Government bailout for airlines possible?

wymondham

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Thats all fine when you are constrained to your country. The airlines are not; they are a truly global industry and we can have market share whipped away from us as soon as we want to give it to the Likes of Air France, who are heavily subsidised by their government.

OK, so really as our airlines:

a. cannot fold
b. must receive state aid (to be fair as others do)

then surely they should be nationalised as this ticks all the boxes??

Having a private business that cannot go bust is crazy.

Graham_Devon

wymondham wrote: »

Being a private business they should have disaster recovery provisions like any other business. The fact they are airlines should encompass these types of scenarios when they cannot fly for a multitude of reasons. Most businesses have reserves to cater for unexpected situations. They are private businesses and should not receive state funding if they have not made adequate provisions themselves....

If your whole business is built on flying passengers and goods, and you cannot fly, what sort of disaster recovery provision would help here?

The airlines can go bust, and have in the past.

There is a difference here though. It's a natural problem, won't say disaster as it isn't, and the airlines cannot fly because they have been told they are not allowed.

It's not just one airline unable to cope. It's all airlines, ground, because those who control the airspace have said they cannot fly.

C_Mababejive

I know...lets have an airline scrappage scheme.

What we do is any airliner that has more than 20,000 flying hours gets mangled and we give the airline £2000 for trading it in.

Graham_Devon

Well steps are being taken.

Gordon Brown has just summoned various people from the cabinet to an emergency meeting at Downing Street to be held....well, right now.

wymondham

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If your whole business is built on flying passengers and goods, and you cannot fly, what sort of disaster recovery provision would help here?

The airlines can go bust, and have in the past.

There is a difference here though. It's a natural problem, won't say disaster as it isn't, and the airlines cannot fly because they have been told they are not allowed.

It's not just one airline unable to cope. It's all airlines, ground, because those who control the airspace have said they cannot fly.

My gripe is about the state bailing out private businesses, regardless of why that situation occurs.....

wymondham

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well steps are being taken.

Gordon Brown has just summoned various people from the cabinet to an emergency meeting at Downing Street to be held....well, right now.

I would imagine since he can't really do anything about the ash, it will involve financial help again....

vivatifosi

Just saw this on the Beeb news:

In a nutshell, European airports and airlines are now questioning the flight ban because the steps being taken in Europe are far stronger than those taken in other parts of the world when volcanoes erupt. Several airlines have operated test flights without negative impact and the main bodies for the European Airlines and European airlines ACI Europe and AEA are calling for resumption of service asap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8628323.stm

mbga9pgf

wymondham wrote: »

Being a private business they should have disaster recovery provisions like any other business. The fact they are airlines should encompass these types of scenarios when they cannot fly for a multitude of reasons. Most businesses have reserves to cater for unexpected situations. They are private businesses and should not receive state funding if they have not made adequate provisions themselves....

I believe it all got spent when oil hit 140 dollars a barrell I am afraid.

The nationalisation would not work unfortunately as the competitions commission demands you have 2 major players competing for business, IE Virgin and BA.:A

mbga9pgf

vivatifosi wrote: »

Just saw this on the Beeb news:

In a nutshell, European airports and airlines are now questioning the flight ban because the steps being taken in Europe are far stronger than those taken in other parts of the world when volcanoes erupt. Several airlines have operated test flights without negative impact and the main bodies for the European Airlines and European airlines ACI Europe and AEA are calling for resumption of service asap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8628323.stm

They will end up killing a load of people carrying on like this. Just because one segment of the ash cloud is safe, how can you then take those results and assume that all sectors of the cloud are safe? Microscopic levels of contaminants on turbine blades can change their vibrational qualities significantly, changing natural frequency and potentially leading to High Cycle Fatigue. Not to mention contaminant corrosion and changes in the cooling paths in engines. Most modern turbines are very clever and the metal that is in them often operate in environments close to their meling point.

Yes, gas turbine engines are that sensitive to tolerance. Thats why they cost their equivalent amount in silver.

Businesses shouldnt make bad business decisions based on dodgy flight safety.

wymondham

I thought Boeing/Airbus etc have clauses in their contracts that forbids the airlines knowingly flying through ash??