Talk:Star Alliance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Aviation Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] SAA & SWISS

Are South African Airlines and Swiss now members of the Star Alliance? The article is inconsistent. For example: "August 26, 2005 - Swiss International Airlines and South African Airways become full members. " I can find no reference to this anywhere and the rest of the article suggests they are to join in 2006. --Adam 20:39, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] possible/potential future Members

Dbinder, you asked if someone could verify those possible future regional members... well, if someone really could they wouldn't be possible future members but future members....

anyway:

as SAS ownes the majority stake in arBaltic and a 49% stake in Estonian Air with whome they have a close coopeartion, so it's very likely that these two airlines will go the way that Blue1 already went and join the alliance as Regional Members.

Air One is very close with Lufthansa and fully integrated in Lufthansa's Miles&More FFP. In fact they are the only fully integrated Airline that is not a Star Alliance member yet. But that seems to be a matter of time.

likely, SIA leaving to join SkyTeam because their routes overlap too much, is there any grounding for such claims?

At the very moment Austrian Airlines ownes a 49% Stake in Slovak Airlines. As the Slovak government is planning to sell off the remaining stake in that airline it is highly likely that Austrian will accquire these stakes. A Star Alliance membership is absolutely possible.

Silk Air is a fully owned subsidiary of Singapore Airlines. I won't comment on that, as I have never heard of them being a candidate for Alliance membership, but doesn't seem unlikely.

Aegean Airlines and Lufthansa started cooperation last year and according to some statements in the German press both airlines seem to be very interessted in Aegean joining the Alliance.

Luxair has strong ties to Lufthansa and Austrian... might not be joining in the nearest future, but would definitely be welcome in the Alliance


Since you removed Qatar Airways from the list of possible members... It's no secret that Star is really interessterd in Qatar Airways. On the other hand Qatar Airways strengthened their cooperation with Lufthansa, ANA and United last year... they are definitely leaning towards Star Alliance.

They are at least as likely to join Star as TAM or SN Brussles etc. to join OneWorld / Malaysia Airlines to join Skyteam


Regards Ota1ffm

When I said verify, I meant that is there any indication that these carriers are interested? Technically, any airline that isn't already in an alliance is a "possible" future member. Dbinder 22:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I have completely removed this section. I think any of them will be welcome back if they have citations, otherwise directly contravene Wikipedia Policy — Wikipedia is not a crystal ball: "Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are original research and therefore inappropriate." --kjd 23:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I moved Turkish back to potential. They have not formally been invited to join, so right now they are simply trying to do so. This was the only one with citation, so I haven't restored any other airlines in the potential section. Dbinder (talk) 03:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


I removed the section on potential members entirely. As long as there is no official statement from Star Alliance, idle speculation about potential members (mostly without any source) does not fit into an encyclopedia. None of the airlines that were in the list (Air India, Jet Airways, TAM and Egyptair) have been mentioned in any Star Alliance press release. SmilingBoy 09:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Just would like to add that Aerolineas Argentinas is basically owned by Iberia which belongs to OneWorld... I highly doubt that it can enter Star Alliance. I have no source for this other than knowing it. Mariano —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.169.117.71 (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] statistics

Would somebody have any idea how many miles Star Alliance flies on a daily basis ?( give or take a few hundred miles or so). Needle in a hey stack!!! Rob

I've updated some of the statistics as per here [1] but don't know where the daily flights number comes from so haven't changed that although I guess it's changed (indeed, I'm sure it will change on a daily basis because flights don't operate every day, so I guess it's an average over a week or so) Iancaddy 15:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Future Members

Based on ATW July 2007 issue, they are stating that Air China is a member of Star Alliance, with Shanghai and Turkish still future memebers. Can this be clarified.

Does anyone have any information as to when the potential/future members would be joining Star Alliance?

Bmaganti 16:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Shanghai Airlines and Air China will most likely join next year. The potential future members are airlines that have expressed an interest in joining but have not formally applied or been invited yet. Dbinder 16:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the cross-ownership

Dear All,

Where can I get the alliances' cross-ownership information?

Best Regards, Woody108

[edit] Air Canada Jazz

Air Canada Jazz should be added as a full regional member. You can see on their planes, it says they are a Star Alliance member. Any comments/suggestions? Dk16 18:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

The are not Star Alliance Regional Members, they are members by virtue of Air Canada. By the same token, airlines like "Austrian Arrows", "Lufthansa CityLine", "bmibaby", "United Shuttle" and other regional airlines aren't listed either. --kjd 21:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
A "regional member" is a small regional airline that is a member, i.e. Adria, Croatia, and Blue1. Other carriers operating as Express, Connection, etc. are not members in their own right, but do offer member benefits. A Chautauqua Airlines flight operating as US Airways Express is a Star Alliance flight, but Chautauqua itself is not a member, for a Chautauqua flight as Delta Connection would be included as SkyTeam. Dbinder (talk) 22:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The Star Alliance website is a "somewhat reliable" source when it comes to judging about who is and who isnt a full/regional member--FMB 13:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliated Airlines

What do people consider an Affiliated Airline? US Airways has America West, United/Ted, but should we include all regional airlines? Ben 05:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if SIA's 100% owned subsidiary, SilkAir is also included as an affiliated airline. There are also other Star Alliance airlines subsidiaries, are they counted as well? Affiliated airline is an airline that is a subsidiary (I believe counted only when 100% owned) of the parent carrier. Terence 16:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Star carriers affilated airlines are not member in the alliance, eg SAS ownes 100% in Blue1 but Blue1 is a regional member by its own. BMIbaby (BMI, low cost carrier) is not within the alliance. Many regional airlines operate their flights on wet-lease agreement for the main carrier eg. Lufthansa Regional, but they are still not members. Martin
Please look what I am doing so far on the affiliated members section. I started to incorporate this under each full member. Oneworld is listed like this and I think it clarifies which airline is affiliated with what airline. Most people would not necessarily know that America West Airlines is affiliated under US Airways brand. But of course some one could figure out Air Canada Jazz is under Air Canada. -Ben 12:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I think we need to observe at least two principles:
  • What is useful to the reader
  • That the official *A website is authoritative as to member status
Personally I deprecate how fussy the list of members has become. Knowing the ownership of airlines is not interesting for most readers of this article. By all means create a separate article on *A Affiliate airlines and link to it from this article, but what matters is such things as: does one get extra baggage allowance, flyer miles, lounge use because of this affiliation.
On this test, who cares (in this article) that Silkair is a wholly owned subsidiary of *A carrier SQ? You can't accrue or redeem mileage on other *A carrier FT programs and neither can you use their lounges or get any other *A (as opposed to SQ) privileges!
...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 17:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Only subsidiaries and regional carriers that actually provide alliance benefits should be listed. Lufthansa CityLine, America West, Air Canada Jazz would all fall under this category. However, bmibaby, Silkair, and the like should not be included since they have nothing to do with the alliance. DB (talk) 22:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposals for change:

Since four weeks have now elapsed without negative comment since I made the proposals below, they are now consensus for this article. ...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 13:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] change layout

I propose:

  1. The current (newly re-named) sub-section Star_Alliance#Full_members_and_affiliates revert to the old sub-section name of Star_Alliance#Full_members
  2. Creation of a new sub-section Star_Alliance#Affiliates
  3. Position the new sub-section Star_Alliance#Affiliates below the currently existing sub-section Star_Alliance#Regional_members but above the currently existing sub-section Star_Alliance#Future_members
  4. Removal of All affiliates from the re-named sub-section Star_Alliance#Full_members
  5. Populating the new sub-section Star_Alliance#Affiliates with only those affiliates that provide real (and referenced) specified Star Alliance benefits to all members of Star Alliance frequent traveller (FT) programs.

[edit] limited list of affiliates

Furthermore, I also propose that the current agreed list of Star_Alliance#Affiliates be limited to only
Lufthansa CityLine, America West, Air Canada Jazz, Air Nelson, Eagle Airways, Mount Cook Airline, Air Nippon (excluding Taipei flights), Austrian arrows, bmi regional; Lufthansa Regional operated by Air Dolomiti, Augsburg Airways, Contact Air; SAS Braathens. Any suggestions for inclusion or deletion (with references and arguments) be listed in the talk page section below until and unless consensus is reached.

[edit] proposed additions/deletions from limited list of affiliates

  • Add US Airways Express...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 08:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Add Swiss European Air Lines - FMB 12:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete SAS Braathens ...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 07:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits?

I understand you do not like putting each affiliated carrier under its parent, but that is the easiest and most convenient to someone viewing the article. Also all the other airline alliances are laid out like this. SkyTeam and Oneworld I think this would be the best way. I agree that we should not include any airlines that just happen to be owned by the parent company but do not provide *A benefits. Bmibaby-NO, America West-YES, Silkair-NO, Ted-YES, US Airways Express and Shuttle-YES and many more. -Ben 12:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Logo

I really feel that this article just isnt the same without the star alliance logo on the top of the page. Perhaps, another picture of the logo should be put in it's place. Greenboxed 22:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] maps

Some maps would make the article a lot more comprehensive ... hubs, member states etc.

I really like that idea! Greenboxed 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] SilkAir

Someone added SilkAir to the affiliates list. I am unsure that it is acutally an affiliate member of the star alliance. Should it stay? Greenboxed 19:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It needs to go. No Star benefits nor does it bear the Star logo; the other affiliates do. FMB 18:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok thanks, thats what I was thinking. Greenboxed 01:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
SilkAir passengers holding a Star Alliance Gold membership are not entitled to enter the lounge at Changi Airport. They do not have any Star Alliance privileges and there's no mention of Star Alliance anywhere on their website or their inflight magazines. I just verified my facts and it should be removed. Actually, I don't know why is there an affiliate members section. Star Alliance website has never mentioned anything about affiliate members. Maybe on the subsidiary airline website, they just put a Star Alliance logo, so that counts right? Terence 12:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
See the above discussion, Affiliated Airlines. Greenboxed 18:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Affiliates (2)

The new design for the affiliate list tells absolutely nothing about the airlines. It's not even possible to book flights on those carriers in themselves. I think the list should be reverted to the old format, with affiliates/subsidiaries listed under their respective parent, as is currently done in the oneworld article. DB (talk) 01:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

  1. Each of the current affiliates listed are internally linked to their own explanatory WP article for further information
  2. Star Alliance generally has better integration than Oneworld. That is why I argued not to include an affiliate list at all. (for example, although Air Nelson is a separate company it deliberately subsumes it's identity under that of the Star Alliance member Air New Zealand) so the choice is really between listing them briefly here or deleting the list completely....Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 23:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • The new layout with so-called affiliates right underneath their parent is terribly done. I also think that the Oneworld article and the way it's done there is awful. The reader wants to find out about which airlines are members in their own right at one glance. The current list is crowded and full of errors (eg. Germanwings, Condor, Freedom Air - who came up with that?) and I must admit I'm currently lost as to what has been discussed on here, as the affiliates section was alright as such. FMB 18:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
If you look above at the talk section headed Affiliate Airlines you will get an idea of the way folk thought (at least, those who bothered to comment. I shall restore the recent radical changes until a new consensus is reached...Gaimhreadhan(kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 07:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article class upgrade

I have recently upgraded the class of the article as it has recently improved in quality. There is more information and it is shown clearly so it reaches the next article borderline.

Comments are welcome below: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thebestkiano (talk • contribs) 16:57:35, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] AiRUnion

Why is an alliance of airlines joining another alliance? AiRUnion is an alliance. Where's the link that suggests that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Einsteinboricua (talk • contribs) 21:44:35, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Staralliancemembers08.JPG

Image:Staralliancemembers08.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 11:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heathrow relocation

According to BAA's schedule published 6 July 2007 (was available on BAA website), Star Alliance airlines will be relocating to Terminal 1 on the following dates:

  • Air Canada - remain Terminal 3
  • Air China - remain Terminal 3
  • Air New Zealand - 5 May 2008 shift from Terminal 3 to Terminal 1
  • Austrian Airlines - 25 October 2008 shift from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1
  • Croatia Airlines - 25 October 2008 shift from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1
  • Lufthansa - 25 October 2008 shift from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1
  • SAS - remain Terminal 3
  • Singapore Airlines - remain Terminal 3
  • Swiss - 25 October 2008 shift from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1
  • TAP Portugal - 25 October 2008 shift from Terminal 2 to Terminal 1
  • Thai - remain Terminal 3
  • United - 5 May 2008 shift from Terminal 3 to Terminal 1

Of course this does not mean that those remaining will be there permanently, but plans are for Air Canada, Air China, SAS, Singapore and Thai to not move in 2008.

BMI, LOT, Asiana and South African Airways are already at Terminal 1 Libertyscott (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Network requirements

Does the Star alliance have any influence on the network of its members? At least the SAS and the Air New Zealand do not overlap well. SAS flies to Bangkok and Seattle but not to Singapore and San Fransisco. Air New Zealand flies to Singapore and San Fransisco but not Bangkok and Seattle. Singapore and San Fransisco are hubs of Singapore airlines and United Airlines where the SAS don't fly. And so on. Do the alliance members care much about the transfer possibilities? -- 217.209.46.99 (talk) 02:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it "Network Co-ordination" is in fact the whole point for the existence of airline alliances. So the short answer is Yes. Roger (talk) 23:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Not "first airline alliance", edited out

I edited out the statement that it's the oldest airline alliance. There exists no distinction between the established Star Alliance and those mentioned in [2]. This is a point for modification worth taking note of, and a good one to establish in order to reference the oldest-largest-awardestest statements in the beginning of the article. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 11:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] This user removed my edits for Potential members: Greenboxed

User:Greenboxed removed my edits for Continental Airlines high likelihood of joining Star Alliance. I disagree that it should be removed. The removed edit was:

He also removed the following edits (from someone other than me):

  • Flag of Argentina Aerolineas Argentinas, is a candidate especially since the alliance lacks a South American partner.[5]
  • Flag of Belgium Brussels Airlines (Brussels Airlines) – Recent news communicated that Brussles Airlines is in talks with major alliances to negotiate about a potential membership. Also announced in the news was that Lufthansa is look into buying the airline this year, which would imply that it will join the Star Alliance.

I think he erred in removing this. Can other editors please weigh in on this matter? Thank you!--Inetpup (talk) 04:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

From WP:NOT: "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." Indeed the very references that are used speak of ongoing 'talks' and say airlines 'could' join SA. It doesn't sound very definite. This puts in question, however, the entire section of 'Potential Members' as none of them is definitely going to join, and the section seems to serve only as a crystal ball. NcSchu(Talk) 16:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the whole section should be removed, as it has been in the past. Wikipedia is not a forum for speculation or a place for rumors. I removed three airlines from the list that have NO definate evidence that they would ever join star. ⒼⓇⒺⒺⓃⒷⓄⓍⒺⒹ (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shandong Airlines (SC) and Star Alliance

Right now Shandong Airlines is not part of *A despite being owned completely by *A partner Air China. Although they use the same frequent flier program (Companion Pass) none of the Star Alliance benefits apply. None of the Shandong flights (SC) appear in the *A timetable or in any *A fare product tool on the Star Alliance website.

Right now Air One (AP) has the same frequent flier program as Lufthansa (Miles and More) however they are not considered a part of *A. Only a few *A have bilateral code-share agreements with Star partners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.217.117 (talk) 05:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Also from an e-mail from *A:

Thank you for writing to us at the Star Alliance Help Desk.

Shandong Airlines is not a Star Alliance member.

However, it is worth noting that the Star Alliance members include Air Canada, Air China, Air New Zealand, ANA, Asiana Airlines, Austrian, bmi, LOT Polish Airlines, Lufthansa, Scandinavian Airlines, Shanghai Airlines, Singapore Airlines, South African Airways, Spanair, SWISS, TAP Portugal, THAI, Turkish Airlines, United, and US Airways.

We hope this information is of help. Thanks again for contacting us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.217.117 (talk) 11:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)