Talk:World's largest airlines/Archive 1

These figures are way, way off. --Mets 05:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

What are these numbers? Passenger miles? Seat miles? Flight seats?

I seriously doubt Aeroflot is larger than Lufthansa, British Airways or the new Air France-KLM except perhaps in unnecessary personnel and ancient planes. 141.53.194.249 13:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the above - the figures also appear to have no date references - how current are the figures? You can't tell how up to date this is. Ardfern 19:55, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

---

IBERIA , www.iberia.com , in the press release of January 12, 2006 , reported all it's passengers statistics for 2005 . 2005 schedule passengers 27.675.000 (domestic 15.415.000 , international 12.260.000). 2005 ASK 63.628.000 2005 RPK 49.060.000 2005 load factor was 77.1 % . 2005 net profit of 385 millions euros . 10th consecutive year of net profits .

But Iberia flies with an afiliate company called Air Nostrum . Use the same livery , same code . You cannot diferenciate Iberia from Air Nostrum , so i think Iberia total passenger numbers MUST count Air Nostrum as well .

27.675.000 + 4,689,263 = 32,364,263 Passengers in 2005 .

---

Revenue rank?

Anybody care to put up some revenue rankings?--Jerryseinfeld 18:16, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

For the global rankings? Anyway....considering this list may keep growing, how about we branch it out to seperate lists as has been done for the corresponding airports pages?--Huaiwei 09:59, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Good idea, anyways these #s are waaaay off.

air canada has 336 aircraft not 329

in the list of no. of airplanes per airline, it says air canada has 329, but actually air canada has 336 aircraft.(check the air canada article for more clarification) Someone change it

No section title

These figures are way, way off. --Mets 05:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

International

Re [1] - User:Huaiwei prefers " flights within the People's Republic of China ", while I prefer " flights to mainland China ". While both are technically correct, the former is illogical in the sense that it's in effect even defining flights within Hong Kong (or within Macao) as international, which is ridiculous. — Instantnood 19:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hong Kong has one airport that serves airlines. Macau has one airport that serves airlines. Therefore, there are no flights WITHIN Hong Kong or Macau that are not to other international destinations. You have previously argued that things like helicopters or private aviation are exceptions. But, as this is a list of large airlines, it has nothing to do with helicopters and private aviation. Even in other cases, those exceptions to the general may be more accurate, but it is less useful to the reader of a general encyclopedia to worry about such minor exceptions. SchmuckyTheCat 19:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

There are airlines offering scheduled helicopter services, but that's not quite relevant to the discussion here, since only Cathay Pacific, Dragonair and Air Macau are on the list. Defining international by " all flights within the People's Republic of China " is illogical in the sense that it's defining flights within Hong Kong (or within Macao) as international. The key issue that has to be addressed in the footnote is that flights between Hong Kong and mainland China, or Macao and mainland China, are classified as international, despite within the same sovereign state. — Instantnood 20:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

And so flights between HK and Macau are domestic? Allow me to just remind, that the footnote was actually not meant to describe all possible scenarios, but all existing airline flights, considering they are footnotes of airline passenger figures currently available. To say there are XXX passengers from point A and B, and to have a footnote to XXX saying some of these passengers were treated as International despite flying within the same country makes perfect sense. We dont have to consider discussing the possibility of rockets zooming off from HK into outer space and slamming back into it later now or in the distant future, for that is obviously beyond its scope.--Huaiwei 03:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The footnote is intended for tell why flights within the same sovereign state could be international. Therefore it should tell what exactly is considered international. Flights between Hong Kong or Macao and mainland China, and flights between Hong Kong and Macao, are considered international. Flights within mainland China (or within Hong Kong, or within Macao) are not. In other words, flights within the PRC may or may not be international. — Instantnood 15:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I was the one who introduced the footnotes, and my intention is to provide footnotes for the statistics in question, and not a lengthy explaination on cross-border political situations. For the record, you chose to wikiwar with me even when the sentence reads Flights between the special administrative regions of Hong Kong, Macau and the rest of the People's Republic of China are classified as "International", which would have easily covered whatever you attempted to explain above, but of course you must amend it since a certain favourite keyphrase of yours is missing, I recon?--Huaiwei 17:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

" I was the one who introduced the footnotes, and my intention is to .. " - Nobody owns the footnotes. — Instantnood 18:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Nobody takes subsequent ownership of foodnotes too.--Huaiwei 18:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No section title

From the Wikipedia entry about Delta Airlines:

It is the 2nd largest airline in the United States (Behind American Airlines)

From the Wikipedia entry about American Airlines:

American Airlines is the largest airline in the world in terms of total passengers transported and fleet size,...

--->Something wrong about that figure on this page, isn´t it ?! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.122.78.63 (talk • contribs) .