"US likely to stall on 'open skies' agreement"

[Colonâ„¢]

US likely to stall on 'open skies' agreement
By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent
Published: May 2 2006 21:22 | Last updated: May 2 2006 21:22

Open Skies GraphicThe US government is expected on Wednesday to end any hope of implementing this year the long-awaited deal to liberalise aviation services between the US and the European Union.

The so-called open skies treaty, the first to be negotiated between the US and the whole of the EU, has run into significant opposition in the US Congress as well from US unions and some carriers, in particular Continental Airlines.

https://registration.ft.com/registration/barrier?referer=&location=http%3A//news.ft.com/cms/s/d0e0757c-da14-11da-b7de-0000779e2340.html

Registration needed to read the rest of the article.

I'm curious what of excuse they have this time. Unfair competition from cheap European workers? Airlines with terrorist-connections?

For the record, the lack of open skies between the EU and the US has been the reason why there have been no low-cost transatlantic flights so far.

[Ecthy]

Air travel doesn't have to be low-cost, especially not if you take into account the environmental harm it does.

Then on the other hand if we had such an agreement and they became low-cost, we could implement environmental taxing.

Legalize air flight, but tax them to hell!

[SlowwHand]

Just put floaties on a volkswagen like Che's Cuban buddies.

[Colonâ„¢]

Low-cost flights pollute just as much as regular ones... it's just the consumer that's being ripped off by the stranglehold the traditional airlines have over transatlantic flights.

[Dauphin]

So you don't think cheaper flights would lead to more flights?

[Colonâ„¢]

You're angry I gave you a date in the post stats betting competition, aren't you?

[Dauphin]

You did?

[Colonâ„¢]

Yes.

[Colonâ„¢]

Are you angry now?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Dauphin
So you don't think cheaper flights would lead to more flights?

if all the current flights are filled to capacity.

[Thorn]

If I had my way we'd have zepplins flying everywhere, that would make the most sense..... paranoid people stop my idea though......

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Colonâ„¢
Are you angry now?

Not at all, would be a lovely irony if I won.

But in no way do I condone your actions.

[Colonâ„¢]

Someone would have to tell you though, because you're ignoring the competition.

[Whoha]

Zeppelins are slow, vulnerable, and I think that they were all pretty vulnerable to failure and crashing as well.

Still, a CFC filled airship might have some merit

[DanS]

Our airlines aren't very financially healthy at this time. The gov't is probably trying to stall a couple more years until the industry is in better shape to compete.

I am skeptical about whether it will ever be in a good position to compete, but there you are. For example, Continental filed for bankruptcy in '83, '91, and maybe soon again.