Well, I tend to disagree here.
I always thought, and still think that BA
are perfect for each other. I mean, BA
has tons of O&D traffic @ LHR
. Considering the severe capacity constraints at LHR
[will it see a third a parallel runway this century?], AMS
would be a perfect fit for BA
's connecting traffic, and handle the overflow traffic from LHR
. I remember that in the early eighties, Schiphol ran a campaign in the UK advertising AMS
as London's third airport.
The only real problem with a BA
tie up is that either BA
should let its US partner go.
BTW the likelyhood of KL
virtually vanished when NW
/CO went into a deal with DL
I don't really understand why KL
. Much worse, I don't see why KL
with the CDG
hub relatively close to AMS
has capacity to spare and won't be growth hindered in the foreseeable future. Four parallel runways and acres and acres of space available for future terminal expansion at CDG
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"