly I think that upon their privatisation in the mid 1980s they should have been compelled to give up that title. The current BA 'brand' is not representative of Britain as a whole, to say nothing of their operations. Indeed as an ex-pat Scot, I have sen how this image helps distort the image of the UK abroad as a whole. For one it reinforces the popular misconception in many parts of the world that England=UK and that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are part of England!

BA are no more representative of the UK as a whole, than Cockney Pearly Kings and Queens are!


User currently offlineEWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5523 posts, RR: 56
Reply 5, posted (6 years 12 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2432 times:

Quoting Adicool (Thread starter):
a flag carrier

While I do understand what you are saying, you are forgeting one point here:

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 3):
All airlines are registered/head quartered in a country. They carry that country's flag.



Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 2):
This flag-carrying concept is a legacy of the dinosaur era



Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 2):
definition of this archaic term

Flag flying no longer exists the way PanAm and BOAC flew.



You can't cure stupid
User currently offlineFlysherwood From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 3):
I have sympathy for the poor taxpayers of those countries that support money losing industries. Airlines have no business providing welfare. If you can't afford the true cost of traveling from Point A to Point B, tough luck. Life isn't fair. Don't expect me to subsidize your travel

Can anyone say ALITALIA?!?!?!?!?  Wink


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7541 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2346 times:

Quoting Adicool (Thread starter):
BA really has become a LON-Airway in my eyes.

Two comments. The UK is a geographically small country. In area it is about 10 per cent smaller than the state of Colorado. So comparing the BA network with the networks of other "flag carriers" - whatever they are - is a bit like comparing apples and pears.

Another definition of "flag carrier" could be an airline that links its country's capital with all other major capitals in the world. But that would exclude LH who do not operate between Berlin and London. Perhaps they should be called Frankfurt and Munich Airlines?
 Wink Big grin  Wink


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25372 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2337 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 7):
But that would exclude LH who do not operate between Berlin and London. Perhaps they should be called Frankfurt and Munich Airlines?

LH recently announced new twice-daily TXL-LCY service starting January 14, 2008 using LH Regional (Eurowings) BAe-146.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2308 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 7):
Two comments. The UK is a geographically small country.

It is a union of four nations actually. It is not one country.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7541 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Quoting Adicool (Thread starter):
all those carriers serve their country meaning you can reach basically any big city in those countries with max. one change at their respective hubs.
BA on the other hand does not fulfill the name "flag carrier" IMHO. They don't fly to BEL for example respectively to any city in Northern Ireland.

But it does. These flight pairs all meet your criteria:

BHD-MAN (BA6101) MAN-LHR (BA1389) (One change)
BHD-MAN (BA6103) MAN-LHR (BA1391) (One change)
BHD-MAN (BA6109) MAN-LHR (BA1403) (One change)
BHD-MAN (BA6111) MAN-LHR (BA1407) (One change)
LDY-GLA (BA8936) GLA-LGW (BA2959) (One change)
LDY-GLA (BA8936) GLA-LCY (BA8725) (One change)
LDY-GLA (BA8936) GLA-LHR (BA1483) (One change)

By the way 'BEL' is not Belfast City or Belfast International Airport. It is Belem Airport (in Brazil). And, of course, LDY is Londonderry, Northern Ireland's third airport.


User currently offlineTYCOON From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 394 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

AF does have certain obligations to fly to French overseas territories ('continuité territoriale"). They receive a subsidy in the form of lower "social" charges in order to offer cheaper tickets to inhabitants of the overseas territories. But this is not reserved just for AF, but for any French carrier flying between France (the 'metropole' and the overseas territories).
Spain has a similar system whereby local residents in the Balearic and Canary Islands pay a cheaper fare when flying to mainland Spain than non-residents.
There is of course the notion in every nation of a government's right to oblige national airlines to put at the disposition of the government transport aircraft in times of crisis (natural catastrophes, wars, etc...). This exists in all European counties, Australia and even in the United States. I forget the legal term - it has been too long since I worked in aviation finance.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7541 posts, RR: 17
Reply 12, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2135 times:

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 9):
It is a union of four nations actually.

 checkmark 

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 9):
It is not one country.

 redflag 

If you were right that would make England, a country of some 50 million people, a country with no form of national government, national legislature or national assembly. With respect this is an absurd hypothesis.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2090 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 12):
With respect this is an absurd hypothesis.

Well I think you sum it up quite well...to us Scots England is an absurdity!  Wink

To be precise the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a single sovereign state formed of the union of the 4 home nations/countries, call them what you like and thier dependent territories.


User currently offlineEWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5523 posts, RR: 56
Reply 14, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2087 times:

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 13):
To be precise



Quoting EDICHC (Reply 13):
thier

is spelled their. Big grin



You can't cure stupid
User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2061 times:

Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 14):
Quoting EDICHC (Reply 13):
thier

is spelled their.

Heyy spare a guy the odd typo considering the time here!  Silly


User currently offlineKochamLOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2049 times:

Its too bad how things have changed like this...
certain things dont mean as much just like 'flag carrier.' I agree that a Flag Carrier has soemthing more to live up to, but now I dont know what. It seems that whatever airline is more patriotic with their logos can call themselves call themselves a flag carrier. (Like Virgin Atlantic vs. BA)


User currently offlineEWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5523 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2049 times:

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 15):
Heyy spare a guy the odd typo considering the time here!

LOL...had to. Two finger typer here.



You can't cure stupid
User currently offlineSwissA330 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2002, 613 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 2039 times:

And what about foreign owned flag carrier?

Is KL a dutch flag carrier? Belonging to France??
Same with LX/LH



swissair/+/ we care
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...
United And Their Express Carriers posted Wed Feb 1 2006 17:00:14 by Apodino
US Carriers And The Flag posted Tue Aug 31 2004 00:16:00 by Bh
LCC's And Flag Carriers Data And Statistics In UK posted Fri Mar 26 2004 00:20:46 by SIMPLICITY
Flag, Domestic And Supplemental Carriers? posted Tue Mar 2 2004 22:00:42 by Saab2000
Do You Think Flag Carriers Helped Kill PA And TW? posted Wed Nov 12 2003 00:23:35 by ORBITJFK
European Carriers: why have some the EU flag painted and others not? posted Sun Oct 26 2003 19:50:14 by DIJKKIJK
Flag Carriers And Their Responsibility?! posted Wed Sep 26 2007 23:28:14 by Adicool
China Bans New Carriers And Scales Back Flights posted Mon Aug 20 2007 12:24:21 by EK156
Brazilian Carriers And Alliances posted Mon Aug 13 2007 18:53:23 by Miner
BA And Their 757s: What Now? posted Sat Jul 14 2007 12:25:47 by BA787