Could airlines share planes? Say a foreign carrier had a flight that spent several hours sitting on the ground waiting to return. Could they lease that aircraft out to a domestic airline to fly in between those times? The idea that for the foreign airline the aircraft is earning money while it waits, and for the domestic it is one plane they dont need to pay for, only pay for those hours of utilization.

Along that same line - QANTAS has a flight from LAX to JFK, but they cannot sell seats on that leg. Could theoretically a code share partner, say AA or AS, sell tickets on that leg, since they are a domestic airline, and then just treat that as a codeshare flight?

Say said aircraft needs MX on LAX JFK LAX flight, who's responsible for cost? Also IF said aircraft were to delay due to whatever reason, LAX SYD flight would be delayed... Which I doubt any carrier would want to risk that.

Quoting cloudboy (Thread starter): Could they lease that aircraft out to a domestic airline to fly in between those times?

Firstly, who owns the aircraft? If not the airline, do the owner allows for that? Will authorities allow it? Trying to earn money is one thing, but what about the risk of having the aircraft return late because of any sort of reasons that delayed it while it was leased to another airline?

Simple answer: NO
Aircrew from one airline cannot operate the aircraft of another carrier.
Aircrew under one AOC cannot operate on an aircraft under another AOC.
Aircraft is insured under one operator..

I believe that Transavia and Sun Country share equipment, but that is seasonally, not daily.

Canadian leisure carrier Air Transat and French charter airline XL Airways used to share 737 and even A330 planes, maybe still do, on a regular (mostly seasonal) basis via wet lease. Air Transat has a much bigger load in winter while XL and other European carriers are busier in summer. I recall XL Airways also leasing an Air Transat A330 for their New York route last year.

Edit: obviously I didn't read the thread, sorry about that. I have no knowledge of unrelated airlines sharing planes on a daily basis, that would be quite something. Though I noticed a trend where airlines avoid having to sit a plane for more than few hours. Air Canada's widebodies are now commonly seen on domestic routes between their usual long-haul legs, even short routes like YUL-YYZ, which as far as I know is a relatively recent development.

[Edited 2016-04-22 17:41:20]

It is called an interchange agreement. It is allowed in the US, but I have no idea if other jurisdictions allow it or how it would work with air carriers from multiple countries.

Before deregulation in the US a number of airlines flew interchange services where the same aircraft operated for more than one airline.

Example: United and Western did an interchange in 1940. UA flew the aircraft ORD-SLC and WA flew the aircraft SLC-LAX with crews of the respective airlines operating the aircraft. After WWII the practice was more widely adopted.

Eastern and Air Canada used to share two L-1011s.

Bob Bradley

eastern an bn did it a few times, it was confusing getting on an orange bn plane, bn flew texas to mem, then i got it as ea mem to atl, this a
was late 70,s

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 4): Simple answer: NO Aircrew from one airline cannot operate the aircraft of another carrier. Aircrew under one AOC cannot operate on an aircraft under another AOC. Aircraft is insured under one operator..

This answer seems a bit simple. I think it can probably be done under a wet lease. The problem of doing it regularly is probably union rules in unionized airlines.

What has changed in the FAA and DOTs eyes since the interchange agreements that allowed DL/PA, BN/EA, AS/AA&CO to fly each others equiptment?

Quoting cloudboy (Thread starter): Along that same line - QANTAS has a flight from LAX to JFK, but they cannot sell seats on that leg. Could theoretically a code share partner, say AA or AS, sell tickets on that leg, since they are a domestic airline, and then just treat that as a codeshare flight?

It AND OLD: Guangzhou - Baiyun (CAN / ZGGG) (closed), China">CAN be done BUT it would be a total pain in the a*s. It would require both CASA & FAA approval and harmonising different requirements would not be simple. Labour, insurance, traffic right and various national legal requirements would all have to be negotiated AND approved by authorities in both countries. Very, very unlikely to be worth it.

Gemuser

Quoting incitatus (Reply 11): This answer seems a bit simple. I think it can probably be done under a wet lease.

True, my answer was as a bit simple. The OP was asking could an aircraft be operated by airline B when not being used by airline A. Simple answer would be No.

Quoting cloudboy (Thread starter): Say a foreign carrier had a flight that spent several hours sitting on the ground waiting to return. Could they lease that aircraft out to a domestic airline to fly in between those times?

In the (very specific) example given by the OP, the foreign airline would not want to risk any disruption to its schedule later than evening and the domestic airline would not have any crew trained to operate the aircraft under the foreign airlines AOC, as it is 'their' aircraft.

Of course over a longer period of time airline A could lease their spare capacity to another carrier. ie a week or a month. In Europe there are a few airline who specialise in short notice hire-in's, Titan come to mind immediately. Titan operate short term wet lease's. Other airlines and leasing company provide longer term dry lease options.

As for "sharing aircrew", that gets a little tricky. as each airline will have its own SOP's.
EG, Aer Lingus currently operate B757 ex SNN and DUB. However these are in fact operated by ASL Airlines (used to be called Air Contractors) under a franchise agreement, the aircraft and the flight crew are ASL Ireland/Air Contractors staff. The cabin crew/flight attendants are Aer Lingus crew trained to ASL procedures.
So in this sense they sorta 'share' the plane!

Quoting diverted (Reply 3): BN did this with Concorde back in the day. Believe they'd re-register it upon landing with an N number, and they had crews rated for it. I believe BA's insurance mandated they have BA crews observing.

Yes. In order to comply with US regulations that required an aircraft operated by a US airline to be on the US register five of BA's Concordes were reregistered with a unique format British alpha-numeric registration:

G-BOAA was reregistered G-N84AA
G-BOAB was reregistered G-N84AB
G-BOAC was reregistered G-N81AC
G-BOAD was reregistered G-N94AD
G-BOAE was reregistered G-N94AE

When a Concorde arrived at IAD to be handed over to BN the 'G-' part of its British registration was covered with tape. In that way G-N84AA then displayed its new US registration, N84AA.

And again, 'Yes'. It was the insurance company that insisted a BA flight crew were present when Concorde was being flown by a BN flight crew.

Another example of two airlines sharing an aircraft also involved BA and this time NZ. Back in the mid 1970s BA were loosing market share on the LHR-LAX route to PA and TW. The two American airlines were using up-to-date twin-isle aircraft on the route. BA were using 707s. This was because their only twin-aisle aircraft with sufficient range to operate this route was the 747. Its passenger capacity was too large for the demand.

NZ (back then TE) had surplus DC-10 capacity. So they signed a four year agreement with BA that started in May 1975. Under this agreement when the daily AKL-HNL-LAX (TE001) arrived at LAX it was leased to BA to operate LAX-LHR-LAX (BA598/99) with a BA flight and cabin crew. Conveniently this BA rotation was just short of 24 hours. So when it arrived at LAX it was exchanged for the aircraft arriving from AKL. The DC-10 arriving from LHR then operated that day's LAX-HNL-AKL (TE002) flight.

At the start of Summer Season 1978 when the agreement still had 12 months to run the success of the arrangement described above required BA to upguage their weekday flights to LAX to a 747. BA continued to operate the NZ DC-10s for the two weekend flights to LAX as described above. During the week they used the two aircraft to operate five LHR-MIA-LHR and three LHR-YUL-LHR rotations. At the end of the BA weekend flights to LAX the two aircraft were exchanged as before with those operating the flights arriving from AKL.

Throughout this period all the DC-10s operated in full NZ livery with New Zealand registrations.

Quoting planeguy727 (Reply 8): Before deregulation in the US a number of airlines flew interchange services where the same

Including flights to Europe. This is how, for instance, DL B747-100s were seen at LHR.

In the 1950's and 60's, there were a number of important city pairs that lacked nonstop and even direct service, so domestic carriers did interchange flights, using the same aircraft for through service. Probably the heaviest trafficked one was Houston to Los Angeles. (This shows how ridiculously cumbersome the CAB route granting process was.) Continental would fly a 707 from Houston to El Paso and American would take it over and fly on to Los Angeles with their own crew. I remember being amazed at LAX as a kid after being told the intra-Texas leg was actually longer than the leg from ELP to LAX.
Another significant route lacking service was Minneapolis to Miami. Northwest and Eastern had a similar arrangement on that. If I recall correctly, Dallas and Seattle had no direct service as well, and Braniff ran to Denver, where United (I think) took over for the leg to Seattle.
It is amazing to me that the CAB was so restrictive in granting route authoritiy. God bless Alfred Kahn for pushing deregulation in the Carter Administration.

What about selling codeshares? Could a domestic airline sell codeshare seats on a foreign airline that had for whatever reason had to fly between two domestic airports, i.e. the QANTAS flight from LAX to JFK?

Braniff flew the Concorde from IAD to DFW. How did that work?

The Braniff example is the best explanation of how this could/can work.

However, as many posters have pointed out, its more trouble than its worth.

so, I guess the answer is Yes, it can be done, but No, no its not worth the effort.

Not exactly what you describe, but Aer Lingus operated a flight on behalf of United between IAD and MAD for a few years as EIN6962/6963. The aircraft, IFE, meal service, and pilots were all EI property but the FAs were contracted by UA.

I'm sure there are other instances of this happening, but I only know of this one.

Quoting hispanola (Reply 22):

I was very much under the impr session that the cabin crew where for all intents and purposes Aer Lingus cabin crew trained to Aer Lingus SOPs and IAA AOC but hired via a US based agency. The IAD base often operated with Ireland and UK based crew on secondment.

The clearest examples of parked aircraft are A380s. QF park one all day at LHR and BA at JNB.

Almost all of the LAN Airlines (Lan Chile, Lan Peru, Lan Ecuador and Lan Colombia) share their equipment. Lan Argentina does not as, same as in the US, Argentinian legislation requires local airlines to fly planes registered and crewed locally. All LAN places except for those of Lan Argentina are registered in Chile under the CC- registry.

Thus, a 767 may fly from SCL to LIM for Lan Chile. Then it may do a LIM-MAD for Lan Peru. It may turn around as a MAD-GYE on Lan Ecuador, then do a GYE-MIA for the same airline, then a MIA-BOG-SCL for Lan Colombia, and return to the main SCL base.

Crews are not shared though, AFAIK.

The 2 L-1011s operated seasonally by AC and Eastern were owned by a leasing company. Spent winter with Eastern and summer with AC. There are several a.net photos in their various hybrid liveries.

Quoting richardw (Reply 24): The clearest examples of parked aircraft are A380s. QF park one all day at LHR and BA at JNB.

Pretty much all long haul North-South routes include some sort of longish idle time parked, but it is the name of the game. Airlines could increase utilization by turning around right away, but it would not result in an optimal revenue management mix. Most high yielding traffic prefers the night time flying and being able to land at the destination and be ready for a day's work and airlines cater to them. It also happens on North America-Deep South America routes.

Someone from Alaska Airlines may be able to verify this.
I remember in the late 80's early 90's there were a few 727-200 aircraft operated by Alaska; they flew from ANC to SEA, switched crews with American and headed to Texas, Houston I believe. The route arrangement primarily served the oil industry in Texas and Alaska.
The aircraft were equipped with two variants of Radio Altimeter indicators, round dial for AS and vertical for AA. There was a switch on the instrument panel that switched between the two…depending on the airline flying.

Quoting techspec (Reply 28): Someone from Alaska Airlines may be able to verify this. I remember in the late 80's early 90's there were a few 727-200 aircraft operated by Alaska; they flew from ANC to SEA, switched crews with American and headed to Texas, Houston I believe. The route arrangement primarily served the oil industry in Texas and Alaska.

Those were known as "interchange" flights and were quite common on US carriers before deregulation when traffic rights were very restrictive. The same aircraft would operate AAA-BBB-CCC using one carrier's rights AAA-BBB and the other carrier's rights BBB-CCC. The crews would change at the intermediate point but passengers could remain on the same aircraft all the way.

I can think of many of those operations on both domestic and international routes. For example, a Northwest 707 used to operate MSP-DTW-LHR, flown by a NW crew MSP-DTW and by a PA crew DTW-LHR. DL and PA did the same ATL-IAD-LHR for a while using DL's early 747-100s, flown by Pan Am crews on the IAD-LHR sector.

There was even one interchange operation involving 3 carriers between IDL/JFK-MIA-PTY-South America, using one aircraft but operated under the traffic rights of National Airlines NYC-MIA, then Pan Am's rights MIA-PTY, and finally using Panagra's rights PTY-South America (when the Canal Zone was still US territory). Panagra was the 50-50 joint venture between Pan Am and the W.R. Grace shipping company. Braniff acquired Panagra in 1967.

The only example I know that answers the OP question (international flight to DOMESTIC lease) is the Braniff Concorde example.

International to international agreements are more common:
The TE/BA example above (question- were the flight crew BA or TE? I ask as BA had no DC-10's in their fleet).

Similar Air Gabon & Air Madagascar 747 sharing with Air France.

QF chartered their 744's to as cruise company/travel agency one summer to fly LHR-IST-LHR when the aircraft would normally be idle awaiting turnaround.

Icelandair arrangement with US charter carrier (or agency?) a few winters back ex KEF-BOS-Caribbean.

Nauru Airlines-Air Kiribati: this arrangement might still be in operation. 737 operates Nauru-Tarawa, then subleased to Air Kiribati for the Tarawa-Nadi flight.

Quoting tonystan (Reply 23): I was very much under the impr session that the cabin crew where for all intents and purposes Aer Lingus cabin crew trained to Aer Lingus SOPs and IAA AOC but hired via a US based agency. The IAD base often operated with Ireland and UK based crew on secondment.

That may be the case, but I flew EI 6963 once and all of those flight attendants had american accents. One of them couldn't even understand me! I may be from Co. Down, but at that point I had been living in the US for 3 years and had acquired a bit of an American accent.

Later, while we were deplaning, I talked to one of these flight attendants and she told me that in Mexico City the process was much longer. This is what led me to believe that they had some sort of relation with UA rather than EI. EI doesn't fly into MEX, and an IRL/GBR crew would be unlikely to speak with a US accent.

Here's a quote from a previous thread: "It was operated on behalf of UA. There was quite a bit of controversy surrounding it when it started. Many thought it was UA's beginning of an attempt to break their unions. The crews on this flight were US based and US citizens that were hired specifically for this one flight." -ASFlyer

Quoting richardw (Reply 24): QF park one all day at LHR and BA at JNB.

In the northern hemisphere winter (when daylight hours are short) BA have flown their 380 that would otherwise have been parked all day at JNB to DUR. There (as DUR is significantly less busy than JNB) they have flown flight crew training missions.

As an example G-XLEA arrived in the morning of 29 June 2014 at JNB from LHR as BA055. It then operated a JNB-DUR training mission (BA9160T). At DUR it completed four separate training circuits (BA9161T/62T/63T and /64T) lasting 23, 27, 25 and 26 minutes respectively. Then it operated a training mission back to JNB (BA9169T). At JNB it returned to commercial operations operating JNB-LHR (BA056).

This was not an isolated occurrence. BA 380s G-XLEC, 'EE and 'EF have also been flown JNB-DUR to complete training flights during the southern hemisphere summer.

These programmes not only have the advantage of using an aircraft that would otherwise be parked up. They simultaneously avoided having to stand down a frame from commercial operations to complete necessary flight crew training back home.

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 30): The TE/BA example above (question- were the flight crew BA or TE?

There was no New Zealand legal requirement to operate a locally registered airliner with a New Zealander crew So the trans-Pacific flights were all crewed by TE personnel and all the other flights by BA crew.

One possible query is 'Why did BA not lease just two aircraft for the four year period with the intention of flying them solely on the LHR-LAX route?'

I cannot be sure. It may have been so that TE could complete routine, on-line maintenance. But I suspect it may have been a UK CAA regulation. This requires any airline leasing a foreign registered aircraft to demonstrate the need for that lease and for the lease not to exceed two calendar years. For the first three years of this agreement the aircraft operating the incoming daily TE flight from AKL was exchanged at LAX with the aircraft operating the incoming daily BA flight from LHR. So each lease lasted 24 hours give or take a little. In the last (fourth) year of the operation the leases lasted just one week when BA flew the two weekend DC-10 flights to LAX for exchange with the incoming TE operated aircraft.

An example of this CAA regulation in action was B 747 4UF N495MC/G-GSSA. This aircraft was wet leased by BA World Cargo from Atlas Air on 28 May 1999 when it was delivered brand new at STN directly from Boeing's PAE plant in full BA Chelsea Rose livery with 'British Airways World Cargo' fuselage titles. Having gained an extension to the two-year regulation the aircraft was transferred to a British registered company 49 per cent owned by Atlas Air, namely Global Supply Systems, on 22 January 2002. At that time it was placed on the UK register as G-GSSA. This registration was cancelled and its original US registration was restored when it was returned to Atlas Air on 28 December 2011.

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 4):

Not true,

Classic example is the GF & TW Tristars that used to swap daily at LHR.
The GF L-1011 continued to JFK iirc, with TW crew, and v.v. with the TW L-1011 heading down to BAH with a GF crew.

Quoting hispanola (Reply 31):

The flight to MAD was very much an "out sourcing, union busting" exercise by UA and was most disliked by the cabin crew and flight crew unions at UA so certainly did not employ any current United crew.

From friends of mine who operated as SCCMs on the flights on secondment from DUB most of the US based crew did have previous flying experience and came from all over the US and often commuted to IAD.

It was a most unusual set up I must admit.

In relation to the UA/EI joint venture ex-IAD. Aircraft was operated by EI under a lease to UA. UA covered all ticketing/reservations end of things. EI provided flights crews on secondment from Ireland and cabin crew were all US based. Hired and trained by EI but based/paid in IAD. Occasionally there would be Irish/UK based crew on the flights to cover gaps in crewing.

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 14): As for "sharing aircrew", that gets a little tricky. as each airline will have its own SOP's. EG, Aer Lingus currently operate B757 ex SNN and DUB. However these are in fact operated by ASL Airlines (used to be called Air Contractors) under a franchise agreement, the aircraft and the flight crew are ASL Ireland/Air Contractors staff. The cabin crew/flight attendants are Aer Lingus crew trained to ASL procedures. So in this sense they sorta 'share' the plane!

That's a long-term damp leasing arrangement. That also happens quite a lot at European leisure carriers, but on a short-term basis over the summer season. For example, Thomas Cook (UK) has been leasing A320s from Avion Express every summer season for at least 3 or 4 years, the cockpit crews are supplied by Avion Express with the cabin crew from Thomas Cook.

NZ and HA did this up until a few years ago. HNL-SYD operated by HA SYD-AKL by NZ not sure where the aircraft went after that, back to HNL or back via SYD.

remember two involving pan am...first was the dl interchange atl iad by dl crew then lhr with pa crew (747-100) and the other was national jfk-mia then points south with panam (b707). Pan Am also did some with Panagra in South America as well. Heard last decade before the UA/CO merger some CO flight crew ran CM flights due CM pilot shortage.

Some operators use these long down times to due scheduled MTC or extensive cabin cleaning. I know this is the case for DL in deep South America. I'm pretty sure Qantas has a good sized mtc staff in LAX that can do A check work and cabin recondition work.

FWIW, the Indian railways does this quite often - between various railway 'zones'.

Then again, airplanes and trains are different kettles of fish.

Quoting cloudboy (Thread starter): Could airlines share planes? Say a foreign carrier had a flight that spent several hours sitting on the ground waiting to return. Could they lease that aircraft out to a domestic airline to fly in between those times? The idea that for the foreign airline the aircraft is earning money while it waits, and for the domestic it is one plane they dont need to pay for, only pay for those hours of utilization. Along that same line - QANTAS has a flight from LAX to JFK, but they cannot sell seats on that leg. Could theoretically a code share partner, say AA or AS, sell tickets on that leg, since they are a domestic airline, and then just treat that as a codeshare flight?

Many years ago, this was not uncommon. For example, Eastern Air Lines (in the US) had a primarily North-
South route system, which tended to have heavy loads in the winter, lighter in summer. TWA (also US), had a primarily East-West system which had heavier traffic in the summer, and lighter in the winter. So Eastern and TWA had at least one L1011 which they leased back and forth between them. Air Canada has also done similar things, and, today, many of the European "holiday" airlines lease planes back and forth to some of the Canadian carriers (i.e., Sunwing) when there's a need for extra lift.

And, of course, in the late 1970's and early 1980's, there was an agreement between Braniff and both British Airways and Air France by which Braniff leased a Concorde and flew a tag on leg IAD-DFW to the leasing carr'iers LHR and CDG to IAD leg. Same flight number, operated like a code-share, but because of the lease agre

Quoting hiflyer (Reply 38): remember two involving pan am...first was the dl interchange atl iad by dl crew then lhr with pa crew (747-100) and the other was national jfk-mia then points south with panam (b707). Pan Am also did some with Panagra in South America as well.

Mentioned in Reply 29. The 3-way (National/Pan Am/Panagra) interchange flights dated back to the propeller era.

AA and AS used to do this with 727-200 aircraft.

An AS 72S would operate FAI-ANC-SEA-DFW-IAH with AA crews flying the aircraft SEA-DFW-IAH.
An AA 72S would operate FAI-ANC-SEA-ORD-DCA with AS crews flying the aircraft SEA-ANC-FAI.


-DBC

Quoting smi0006 (Reply 37): NZ and HA did this up until a few years ago. HNL-SYD operated by HA SYD-AKL by NZ not sure where the aircraft went after that, back to HNL or back via SYD.

Not quite- these were actually one off flights so to speak. NZ won the HA 767 maintenance contract. The aircraft would operate HNL-SYD, then be given to NZ to operate SYD-AKL (maintenance) then AKL-SYD and be given back to HA to operate SYD-HNL. Only happened whenever an aircraft required a significant check.

Quoting hispanola (Reply 31): One of them couldn't even understand me!

That's quite understandable- I once had a conversation with a group of Northern Irish- it was challenging to understand- one person spoke with such a strong accent I didn't comprehend a single word!

The AC/EA Tristar share- I believe these were seasonal swaps- not daily.

GF/TW- I never ever saw a GF Tristar at JFK- when did this happen???

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 45): The AC/EA Tristar share- I believe these were seasonal swaps- not daily.

Already mentioned. They spent the winter with EA and the summer with AC.

The very first U.S. domestic jet service - New York (IDL) to Miami starting on December 10, 1958 was exactly this type of arrangement. National Airlines operated and crewed 707s owned by Pan American. The aircraft was utilized when it was normally idled between transatlantic flights. In 1959 Northeast Airlines entered a similar arrangement with TWA, flying MIA turns with 707s.

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 45): GF/TW- I never ever saw a GF Tristar at JFK- when did this happen???

This was done for many years in the late 80's, even into the 90's.
Best link I could find.
http://www.airfleets.net/forum/topic-6809.htm

cheers

T