How will Ukraine Situation affect travel

[dajop]

I am extrapolating that you think paying a lot more to go a long way, only to finish in a more dangerous environment has a different risk profile to travelling on a cheaper flight, a short distance and close to home base and ending up in a more dangerous environment.

Not so much thinking about the risk of a "dangerous environment" but the risk of disruption, as I alluded to with my question.

 

[Must...Fly!]

Not so much thinking about the risk of a "dangerous environment" but the risk of disruption, as I alluded to with my question.

Worse that happens is you end up going home via the UK though. Certainly inconvenient but probably not a show stopper if it came to that.

 

[jrfsp]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1497113275498057728

As an FYI IAG includes BA, IB and EI

 

[Flashback]

While not an impact on future travel, it does make me glad I went to Latvia and Lithuania last year. I wanted to do another trip back to Lithuania and then get the train into Belarus but Mrs FB said no (not that I usually listen.......). Shame, seems like that might be some time away now.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1497113275498057728

As an FYI IAG includes BA, IB and EI

And QR. Well, they own about 25% of it and are moving to using Avios. I WONDER IF SHE REALISES SHE IS SHOUTING?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Has there been any indication of a threat to civilian air traffic in Russian airspace outside the areas indicated as no fly FIRs by the Russian authorities?

Qantas (and all other decent airlines) pay a large sum to global consultancies who advise (independently of government) on the safety of particular countries and air routes. If the security situation in Russia deteriorates, Qantas will make the changes required. Until then, no one is putting profit before people.

Oh also, it's been a while since Qantas made a profit....

There was no indication of threat to the flightpath of MH17. Yet there clearly was.

It doesn't matter how much an airline pays an independent advisor. If that advisor is wrong, the airline is still liable to its passengers.

It's not just the safety of the aircraft in the air, it's also about a diversion. Australia is part of the group leading sanctions. What happens with a planeload of stranded Aussies somewhere in the middle of Russia?

 

[Daver6]

Clear solution for QF is to just route all LHR flights via PER

 

[FlyingFiona]

Russia dummy spits that Britain is being "unfriendly" to them by banning Areoflot from landing in the UK and so retaliates by banning UK from their airspace

Russia bans British airlines from its airspace

Russia says the move is a response to the UK's 'unfriendly' decision to ban Aeroflot from the UK.

www.bbc.com

 

[Must...Fly!]

What happens with a planeload of stranded Aussies somewhere in the middle of Russia

Dunno, what's happening to all the American journalists in Russia? Or the diplomats?

Oh yeah, they're not being carried away to a gulag. The emotion in the argument is understandable but ultimately leads to clouded judgement.

There was no indication of threat to the flightpath of MH17. Yet there clearly was.

Actually there was (limited) indication of a threat.

There is not even a tiny hint of a threat over flying Russia (outside the restricted areas) is unsafe, much less the routes normally taken by QF...

 

[serfty]

Clear solution for QF is to just route all LHR flights via PER

Is 2x 10 hour better ... via Mumbai.

Or perhaps Columbo ...

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Dunno, what's happening to all the American journalists in Russia? Or the diplomats?

Oh yeah, they're not being carried away to a gulag. The emotion in the argument is understandable but ultimately leads to clouded judgement.


Actually there was (limited) indication of a threat.

There is not even a tiny hint of a threat over flying Russia (outside the restricted areas) is unsafe, much less the routes normally taken by QF...

The press and diplomats aren’t civilians.

MH would categorically disagree there was any indication of threat to the MH17 flight path.

I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to fly over Russia at the moment, for any one of a number of reasons.

 

[OATEK]

Not so much thinking about the risk of a "dangerous environment" but the risk of disruption, as I alluded to with my question.

Actually, that was what I was leading to. The variables were the cost and distance from home, the environment (however dangerous) was the same.

There was no indication of threat to the flightpath of MH17. Yet there clearly was.

It doesn't matter how much an airline pays an independent advisor. If that advisor is wrong, the airline is still liable to its passengers.

It's not just the safety of the aircraft in the air, it's also about a diversion. Australia is part of the group leading sanctions. What happens with a planeload of stranded Aussies somewhere in the middle of Russia?

I think we may have disagreed on this last time, over whether MH17 should be flying directly over an area of conflict only 4 months after losing MH370. The airlines we are talking about flying over Russia are not going over and area of conflict.

I can see how Russia might refuse permission for QF to overfly the country, but QF is not actually overflying the conflict area.

 

[N860CR]

There’s no active conflict in Russia so I cannot see any feasible threat to civilian aircraft flying at 40,000ft. When MH17 was shot down, there was active conflict in Ukraine however it wasn’t perceived as a serious risk to aircraft flying that high.

If we’re taking about Russia potentially intercepting a foreign airliner and forcing it to land as some kind of a hostage situation… well at this stage I’d say that’s a bit of a stretch. I think they’ve got enough to worry about in Ukraine without involving a plane load of mouthy Australians.

 

[justinbrett]

The press and diplomats aren’t civilians.

MH would categorically disagree there was any indication of threat to the MH17 flight path.

I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to fly over Russia at the moment, for any one of a number of reasons.

Please do not draw parallels between MH17 and this crisis. It’s a completely different situation.

I agreed with your original post, nobody can guarantee anything is threat free.

But as it stands, Australia is not at war with Russia. Smart traveller has not issued a “do not travel” warning for Russia. This can all change in days, or even hours.

Airlines and countries will do their own risk assessments. The DRW/LHR route goes nowhere near the conflict.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

There’s no active conflict in Russia so I cannot see any feasible threat to civilian aircraft flying at 40,000ft. When MH17 was shot down, there was active conflict in Ukraine however it wasn’t perceived as a serious risk to aircraft flying that high.

If we’re taking about Russia potentially intercepting a foreign airliner and forcing it to land as some kind of a hostage situation… well at this stage I’d say that’s a bit of a stretch. I think they’ve got enough to worry about in Ukraine without involving a plane load of mouthy Australians.

Could be a standard diversion in the event of a problem with the aircraft, or a medical emergency. A stranded plane from a country that is imposing sanctions and is critical of the regime is not exactly asking to be helped out.

 

[Cheatah]

There’s no active conflict in Russia so I cannot see any feasible threat to civilian aircraft flying at 40,000ft. When MH17 was shot down, there was active conflict in Ukraine however it wasn’t perceived as a serious risk to aircraft flying that high.

If we’re taking about Russia potentially intercepting a foreign airliner and forcing it to land as some kind of a hostage situation… well at this stage I’d say that’s a bit of a stretch. I think they’ve got enough to worry about in Ukraine without involving a plane load of mouthy Australians.

If Putin wants to further embarrass/harass the west all he needs to do is force a western aircraft to land due to "paperwork" issues and keep them for a day or so.

An easy way to embarrass the west without itself escalating things too much would be to pick on a western country which really has no military or economic clout with Russia, a country which could well be mouthy but not much more!

And I doubt many Australian's would be that mouthy in the middle of Siberia surrounded by noone except a handful of Russian troops. The troops would appreciate the entertainment though.

 

[jrfsp]

Seems europe couldnt agree to act together

Poland is joining the UK in closing to all russian aircraft likely some others will follow

LOT is also re routing to avoid russian airspace

 

[OATEK]

If Putin wants to further embarrass/harass the west all he needs to do is force a western aircraft to land due to "paperwork" issues and keep them for a day or so.

An easy way to embarrass the west without itself escalating things too much would be to pick on a western country which really has no military or economic clout with Russia, a country which could well be mouthy but not much more!

And I doubt many Australian's would be that mouthy in the middle of Siberia surrounded by noone except a handful of Russian troops. The troops would appreciate the entertainment though.

I think I read that book, and Scott Harvath went in under cover to rescue them.

For years we have been flying near or over countries hostile to Australia in the middle east. Now it involves Russia and may soon extend to China. Risks are increasing and we have to factor them in, which at this stage means avoiding Ukraine (again).

 

[AisleSeat]

Delta has suspended codeshare with Aeroflot

Delta suspends codeshare with Aeroflot

Delta has withdrawn our codeshare services operated in conjunction with Russian national airline, Aeroflot, effective immediately.

news.delta.com

 

[antycbr]

Czech Republic and Bulgaria also closing airspace to Russia. Just need the pieces to join up even if not a complete ban and it starts to get difficult for Russian airlines.

 

[HappyFlyerFamily]

Who has the call on airspace rights over Gulf of Finland? Helsinki and Tallinn are pretty close.