Yet another aviation thread.

So how about Emirates launching a 40 minute flight from Dubai to Doha on an A380?

Comments on aviation blogs suggest such flights are very crowded. Emirates, furthermore, owns only wide bodies, so currently they use a 777 variant. If those are packed, an A380 makes sense.

But they'll be using a 3-class configuration. I want to know who pays a huge premium on a 40 minute flight.

Quote: Nareed

But they'll be using a 3-class configuration. I want to know who pays a huge premium on a 40 minute flight.

Emirates still have 8-10 Boeing 777-300 with 364 seats that are between 13-17 years old.
Emirates flies a 2-class configuration on an A380 with 615 seats total and only 58 in business class.

They do fly an A380 to Jeddah, Bahrain and Kuwait however, so it is not that much of a stretch for them to fly one to Doha

Quote: DRich

This is their fleet:...

You can't beat a Cessna Caravan. Passengers or freight or both... pilots love to fly them.

Quote: Pacomartin

They do fly an A380 to Jeddah, Bahrain and Kuwait however, so it is not that much of a stretch for them to fly one to Doha

I don't have an issue with a wide body on a short route, or even a shortest route, if the demand justifies it, though it ages the frame rather quickly. What I wonder is the kind of people who will pay for Emirates first or business class for such short hops.

Quote: Nareed

I don't have an issue with a wide body on a short route, or even a shortest route, if the demand justifies it, though it ages the frame rather quickly. What I wonder is the kind of people who will pay for Emirates first or business class for such short hops.

Presumably a lot of those seats are given out to frequent flyers who just want a taste of what it is like to sit in one of those pods. On the other hand some people will probably pay for any kind of preferential treatment from first on first off to being served champagne while the economy class probably gets no food or beverage on such a short trip.

----------------------------------

In the game of insight into head of state expenses it turns out that most people aren't quite as interested in the state visits as they are in the day to day expenses which are similar to the kind of things they do. They want to know what it cost for President Obama to fly to NYC to take his wife to a broadway play and date night. They want to know what it costs for Michelle Obama and her daughters to go on vacation one day ahead of the President


In Britain, they gave in to public curiosity and began publishing a yearly report about Royal expenses including jet charters. While the most expensive charters are always for state business (£95,000 for a jet to go to Eastern Europe for a six day state visit this year), people were fascinated with the day to day expenses (£30,000 for a jet to take The Queen and Prince Phillip to Scotland to visit their castle for a week).


The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Official FCO visit to Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
Charter 14-19 March 2016 RAF Brize Norton - Zagreb - Osijek - Zagreb - Belgrade - Podgorica - Pristina - RAF Brize Norton £94,409

The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh Charter 21-May-2015 NHT - Aberdeen £14,659 Residence to residence.
The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh Charter 26-May-2015 Aberdeen - NHT £16,593 Residence to residence.

Quote: Pacomartin

On the other hand some people will probably pay for any kind of preferential treatment from first on first off to being served champagne while the economy class probably gets no food or beverage on such a short trip.

I can understand paying extra to get off the plane first, when traveling on business on a crowded flight. Besides, it's deductible.

Quote:

In the game of insight into head of state expenses it turns out that most people aren't quite as interested in the state visits as they are in the day to day expenses which are similar to the kind of things they do. They want to know what it cost for President Obama to fly to NYC to take his wife to a broadway play and date night. They want to know what it costs for Michelle Obama and her daughters to go on vacation one day ahead of the President

Oh, those costs are outrageous.

But, I wonder, suppose a generic US President said "I'm driving myself and my spouse to the airport, taking a coach flight to NYC, I'll rent a car, and drive to a hotel, then to the theater and then to dinner. I'll be back tomorrow. Now, I can pay for one Secret Service agent. Who wants to come?" What are the odds he'd be able to take a breath without every advisor, Secret Service agent, and aide within a ten-mile radius not telling him that's not going to happen?

Quote:

[..]people were fascinated with the day to day expenses (£30,000 for a jet to take The Queen and Prince Phillip to Scotland to visit their castle for a week).

And the family can grow as large as it wants.

US Presidents tend to be well off, if not wealthy, by the time they assume office, but they're not rich then (they grow very rich after their term(s) in office). The Royals are very rich. They should pay at least all of their travel costs for personal reasons.

Quote: Nareed

US Presidents tend to be well off, if not wealthy, by the time they assume office, but they're not rich then (they grow very rich after their term(s) in office). The Royals are very rich. They should pay at least all of their travel costs for personal reasons.

The cost of transporting the US president is high partly because he has to be ready to go to war at a moment's notice at any time anywhere. Royals travelling on personal business have to be protected as obvious targets, but they are not vital to warfare or day to day operations of the government. By definition The Queen is always travelling on official business, but she is prohibited from leaving the country for personal reasons. The Princes can go on ski vacations or Las Vegas or a vacation in the Caribbean. Prince Charles has property in Romania.

But Republicans (i.e. people who want UK to become a Republic) in Britain do protest when Prince Charles charters a jet and flies to Scotland for a personal weekend. They tend not to attack the Queen very much, but they want the royal train given to her on her silver (25th anniversary) retired as a relic It is normally only used a dozen times per year.

But even the source of the royals great wealth largely goes back to 1066-1760 when the kingdom was largely considered personal property of the Monarch, and the functioning of the government was primarily at the will of the monarch (although the Prime Minister office was formed in 1714).

From 1265, a few percent of the adult male population were able to vote in parliamentary elections that occurred at irregular intervals to the Parliament of England. The Bill of Rights 1689 in England and Claim of Right Act 1689 in Scotland established the principles of regular parliaments and free elections.

In 1760, George III reached an agreement with the Government over the Crown Estate. The Crown Lands would be managed on behalf of the Government and the surplus revenue would go to the Treasury. In return, the King would receive a fixed annual payment, which was called the Civil List. With effect from 1 April 2012, the Civil List was incorporated into a new system of funding referred to as the Sovereign Grant. The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the Monarch. It cannot be sold by the Monarch, nor do any profits from it go to the Sovereign, but they do get 15% to manage the royal household (including travel expenses).

So far the royals have not been able to secure a private jet, but they have been leasing a private helicopter which flies almost daily for about 20 years. I think it must refuel to fly to Scotland, and it is considered too slow and noisy so a private jet is always chartered for those trips.

Quote: Pacomartin

The cost of transporting the US president is high partly because he has to be ready to go to war at a moment's notice at any time anywhere.

That and the security detail and plans for every contingency. The president doesn't fly with just a big plane, but with a flotilla.

Quote:

Royals travelling on personal business have to be protected as obvious targets,

Fair enough. But they can easily afford their own security. It shouldn't be the taxpayer's concern.

Quote:

but they are not vital to warfare or day to day operations of the government.

The only things they're vital for are the scandal sheets and style magazines.

Quote:

From 1265, a few percent of the adult male population were able to vote in parliamentary elections that occurred at irregular intervals to the Parliament of England.

One reason to "call a parliament" was in order to raise taxes. The English revolution in the 1600s against the Stuarts involved such things as the king trying to sidestep that obligation.

Quote:

So far the royals have not been able to secure a private jet, but they have been leasing a private helicopter which flies almost daily for about 20 years. I think it must refuel to fly to Scotland, and it is considered too slow and noisy so a private jet is always chartered for those trips.

I say let them charter an A380 or a Falcon IX to go to the corner store if they want to, so long as they pay for it.

Quote: Nareed

One reason to "call a parliament" was in order to raise taxes. The English revolution in the 1600s against the Stuarts involved such things as the king trying to sidestep that obligation.

One might say it was the primary reason to "call parliament".
In 1215, the tenants-in-chief secured Magna Carta from King John, which established that the king may not levy or collect any taxes (except the feudal taxes to which they were hitherto accustomed), save with the consent of his royal council, which gradually developed into a parliament.

Charles I dissolved parliament and ruled without them for eleven years. It was only after the financial disaster of the Scottish Bishops' Wars (1639–1640) that he was forced to recall Parliament so that they could authorize new taxes.

Rumours reached Charles that Parliament intended to impeach his Catholic wife for supposedly conspiring with the Irish rebels, the king decided to take drastic action. Charles entered the House of Commons with an armed guard on 4 January 1642. His armed entry into Parliament started him down a slope that ended with his execution in 1649. The day King Charles I entered the House of Commons is commemorated by he ceremonies surrounding the State Opening of Parliament and the Throne speech. Black Rod summons the Commons to attend the speech and leads them to the Lords. As part of the ritual, as Black Rod approaches the doors to the chamber of the House of Commons to make his summons, they are slammed in his face. This is to symbolize the Commons' independence of the Sovereign. Black Rod then strikes the door three times with his staff, and is then admitted and issues the summons of the monarch to attend.

Quote: Nareed

I say let them charter an A380 or a Falcon IX to go to the corner store if they want to, so long as they pay for it.

Prior to 2012 the royals were reimbursed by a series of allowances. Charles wanted that changed to a percentage of the profits of the Crown estate.

The Crown Estate has delivered a record £304.1m to the Treasury in June 2016 after the value of its portfolio rose 9.7% to £12bn. The payout by the estate, which owns London's Regent Street and the entire UK seabed, was up from £285m. It comes ahead of a review of the Sovereign Grant - taxpayers' money given to the Queen by the Treasury. This year the Queen received a grant of nearly £43m, currently calculated as 15% of the Crown Estate's profits. The Sovereign Grant, which is paid two years in arrears, is reviewed every five years. In the coming months, the government and a senior royal official will carry out a review of the grant, which was set at 15% in 2012. If the formula is unchanged, the grant will rise to more than £45m next year, up from £31m in 2012.

Prince Charles will have more say about how to spend the money under the new system. Although repair of the decaying palaces is the priority, he would like to purchase a jet that he will be free to use.

The Royal Household Travel was unusually low last year with the Prince of Wales not chartering jets for over £95,000. Last year he spent £446,159 on a charter to visit Mexico and £239,710 to visit the USA.

£2,212,012 year ending March 31 2016
£3,511,337 year ending March 31 2015
£2,733,239 year ending March 31 2014
£3,931,221 year ending March 31 2008

The most ridiculous thing was Prince Charles chartering the Super Yacht Leander to go on an official visit to British Caribbean countries. Ostensibly it was better for the environment than leasing jets.

Quote: Pacomartin

One might say it was the primary reason to "call parliament".

Absolutely. Which just makes it the more remarkable a body that existed primarily to raise taxes found a following. This tells you how bad Charles Stuart could get.

I listened to Mike Duncan's history of the English revolution, the opening salvo of the Revolutions podcast, but that was over 2 years ago (I still had my old cheapo Sony MP3 player when it began); so I've forgotten much

Quote:

The Crown Estate has delivered a record £304.1m to the Treasury in June 2016 after the value of its portfolio rose 9.7% to £12bn.

I'll tell you what I fin amazing: Harvard University is richer than the bloody royal family!

That's be a good point to make when people contemplate giving money to Harvard.

The thing about subsidizing the travel, and other expenses, of the royal family, is that it reeks of taking from the middle class to give to the rich. Now, as the Queen is head of state and such, then, ok, the state, and ultimately the people, are responsible for her well-being, travel, etc. But the rest of the family isn't head of state. At best they're back ups for the Queen. So unless they're on state's business, and I do realize they engage in diplomacy, then let them foot their own bills.