US Airways considers legal action against BAA in fuel supplies row
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
It sounds like the fuel sharing agreement is just that...an agreement, not a law. If the other airlines say no, how is BAA supposed to force them to share? "You can't land here unless you give a competitor some of your fuel?" Seems like that would be a violation of the "Open Skies" agreement.
I loved this line: "They are competitors. No one has been willing to take them on." 
Little do they know................
Little do they know................
I think what they meant is "No has been willing to take them on as a fuel share", not "No one has been willing to compete with them." The wording in the article is confusing, though.
Just another example of how our scumbag politicians are once again looking out for the American People.
Washington DC needs an enema in the worst way!!!
Washington DC needs an enema in the worst way!!!
How is this Washington's fault or problem? It seems to me that DL and NW and CO (and AA and UA) do not seem to have a problem with obtaining fuel at LHR. I find it amusing, that with * alliance carriers UA, LH, AC, SK, OS, etc. etc., all serving LHR (multiple flights daily), US management cannot find a way to get fuel. This isn't a Washington DC problem, it is a LCC management competance issue. IMHO ofcourse.
I agree. We should invade Great Britain right now and force the British Aviation Authority to force all the other airlines to provide fuel to any U.S. airline that wants it. Making Heathrow safe for democracy and free fuel.
Better yet, we'll give Halliburton a no-bid contract to operate Heathrow "until the British situation is stable enough for them to operate it themselves."Oh, man - so nobody will share their LHR fuel supplies with US? Ouch. Hope that gets cleared up. Tankering fuel would probably make those flights completely unprofitable. Maybe US can fly LHR-LGW(fill-up)-PHL/CLT? That can't be too expensive.
Better assign someone the task of finding fuel in China post-haste. Gotta fuel-up those thirsty A340s. They take a lotta gas.
Better assign someone the task of finding fuel in China post-haste. Gotta fuel-up those thirsty A340s. They take a lotta gas.
Dont be hoodwinked by focusing on our incompetent management. Our government changes the status quo on these agreements, but doesnt actually make sure it can be done.
What good is a landing slot without fuel. You can bet your last breath the EU will not have that problem here.
Those other airline were already flying there as per the old agreements.
This way the EU airlines come to the US unrestricted while the US is severely hampered as to starting new flights to the EU. The EU and US governments sit back and says OH Well, and people here blame Tempe. Great Deal
for the EU dont ya think?
While I never underestimate the incompetence of Tempe, it is trumped by traitors in DC
Fine, take out AA and UA as they have been flying to LHR for years. However, are DL, CO, NW also having problems obtaining fuel at LHR? If yes, then OK, it is a EU/political/government issue, but if not, then it is definitely a US management incompetence issue.
Similar threads
