At the beginning of the month, both the SCMP and The Standard ran stories about Oasis Hong Kong Airlines not having received government approval to operate (see earlier post).  The Standard was particularly alarmist, quoting a government spokesman as saying that it might take years.   However, the company appeared to be optimistic, and it seems they were correct, because last Friday the Civil Aviation Department issued the company with their Air Operator’s Certificate.  You can read the company’s press release here, and their first flight is due to depart tomorrow afternoon.

The SCMP’s story was negative in a different way, reporting that travel agents were advising people to use other airlines.  This prompted a curious reply from one of the agents, saying that Oasis were an important business partner and their company had not advised people against booking with them.  This was published as a letter rather than a correction, so I think they were saying that the individual employee who had made the comment was not reflecting company policy.  As I said before, travel agents will surely prefer to sell more expensive tickets on the established airlines, but I suppose they have no wish to upset Oasis.  Equally, I don’t think Oasis are relying too much on travel agents to sell their tickets.

Later this week, Air New Zealand start flying to London, and they have some special offers – their Premium Economy at HK$8,700 (plus taxes) seems like a good deal as they have more legroom than Virgin & BA, and they also have more legroom in economy than anyone else flying this route.  Competition has to be a good thing!!   

UPDATE: The BBC News website first reported that the first flight took off as scheduled – and then changed their mind and informed us that it had been delayed because of problems getting permission to fly over Russia.  I think they hope to fly on Thursday instead.  Not a very auspicious way to start business.

Posted in ,

3 responses to “Weeks rather than years”

  1. dave avatar

    That whole thing is a little baffling. Surely they have to file a flight plan and show that they have clearance for over-flights before they can even schedule their flights?
    The thought that an airline can actually be allowed to get in the pattern and use up valuable ATC resources while someone at HQ is frantically thumbing through a Russian-English dictionary trying to sort out permission is very worrying.
    Suppose they had taken off. What would be the consequence of not having secured over-flight clearance once they got to Siberia. MiGs? Or just being turned back to land in Dalian?

    Like

  2. Chris avatar

    It’s all very strange. They say that do now have the permission they thought they had before (here’s the Press Release) but it’s not clear exactly what went wrong yesterday.
    You’d think that they would have taken extra care to make sure everything was OK for the first flight.
    On the other hand, assuming the flight does take off today then it may not be such a bad thing – they will have got a lot of extra publicity because of what happened!!

    Like

  3. Letters from China avatar

    Oasis Airlines Becoming Household Name

    A few weeks ago South China Morning Post reported that Hong Kong travel agents were advising people to use other airlines. But that is nothing compared with the failure to take off on its maiden flight to London which became

    Like

Leave a reply to dave Cancel reply