Talk:Airline

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 March 2021 and 28 June 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zhz0.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opening comments[edit]

Ideology - ideologically charged pointless sentences like - "In the 1950s, the De Havilland Comet, Boeing 707, Douglas DC-8, and Sud Aviation Caravelle became the first flagships of the Jet Age in the West, while the Soviet Union bloc countered with the Tupolev Tu-104 and Tupolev Tu-124 in the fleets of state-owned carriers such as Aeroflot and Interflug." Why would airplanes (aeroplanes) be separated by ideology and why would (obvious) state-ownership of Aeroflot and Interflug be stressed, even mentioned, but not state-ownership of Air France or BOAC or for that matter of almost all airlines in the world at the time?

Is it an article about airlines or a cliche ridden idelogical American pamphlet?


How 'bout a List of largest airlines page -Mydotnet 23:22, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

There is such a list at List of largest airlines. 131.107.0.73 20:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)Ksnow[reply]


Under History - US Airline Industry - Early Development, the first sentence is: "Tony Jannus conducted the United States' scheduled commercial airline flight on 1 January 1914 for the Saint Petersburg-routes, Braniff Airways, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, United Airlines (originally a division of Boeing), Trans World Airlines, Northwest Airlines, and Eastern Air Lines, to name a few."

This doesn't make sense, something is missing. JimC1946 (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Airlines Bias[edit]

This article is very biased towards discussing US airlines. No mention is made of the huge changes in the industry in Europe since deregulation in the 'developments since 1945'. I am going to divide the History Article into independent sections for each containent. --Gaainfo (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Airline[edit]

Scheduled air transport I did this, i realised that most of the history was in alot deeper detail on this anyway, I improved the intro aswell. I will invite anyone to feedback on that --mexaguil 05:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about airliner? —LX 09:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Europe vs America airline (Question)[edit]

I am not sure whether this is correct, but my perception is most of the airlines in Europe have been doing relatively better than American airlines. The argument i have seen supporting the observation is that, most of the American airline had over invested before the economy tanked late 90s, but this is not very convincing. For example, most European countries taxes the oil to death and this should really hurt the airline. The current financial filing still show European airline doing better that American airline, 5 year after they seized over investing. How do one explain this?

on the back of Delta and Northwest filing for Chapter 11 today, I'd agree with you that American airlines are tanking it...
the reason why European rivals are doing so much better, however, has to come down to the fact that most of the world don't like America and therefore prefer to travel on European airlines... that's the only reason I can think of! Deano 18:27, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am coming late into this discussion, but I have to say that this is pure rubbish. Several of the major American carriers have simply made bad business decisions. Saying that the American airline industry's problems with profibility has to do with hatred against America is wrong.

Shocking to see such non-sense on a Wikipedia talk page. Several of the world's largest airlines ARE American based. See Delta Air Lines and American Airlines and the most successful low cost carrier in the world Southwest Airlines.72.39.210.23 (talk) 16:06, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

airline cost structure breakdown[edit]

I am propose that we use our cumulative knowledge to collect percentages of airline cost. Once we have a good feel of it, we can summarize it as a pie chart somewhere in the front page. I will start by signing in that fuel amount to around 30% of airline cost. What percentage is labour? What about airplanes leasing/buying? And administration? What other kind of expense does airline need to foot?

Beside a pie chart, other information that can fit in the proposed paragraph is how those cost are affected by geographical factors, economy, politics just to name a few. Please do add any factor that you are aware of. gathima 15:40, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Labour makes 38% of airline cost
Insurance = 1%

I have found more data on airline costs, here it is:

All data is courtesy of Air Transport Association www.air-transport.com

Labor = 26% Fuel per gal.=21.9% Aircraft ownership=0.4% Non Aircraft ownership = 4.5% <----(What I assume is aircraft leasing) Professional services=8% Food and Beverage=1.7% Landing fees= 2.2% Maintenance Materials=1.4% Insurance=0.2% Non-Aircraft Insurance=0.7% Passenger commissions=1.3% Communicaition=0.9% Utilities and supplies=0.6% Other Expenses=21.3% User:Msaunders 4 Nov 2005 (19:11) UTC

Imperial Airways[edit]

It's stated that photos exist of Imperial Airways aeroplanes being maintained by Bedouin in the empty quarter of Saudia Arabia. Sounds great. But who's actually seen one of these photos please ?

A 1937 documentary film about Imperial Airways showing an HP 42 at Sharjah here: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.115.114 (talk) 18:38, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Or this (image at right):
Refuelling Hanno at Samakh, Tiberias (now in Israel), October 1931. Re-coloured picture

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.115.114 (talk) 18:40, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary information[edit]

Is there any reason of having the sentence below on top of the article, considering its easily accessable by clicking disambuguation link? 

   * Sometimes spelt "air line": the shortest distance between 2 points regardless of land obstacles.
   * Airline (television show).
   * A tube that carries a compressed air supply, including tyre inflators (including on airfields).

On the other hand, it may help the printed version, but it still make it a little dirty

What about airline food?[edit]

Hey, shouldn't airline food be mentioned? I don't know too much about it, so I don't want to risk adding incorrect assertions to the article, but it seems to me that it is a major cause of complaints about airlines in general. I vaguely remembering reading somewhere that the average American airline spends about $2 per passenger per flight on food. Plus, labor relations with the third-party providers of such food can be very important to the survival of an airline (as British Airways found out with that recent mess involving Gate Gourmet).

If anyone could research this, that would be great. --Coolcaesar 11:15, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

oil related treaty[edit]

Moreover, the industry is structured so that airlines often act as tax collectors. Airline fuel is untaxed however due to a series of treaties existing between countries. Ticket prices include a number of fees, taxes, and surcharges they have little or no control over, and these are passed through to various providers. Airlines are also responsible for enforcing government regulations. If airlines carry passengers without proper documentation on an international flight, they are responsible for returning them back to the originating country.

I feel like it would be nice to include the treaty that encourage countries not to tax jet oil. I tried to find the name of that/these treaty though google search unsuccessfully and wonder whether someone hear is more informed on this issue. Please slap in the name if you happen to know the treaty that deal with jet oil

Bias against mother nature![edit]

There are "Economic considerations" in the airline article but there are no "Ecology considerations"!

Airplanes spew jet exhaust directly into the ozone layer where it hurts more. Planes use 10x more energy than trains over the same distance and 100x more energy than ships do!

Airfield construction destroys large swaths of natural habitats in many cases. Overly ambitious airfield plans like the japanese artificial island runways require huge industrial efforts to build, causing huge diesel pollutions by hundreds of trucks and tractors.

Jet airplanes hurt people in the large vicinity of airfields with terrible noise, shortening their lives and breaking their nerves.

Rapid travel over large distances can carry infectious diseases and cause possible pandemic. 195.70.32.136 11:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The oldest[edit]

Does anyone knows which airline is the oldest in Europe? Alexzr88 10:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Air ferry[edit]

Which other airlines also made air ferry services?

airplane vs aeroplane spelling[edit]

Shouldn't this article note the spelling differences between US English 'airplane' and British English 'aeroplane' in the sake of NPOV? Otherwise it might lead one to think that one or the other spellings are wrong.

Since airplanes/aeroplanes are both a British and an American phenomenon, why not alternate the spellings throughout the article? 68.36.214.143 (talk) 03:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just use aircraft and avoid the problem. MilborneOne (talk) 09:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article for Planes with Names?[edit]

Should there be articles for airliners that got a name or no?

Airline Ratings[edit]

Why can't there be ratings of airlines? Ygb6147 20:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would violate several Wikipedia official policies, particularly Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:NPOV. ArbCom, Jimbo Wales, and the Wikimedia Foundation are all quite serious about enforcing those policies.--Coolcaesar 04:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation into Chinese Wikipedia[edit]

The 12:52, 19 June 2008 80.200.138.28 version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 09:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

India vs. Pakistan[edit]

A classic example of nationalism: someone replaces an Air India image with one on Pakistan International Airlines [2], only to be reverted later by me. The image was replaced again by a PIA image but that was soon removed and replaced by another Air India image and the pattern continued. To settle matters, I've added an image on Air India to a different section. Let us hope that the Pakistani nationalists won't object to it. --Incidious (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a reasonable compromise (the other is to remove both images!) MilborneOne (talk) 20:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Airline “Bailout”[edit]

My name is Tim Ebner, and I work for Xenophon Strategies, a public relations consulting firm. The Air Transport Association is one of our clients. I have added to the Airline Bailout section of the Wikipedia page in order to clarify and expand upon this period of aviation history. In the interest of neutrality, I would like to leave this entry open to revisions or edits. The information was added to Wikipedia on June 3rd, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim ebner (talk • contribs) 20:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for declaring you relationship, it still might be worth reading our Conflict of Interest guidelines. Not sure that the airline bailout section might be a bit heavy going in an article that is a summary of ninety odd years of airline history, perhaps it could be more generalised I am not sure all the facts and figures are really notable to this article. MilborneOne (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to see that Wikipedia has allowed a corporate mouthpiece (mr. Ebner) to slap together a bit of propaganda and insert it into an article. In it we see him defending the bloated, mismanaged airline industry, making them sound like wonderful, responsible business partners that the government "helped out" with taxpayer dollars. The truth of the matter is that the airlines were simply given an incredible infusion of cash (did they give it back, uh, no) and ALSO loans which the government "profited" from by being "allowed" to buy airline stock at discounted prices.

Oh, and also, the hyperlink that Mr. Ebner points to as "proof" that any of the bailout funds were recouped by the taxpayers? A dead link, what a surprise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.228.15 (talk) 09:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Erroneous information regarding fuel taxes[edit]

...Moreover, the industry is structured so that airlines often act as tax collectors. Airline fuel is untaxed however due to a series of treaties existing between countries.

I've worked as a financial analyst in the industry and this statement is totally wrong, as there is no international "treaty" with regards to jet fuel taxes abatement. There has been a 4.4% per gallon federal tax on domestic fuel in the U.S. (regardless of carrier's country of origin) for years and all of the U.S. States with major airports charge an additional ad valorem tax for fuel. Given the perception that air travel is an opportunity to pass on a luxury tax to non-resident, well-heeled consumers, there are comparable fuel fees and taxes in lots of other countries. The airlines pass these taxes directly to the consumer in the form of fuel surcharges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.163.116 (talk) 18:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First[edit]

fr:Compagnie Générale Transaérienne was founded one month before the German Delag. 85.170.16.25 (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes from Curtiss Jenny citation[edit]

Quotes from the August 1998 American History article:

"Finally, after considerable prodding by a new federal agency called the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Congress included $100,000 in the fiscal 1918 budget to test airmail."

"The airplane drafted to carry the mail was the Curtiss JN-4H "Jenny," a modified version of the twin-seat trainer in which virtually all American and Canadian combat pilots had learned to fly."

---some jerk on the Internet (talk) 14:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

serious date errors[edit]

This article needs to be scrutinized carefully for vandalism. On 25 October 2011 an anon, 93.46.34.158, made a series of date changes, with many dates that are off by 10-20-30 years, like this [3],[4].--Incogm (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cruiser-feeder concept[edit]

Perhaps this can be mentioned and a cruiser-feeder concept page can be made ? See http://www.atc-network.com/News/41331/Futuristic-cruiser-feeder-concept-saves-fuel 91.182.189.103 (talk) 14:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Avianca add picture[edit]

Mr. MilborneOne I ask that we reached a consensus. I had added an image of Avianca, because I think it is important to keep it in the article that refers to the first aerolina founded in America and second in the world. Avianca also still works and is one of the most important in Latin America.Koldorogollo (talk) 20:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Avianca Airbus A330-200 at El Dorado International Airport (2009). Avianca is the America's oldest airline and the second oldest in the world
You shouldnt really add the image again as that is seen as edit waring, you may wish to remove it until you get consensus. We already have enough images in the article, we cant show an image of every airline (they are tens of thousand different airlines over the years. We already have an image of a TAM A330 to illustrate Latin American airlines, I dont have a problem considering a change of image but I am sorry to say that the one you suggested is a really bad quality picture, out of focus and whatever the merit of the airline shouldnt be used in this article, or anywhere on wikipedia really. MilborneOne (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and have just removed it again. There's already enough, and it's not a particularly good image.--Dmol (talk) 20:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Singular for a company?[edit]

Is it really used a singular "airline" for companies? I thought, airline is a line of air transport, and the common name of companies is derrived from a group airlines operated by it, so the air trasport operater is called "... Airlines" usually. --ŠJů (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fuel hedging data[edit]

Looking at both the table and graph for the fuel hedging there appears to be strongly conflicting data between the two. Adding to the problem, the whole section doesn't contain any citations. I'd instinctively say the graph is wrong but I definitely don't have the confidence to remove it. Forentitalk 04:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Airline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:44, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fuel Hedging Data not reliable[edit]

Hi fellow editors,

I am unable to find any reliable sources for the data on fuel hedging, and it seems to be very difficult to find any reference for data dating way back in 2005. Hence, I think that this section on Fuel Hedging should be removed, it also does not appear to have an important relation to this article. The reason for a C-Class status of this article is due to lack of references, particularly for this part of the article. If anyone has found any citation or can help improve this section, please do so! I will delete this section if no one can help improve it after some time, thanks. (Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citation needed)

Guysayshi (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2016 (UTC)Guysayshi[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Airline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Airline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Airline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definition in lede[edit]

I suggest that the definition of airline in the lede be qualified as a common carrier offering scheduled services. It is a stretch to describe the owner of one or two aircraft offering charter service only as an airline. U.S. law clearly differentiates the two kinds of companies. I don't know about other regulatory schemes. Rhadow (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You dont have to run scheduled services to be an airline. MilborneOne (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The OED defines airline as "An organization providing a regular public service of air transport on one or more routes." Charter is neither regular, nor public. Rhadow (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other definitions exist including that an airline is a certified air carrier and an airline is somebody who carries passengers or cargo for reward. MilborneOne (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was unanimous support to merge. N8 15:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge Passenger airline into Airline. The "passenger airline" article is currently a short list of passenger airline types with very short context which would be appropriate as a section of the "Airline" article. "Passenger Airline" is a small stub-class article that makes an easy merge. N8 21:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Makes sense to merge the stub into the more general article especially since the stub is just a list of types. oknazevad (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for reasons listed above.--Dmol (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Passenger airline is not worth it.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seem reasonable and no chance passenger airline would grow into much more than a list. MilborneOne (talk) 08:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.britannica.com/technology/history-of-flight/The-first-airlines. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. /wiae /tlk 12:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Hangkong Gongsi" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hangkong Gongsi and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 14#Hangkong Gongsi until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:14, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Airline alliances[edit]

Should be included in the main profile for each airline; independents should be marked unaligned. Ajpajpajp1 (talk) 11:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First regular airliner ?[edit]

The article states that the first regular airliner happened after it was proven by a flight accross the Channel on 15 July 1919, but all sources I could find states that Henri Farman was earlier than that starting regular flights between London and Paris from 8 February 1919.

The Farman brothers are indeed mentioned in the article but it is told they only came "in late 1919", yet in clicking on the source used for that information, it's clearly stated: "8 February 1919: The first airline passengers to be carried from Paris to London are flown by a Farman F60 Goliath from Toussus-le-Noble to Kenley." Sources:

Metropolitan (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Airline&oldid=1216974868"