JAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10 Posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Newspaper "Politika", May 11th 2001
JAT SPREMAN ZA LETOVE DO SEVERNE AMERIKE
U Njujorku, Čikagu i Torontu krajem juna
Čekaju se dozvole američkih vazduhoplovnih vlasti. - Umesto JAT-ove "desetke" možda će leteti neki moderniji i rentabilniji, iznajmljeni avion. - Predlozi da se i u početku leti samo za Njujork, dok bi u Čikagu i Torontu radila "of-lajn" predstavništva
Jugoslovenski aerotransport put severnoameričkog kontinenta mogao bi da poleti najranije u drugoj polovini juna. Kada će tačno krenuti avioni za Njujork, Čikago i Toronto, koji su uvršteni u ovogodišnji red letenja, još nije poznato, jer američke civilne vazduhoplovne vlasti JAT-u još nisu dale sve potrebne dozvole. U pitanju je dodela termina za letenje preko Atlantika i američkog neba u kome je prekomerna avio-gužva.
U JAT-u ističu da je sve spremno za letove ka gradovima u kojima živi naša brojna dijaspora, koja je veoma zainteresovana za direktnu vezu sa domovinom. Do pomenutih gradova trebalo bi da leti širokotrupna "desetka" koja je nedavno generalno remontovana, čime joj je upotrebni vek produžen za još pet godina. Međutim, postoje predlozi da se ovaj avion da u zakup i od tog novca iznajmi modernija letelica, najverovatnije tipa "boing 767", koja je rentabilnija od "desetke".
Budući da će Severnu Ameriku "pokrivati" samo jedna letelica, postoje i predlozi da avion u početku leti samo do Njujorka i to ponedeljkom, sredom i petkom. U Čikagu i Torontu radila bi takozvana "of-lajn" predstavništva koja bi putnike do Njujorka slala u saradnji sa nekom od aviokompanija sa kojom bi JAT potpisao ugovor o zajedničkom prevozu putnika. Sa aerodroma "Kenedi" u Njujorku do Beograda bi se nastavljalo JAT-om.
JAT is ready for flights to North America
To New York, Chicago and Toronto by the end of June.
Yugoslav Airlines could be flying to North America by the second half of June at the earliest. It is not known when exactly the flights to New York, Chicago and Toronto, which are included in this year's time table, because American civil air traffic authorities have not granted JAT all the necessary licences yet. They are waiting to be given the slots to fly over the crowded0 Atlantic and American skies.
JAT stresses that everything is ready for flights to cities in which a large diaspora lives, who are very interested in a direct air link with their homeland. The wideobdy "ten" which was receantly refurbished and as aresult had it's life span extended by another five years, was supposed to fly to these cities. But, there are suggestions to lease this aircraft (to another carrier) and for JAT to use the money made off this lease (for them selves) a more modern aircraft, most likely a Boeing 767, which is more profitable than the "ten".
Seeing as North America is to be "covered" by only one aircraft, there are suggestions that in the beggining the plane should only fly to New York, three times weekly, on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. In Toronto and Chicago so called "off line" offices would exist which would send passengers to New York in co-operation with another airline. From "Kennedy" airport in New York passengers would continue on to Belgrade via JAT.
White Eagle From Australia, joined May 2001, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2019 times:
According to the article, JAT will trade in YU-AMB for a Boeing 767. The 767 is still only a second-gen widebody which does not share any significant commonality with any other type they have operated or intend to operate.
If your already going to introduce a new type, why not lease 2 or 3 A330-200s which would share significant commonality with their intended A319s.
The 332s could also carry a lot more cargo compared to a 767-300ER.
That way they could restart operations to JFK, Chicago and Toronto. Having passengers fly to JFK and then changeover does not make sense because JFK does not have as many connections as Chicago and does not have good connections with Canada. I think AC flies to La Guardia and not JFK.
They should also consider flying to Newark and interline with CO. Most of JAT's customer base would live closer to this airport.
I don't think that they should start transatlantic operations with only one aircraft. There is too much risk from having it go offline for maintenance etc.
White Eagle From Australia, joined May 2001, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days ago) and read 1980 times:
I don't think cost should be an issue in choosing to lease a B767-300ER versus an A330-200.
From what I have read, the range of costs for a 763 is $600-680K pm while it is $690-750 pm for the 332. Considering the 332's passenger and freight capacity as well as its greater range, I think the 332 comes out on top.
JAT's passenger base has been traditionally very ethnic. Also, demand has always been into Yugoslavia rather than out. Therefore, war and sanctions have not dampened Serbian Americans', Serbian Canadians' and Serbian Australians' desire to travel back to their homeland.
Prior to 1992, its DC-10s were flying near capacity. Therefore, the 763 would have great difficulty meeting passenger demand. Remember JAT was flying economy-class dominated flights (approx 270 Y class with a small Adriatic Class at the front).
I think that only the 332, 343 or possibly 772ER could match the freight and passenger capacity that JAT's DC-10-30s provided.
Hopefully JAT would not like to be restricted to transatlantic flights only. I'm sure that they would also like to fly to Australia. The 763 is not suited for such high-payload long distance flights. Ultimately, payload would need to be sacrificed.
Therefore, I restate that the 332 would better suit JAT's requirements. In the alternative, they should also consider A340-300Es which could also be picked up at a reasonable rate due to the slight surplus of available aircraft.
KUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1965 times:
B763 is too large for JAT. I say, they better start with couple of B762s on flights to EWR (not JFK) and Toronto.
B763 was too large for Malev; leased 198 seater would do fine for beggining. I'm sure there are many 762s ready for lease arrangement.
Good news is that finally there is some sense coming from JAT. Perhaps, someone from their management has stumbled across airliners.net , Nevertheless, we should see to believe... in 2002 they might land their B762 on this continent again...
Toxtethogrady From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 962 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1972 times:
Over at the Signature FBO ramp was a 727 in JAT colors. New ones, too (red and blue tail with a sort of winged logo on it). Wonder who it was and is it a hint of things to come (but then who flies a 727 transatlantic?)
White Eagle From Australia, joined May 2001, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1973 times:
KUGN, Eastern European airlines should not be lumped together when considering which equipment to operate.
The 762 may be appropriate for MALEV. But the market between to Hungary has never been as developed as that to Serbia and Montenegro. Estimates put the Serbian ethnic population of North America at around 1 million people.
In fact, many people travelling to Serbia have used Budapest as their terminus for flights and then continued their trip by land during the sanctions regime and the war.
It is likely that MALEV's share of the South Eastern European market will fall even more with the re-entry of JAT across the Atlantic.
I think many people really underestimate the numbers that JAT could attract. At the height of its operations, prior to the sanctions regime, JAT was flying to New York-JFK, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver! Now thats alot more than either MALEV, CSA or LOT.
Also, don't forget that JAT may be able to capitalise on demand from neighbouring countries such as that from Western Romania (Belgrade is closer and more accessable than Bucharest), Bosnia (a code-share agreement has been signed with 2 Serbian/Bosnian airlines), Macedonia, and don't forget Bulgaria whose national airline BALKAN has only one ageing Russian plane.
KUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1960 times:
White Eagle, you have valid points when it comes to the colorful past of JAT, which I'm too very familiar with. And I know what you're talking about.
But I do think that you overestimate the potention of ethnic population in North America as a market that would immediately bring lucrative routes back to JAT. As the matter of fact, when JAT used to have extensive network in NA, it carried more ethnic groups than just Serbian. Right? Even all the way until 1999 it flew cash cow routes Pristina-Zurich, and now it is gone.
Market that JAT served went from 22 milion down to 11, and since war in 1999 to 7-8.
I'd like to see codeshare agreement on Balkans, but that is just not enough.
Potential is -- business travelers with EU.
Transatlantic market is more of the one you mentioned, and they trave once/twice a year, usually on discount rates. That is not how is made money today (it might have been back in JAT's prime days).
But then again, you never know with JAT. They might lease all their aircrafts to Nigeria and make a profit to cover losses on European routes.. or fill up that poor DC10 with you don't want to know what kind of passangers/cargo and fly it to Bejing twice a week with no weather radar...
White Eagle From Australia, joined May 2001, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1957 times:
Firstly, I don't think JAT has lost that many passengers from ex-Yugoslavia. I don't think many Croats and Slovenes travelled with JAT. Many often travelled with other airlines because many transatlantic flights went direct to Belgrade. They would have to back-track to get to Ljubljana or Zagreb.
However in other respects, I agree with you. I have read JAT's web material far too often! JAT's prospects cannot be solely found by flying over the Atlantic.
I personally think it is very rushed to start a transatlantic network when you haven't fixed up your backyard - Europe.
I think that they should seriously reconsider what kind of airline they want to be. A profitable airline is one which offers good frequencies, on-time departures, good aircraft, and good service. JAT has neither of these.
For one, get rid of those of Boeing 727s and DC-9s and even 737-300s. Replace them with A319s and A320s or 737NGs. At the very leasr, change your the old seating on the 737-300s.
Get rid of those old and arrogant stewardesses and counter staff.
Ensure that you have good hot food on your planes and not that stuff that's has been sitting in the galley for 3 days.
Finally, get management with a vision and business plan.
In the short term JAT, cannot rely on its ethnic population for support when other airlines offer much more.
It should focus on developing frequencies and cooperating with major European airlines on routes to Belgrade. Money, as you said is to be found from premium service.
I hope JAT does not revert to the old days of offerring deep discounted tickets and attracting only ethnic passengers.
JU101 From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1883 times:
This is truely great news about JAT's confirmation with regards to resuming flights to North America, and I am certain that this airline will be very successful in the future. However this year, it is best that JAT operate from New York and Toronto, as was originally planned using one airplane. Its important to resume regular flights this year; and next year JAT can look at expanding its network.
Unfortunately, for residents living in Canada, the proposition of flying to New York/JFK is not favorable. There are no regular links between either Montreal, Ottawa, or Toronto to JFK... they have links with Newark instead. I am going to Yugoslavia this july/august (I reside in Canada), and have been waiting to see if i can fly direct, to BEG. Seeing that I probably wont be able to fly direct out of Canada, I have no choice but to book a flight through a Euro stop-over. Its really unfortunate, since I've been looking forward to fly direct (from Canada) to BEG with JAT for a long time now!
Nevertheless I expect that by next year, the company will be making many changes. The fleet addition should take a high-frequency service into consideration. (Unlike LOT, CSA, or Malev; B767-200, A310-200 are inadequate for JAT, however A340, A330 and B777 may be too large if they looked at maintaining a high flight frequency). I think three B767-300 (or A310-300) would be most feasible.
With regards to the middle-range fleet, the B737-300 are excellent, and compliment the demand well. Because of the introduction to trans-Atlantic traffic, no major addition to the middle-range fleet are expected. If any additions are made, they would be only about 2 planes (best would be either A319 or B737).
JU101 From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1880 times:
Since 1992, Yugoslavia had an on-and-off air-traffic embargo that lasted upto this present year. Primarily, as result of this embargo, Budapest became an important hub for South-Eastern Europe. While JAT planes were idle in BEG, Malev was never experiencd such a boom in traffic. With the the table's now turning in favour of BEG and JAT; what's next for Malev?
I've already heard that Malev's demand for trans-Atlantic flights have been significantly decreased, and the B767-200's are becoming too big for the airline. Do you people think Malev might consider reducing its fleet of B767's?
JAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10 Reply 17, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1860 times:
JU101, I am in the same situation as you, I was also looking forward to stepping on to JAT's DC-10 in YYZ and getting of in BEG. I guess that isn't going to happen since I already have tickets booked on KLM (YYZ-AMS) and JAT (AMS-BEG). I'm very happy though that I will be able to fly JAT, even if it's only a short flight.
The A330 I think is too big for now. The 763 would be good for the summer but I'm not sure how profitable it would be in the off season. Maybe they could offer flights from North America and cheap connections to Europe through Belgrade. Then again, Belgrade isn't exactly a very good transfer airport.
Speaking of A319's, I wonder how their planned Airbus purchase is doing. There was a news report a few months ago saying their going to have to reconsider and go for something cheaper and maybe smaller, I guess A318, which would nicely replace the DC-9 (which isn't even being used right now, which in turn results in fewer flights to smaller cities on the B737) and work nicely until they decide to retire the 737s. The 727's are just being used on domestic and charter flights and many of them are leased to other companies. I guess this is making them money so that's fine, but they should retire them, they aren't a leasing company, they are an airline.
Knowing how JAT and things in Yugoslavia generally work, you can only wait and see.
King767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1865 times:
Wow, I think your ready to step into JATs CEO position.
"According to the article, JAT will trade in YU-AMB for a Boeing 767. The 767 is still only a second-gen widebody which does not share any significant commonality with any other type they have operated or intend to operate."
When you say "second-generation", just what do you mean? Early 767s are second-generation airliners, but 767s built in the 1990s are certainly not. Please specify next time. The article did not even say this was to be a second-hand aircraft. It could be a new build a/c for all we know.
"From what I have read, the range of costs for a 763 is $600-680K pm while it is $690-750 pm for the 332. Considering the 332's passenger and freight capacity as well as its greater range, I think the 332 comes out on top."
But does JAT need the extra range of the A332? Yes, freight is a big thing for smaller, less developed regions like Yugoslovia, but do you have freight bulk statistics that show JAT desperately needs all that room? I think JAT would have shown more interest in the A330 if they seriously needed it. Anyway, look at Malev, Uzbekistan, Aeroflot, and LOT, which are all in the same region.
"Hopefully JAT would not like to be restricted to transatlantic flights only. I'm sure that they would also like to fly to Australia. The 763 is not suited for such high-payload long distance flights. Ultimately, payload would need to be sacrificed.
Just looking at other carriers in the same region (example, Malev), even to BKK, they report poor loads, and that is with 762s, so I doubt that JAT will be flying to SYD.
JAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10 Reply 20, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1861 times:
You bring up a good point King767, I wonder if they would lease a brand new 767 or a second-hand. My guess would be a used one, if they are cheaper, anyway. Also, I wonder if it would be a 762 or a 763, if it was a 762 it would have to be at least slightly used.
There are a lot of Yugoslav immigrants living in Australia, a flight to Singapore and then on to Sydney or Melbourne I believe could be profitable, at least in the summer. Especially if they have a convinient schedule that allows connections to Europe.
Freighth could be a money maker for JAT. Apparently they at times have so much freight for Zurich that they use the DC-10 even though there aren't enough passengers to merit it's use. If this is true there would also be freight for North America. Although, if the flights were frequent enough, my guess is the capacity of the 767 would be enough.
JU101 From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1851 times:
Nice hearing from you Aleks!
Getting to your questions, the B767-300 would be excellent for the airline, even in the off-season. It might sound surprising but off-season travel to BEG is not as low as you may have suspected, especially now that the West have taken a total policy change towards Belgrade; which now promotes greater business opportunities and stronger communication. Furthermore, students and younger families are the main customers from June till September. Nevertheless you must remember that off-season travel takes high preference among other adults destined for countries such as Yugoslavia, where summer temperatures remain constant from the beginning of April till end of October, underlining that they would pay half of what you pay during summer! Not to mention the seasonal-rush from mid-December till nearly end of January.
Making BEG a transfer hub for Southeastern Europe is a great strategic plan, however it is not feasible for the travelers at this time, as long as FRY are not a member of EU. Visa restrictions are a hassle for travelers, and as long as USA and Canada have a visa regime imposed on FRY, BEG cannot become a hub.
As for your last paragraph...
(1) Without the DC9, JAT lacks an aircraft of the 100-seat capacity - A318 or B717 are perfect substitutions. Because B717 is not experiencing high demand, we are better off with an aircraft from the A320 family, the A318. However, only a few would be needed.
(2) B727-200 is flown only for (half the) domestic flights (BEG-TIV, BEG-TGD); due to overwhelming demand during the tourist season. There is no rush for their replacement yet; the few that are in use are serving very well, and more emphasis is going into the long-range fleet. However, sooner or later the B727s should be replaced by a few A319s; consequently raising frequency. The intention here is to keep a high frequency even during the non-tourist season (example: five A319 flights vs. three B727 flights).
(3) Overall the original agreement reached with Airbus in 1997 should be revised. I propose that within the next three years JAT will likely need 3 A318's and 3 A319's.
(4) There is absolutely no need to replace the B737-300.
(5) I think its most feasible to order three B767-300s, with regards to the long-range fleet. (two for North America and one for Australia) Though its served us well, the YU-AMB should be sold.
Ahhhh... FINALLY! Knowing the Serbian government, JAT will be encouraged to perform its tasks in an accelerated way, or else they will lose their support. As a final note, say goodbye to reminiscing about the good-old days, as better are certain to come!
JAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10 Reply 22, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1840 times:
Tne 767-300. I also agree that this would be the best solution. Leasing 2 or 3 for the first 2-3 years. Assuming travel demand grows, (as it probably will seeing as the economic situation of the citizens can only get better) purchase 3-4 763 (about 5-7 years from now) and in 9-12 years a few B777 could be considered for long flights, i.e LA, Vancouver, Australia. This is just my layman's assesment of course. If they go with Airbus it would then A330's and A340's instead of the 767's and 777's.
According to JAT they still plan to get 8 new aircraft, I'm guessing it would be a mix of Airbuses, A319's and 318s.
The 727-200 could remain doing charter work for a while, until JAT is able to purchase more efficent aircradt for this type of work.
The DC-10 could be turned into a freighter.
The 737-300's should eventually be updated, for starters reduce seating from 138 to 126 pax.
RJ's could also be considered for work to surrounding countries.
That is my assesment of the situation...
JU101: "say goodbye to reminiscing about the good-old days, as better are certain to come!" That sounds like a good motto for JAT!
KUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6 Reply 23, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1845 times:
I second opting for EWR as US service destination for JAT; they haven't been flying to JFK in recent years, and now would be good time to chage the airport, so that they could make senseble codeshares. EWR has connections to all potential markets for JAT - including Canada.
On general macroeconimic level I disagree: there is unsubstantiated belief that JAT could do better than Malev; I doubt that. Malev, and more importantly Hungary and Ferihegy airport itself have far surpassed Yugoslavia in last decade. Hungary is soon to be EU member, and its airport, with two runways and two terminals have positioned themselves as major Central/Eastern European hub, passanger and cargo wise when making connections to the Middle East, and other Eastern European countries.
Budapest airport is in competition with Prague (fiercly, since CSA joined SkyTeam) and Warsaw's brand new hub (and LOT's tremendous success). Belgrade airport and JAT are far behind Budapest in terms of western and middle east markets today -- and stories about JAT's success in 80s does nothing to assure me that this an be changed. Restauring transatlantic services won't do the trick.
Malev has grown to carry 2 million passangers a year (aprox same as CSA), which is about equal to the number of JAT's travellers; however if you look at the demographics, you'll see who is flying more business travelers who make money to the airline. Where would EU national who can purchase full fare tickets rather transfer flights? Lets be real.
On future plans note --- trying to descramble "newspeak" common in JAT's press releases, I'd guess that under [i]"2nd generation"[/i] they've implied 767-300 as it is the 2nd generetion of 767.
What seems to be funny in their releases is that they cite the [i]"lack of commonality with the types they intend to operate"[/i] (we know that they've planned A319 purchase) or [i]"operated"[/i] in past. But they haven't operated anything more recent than 733, or DC10-30 in wide body / long haul cathegory!
So what do they reffer then to? If alleged 763 ('2nd gen 767') is not good enough, what is then? B764? Or A330-300? It does not make sense, when one takes the reality into consideration.
The truth is that JAT is in no condition to make long term decesions on its wide body fleet purchase at this time. What they need is scalability which is leasing.
The major problem is again [b]the management[/b]. It is still the old state owned airline mentality that emphesizes "big" and "impressive" rather than making sound decesions that would improve the airline economy. There you get ideas like replace B722 with A319 when you already have sufficient B733 fleet, JFK as the service destination (airport well known to Yugoslav public) rather than EWR (which is not), statements like alleged 763 is not good (big or modern?) enough.
I hate to break the bad news, but I'm still not convinced that we aren't fed with state owned corporate propaganda; the alternative is that JAT is still not being honest with itself when it plans important decesions for its future.
JU101 From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (12 years 7 months 3 days ago) and read 1830 times:
With regards to USA, perhaps JAT may choose to fly directly only to New York, while joining in an alliance with one American airline company, to service its passengers onward, from New York. In that case, within one year, the airline is bound to fly daily. I have to admire what the CSA have accomplished, joining Skyservice. Direct flights between New York and Prague cost only 1100 USD, during the peak of the summer season. From New York, passengers bound for Chicago fly in a seperate aircraft. As a result, the price for traveling from Chicago to Prague (VIA New York) is 1210 USD, just 110 USD more! Without a partership, however, the cheapest ticket between Chicago and New York would fetch no less than 350 USD. On the other hand Malev maintains an inexpensive service between New York and Budapest, 910 USD, which is quite impressive. However, because Malev doesnt belong to any alliance the cost for flying between Chicago and Budapest (via New York) is substancially higher. Minimum price amounts to 1450 USD. Thats why partership is the key!
With regards to Canada, other than this year, I am certain that JAT will fly direct to Toronto and Montreal, as it has done previously. There is no reason why JAT wouldnt want to service these cities itself.
To be honest, I certainly dont think it was JAT's intention to concentrate on the market in the middle-east, since it services flights with a stop-over in either Istanbul or Larnaca, and its targetted soley on passengers in those respective countries. Nevertheless, it cannot be concievable that any of the airlines in Central, Eastern or Southeastern Europe could be inferior to a neighbouring competitor. Especially since Lufthansa (via Munich) is looking to take the newly aquired market share that LOT, CSA, and Malev have already aquired in the region during the 1990s.
In my opinion JAT currently have a well defined network in Europe, Africa and Asia, covering numerous destinations. As the economy continues its promising growth tendancies, JAT will simply need to intensify its flight frequencies. Analysts acknowledge that the airline can run its network with its current fleet of B737-300s and ATR72s aircraft for a few years, but a fleet expansion is inevitable. No midrange Airbus aircraft deliveries at least till next year. And if any deliveries are made, they are likely to be for the remaining B727s that are used on domestic flights.
Overall its great to see good-spirited competition making its way in Southeastern, Central, and Eastern Europe; since we can all benefit!
JAT ...It's more than flying!
25 White Eagle: Dear all My post dated 5 May is not a translation of JAT's press release. A Forum member (JAT) translated the newspaper article very well in his first
26 Kevin: If Milosevic still was at the "wheel", JAT would probably choose a political move and buy or lease the IL 96-300 or IL 96M (closer relations with Mosc
27 KUGN: White Eagle, are you suggesting that JAT is the airline comparable to Lufthansa, Swissair, Sabena, Air France, TAP, El Al? On Budapest matter - it is
28 KUGN: Milosevic directed purchase of A319s; not even he wanted IL96s. There have been few shady firms with close ties to Milosevic who own(ed?) soviet built
29 JU101: White Eagle, In principle I agree with all your opinions. Budapest is unlikely to become a true hub, though we must appreciated that Budapest Airport
30 Jiml1126: I saw a report on Flight International saying that JAT has scrapped the plan to buy A319s.
31 White Eagle: KUGN I want this topic to end soon. I am not suggesting that JAT is comparable to Lufthansa, Air France or Swissair. However, it is comparable to TAP,
32 White Eagle: I have read it too. However, its is not correct. JAT's previous CEO (since replaced) announced that JAT was reconsidering the Airbus A319 deal because
33 Monte: I would be glad to see JAT renew the service to JFK, but I doubt that the airline has serious potential for growth. Yugoslavia is 1/3 of what it was i
34 JU101: Monte: JATs domestic-network isn't as good as it was in 1997 (the only year of stability in the 1990s). JAT no longer services regular flights to Pris
35 JAT: When do the Adria/JAT flights to/from Ljubljana start?
36 CB777: Does anyone think JAT will start flying to Croatia. Such as Zagreb, Split, Dubrovnik ect. CB777
37 King767: White Eagle, Your comparisons prove to us that you seem to be misinformed, or just uneducated in this field. It makes no sense to call the 767 a 2nd G
38 JU101: I highly doubt that there will be air links between Croatia and Yugoslavia. Both states are still far apart in any real sense, and there is an unendin
39 White Eagle: King767 I may be miseducated in this area, you may be highly educated in this field. However, there is no denial that the 767-300ER has been a major u
40 Monte: JU101, thank you for extensive info on JAT's routes. Regarding Uzice, I am almost certain that JAT operated an ATR-72 on a civilian Uzice-TIV route at
41 9A-CRO: JU101 - cut the crap, Croatia did not attack Serbian people, it was the other way round, that they fled it is their fault (or guilty conscience???) -
42 Boeing-Lover: You sound like you have been reading a bit too much mid 1980s Boeing literature. If FBW does not sell aircraft, why then did Boeing use it on the B777
43 King767: "However, there is no denial that the 767-300ER has been a major underperformer in terms of sales since the introduction of the A330-200." You have to
44 JAT: Let's keep this aviation-only, i.e. no politics! Secondly, don't make it an Airbus vs. Boeing thing. Monte, the thing with the birds on the tail is Ab
45 9A-CRO: JAT - I had to react to some things mentioned here I am not sure if ZAG-BEG-ZAG route has big potential, the distance by road is only about 400km, and
46 JU101: Tomislav, my intention is not to talk politics here, however I find it irresponsible for you to give these two statements. The questions I ask are rhe
47 JU101: The latest HOT information is as follows: BEG-JFK (JU500) Flight duration: 9:30hrs (nonstop) DEPARTURE: ARRIVAL: MON ...12:30 ...16:00 THU ...12:30 ..
48 9A-CRO: actually there was at least one landing before - ATR72, also a sports team, I think it was some basketball club from Belgrade after it Kostunica also
49 KUGN: JU101, is that the same YU-AMB that was only month ago rumored to be leased out to Nigeria? If it is the same one, then JAT's management is in state o
50 9A-CRO: Ju101 - so 800.000 Serbs fled (numbers seems too big for me, I have limited trust in Serb victim statistics, according to some of these after WWII in
51 AirafriqueDKR: JU will fly into and out of Terminal 1 at JFK. Does anybody know who the ground handler will be?