FICU wrote:CanadaEH wrote:Is a 737-200 combi a "modern" aircraft? I'm pretty sure Westjet didn't retire a 737-200 with the highest cycles of any 737 in the world because it was modern.
You really have to state this? I'm sure even Westjet, who are the smartest airline people around right, can't figure out how to get a 737NG onto a gravel runway in Cambridge Bay. :
FICU, to the best of my memory Cambridge is the only sked location that requires a gravel kit, which means you have options to operate more effiecient aircraft on most of your route structure.
EastCoaster wrote:
One of the main points for my post was to seek you support. I guess it's clear that everyone has their own side. I don't feel that way. I simply think that IF Westjet seriously wanted to serve this market with a good product rather than just go in and run others out of town, they'd have simply signed the deal with Canadian North the week before they announced service to Yellowknife. They would have enjoyed the ability to sell connection service all over the North with entry points in Ottawa, Edmonton, and Calgary. Would have made sense, IF they weren't just looking to gain market share on Air Canada.
Eastcoaster, the story I heard was that a codeshare was the preferred option, but Canadian North for whatever reason said no thanks. If you want to service a market, you have two choices, codeshare or direct entery. Codeshare was tried, all that was left was direct entery.
FICU wrote:
I know people who have told me your company departed with frost on the wings, not just the spoilers, on more than one occasion. One way to save money and offer $55 fares
FICU, you and your "people" know what a cold soaked fuel frost exemptionis, right?