Talk:Legacy carrier

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airline project.

Merger of DL and NWA

... probably time to shift "big six" to "big 5" ??? NWA is about to become a fallen flag. ++Lar: t/c 05:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USA-centric?

Although they are not generally refereed to as such, "Legacy carriers" do exist outside of the United States of America. There are many in other countries and I feel their airline should be mentioned. A few examples that come to mind: British Airways, KLM, Air France, Lufthansa, Qantas, Mexicana de Aviación, Air India. I could go on. I also feel more needs to be done to differentiate between these full service airlines and low cost carriers. Please could we do something to make this page more inclusive of other cultures, perhaps we could start by renaming the page "Full Service Airlines"151.230.169.226 (talk) 14:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

However "legacy carrier" refers to a specific US law, and therefore the term has no meaning outside the USA.Royalcourtier (talk) 02:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard the term "legacy carrier" used often to describe other airlines globally, including all the examples above. The term does have meaning outside the USA. Very often people using this term are referring to more traditional airlines that are not low-cost. Regardless of whether it is used incorrectly or colloquially, it should be mentioned in the article to give a worldwide view, if suitable sources can be found. Sr88, talk. 14:53, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2020 (UTC)I agree the article is a little to US centric. I have added a section to address this which I will continue to work on and expand[reply]

Accuracy of "61%" fact

I am doubting the recent edit that cites a USA Today article which states "A government study recently found 61% of all advertised flights for American, Delta, United and US Airways (now merging with American) were operated by regionals in 2011, up from 40% in 2000."See Article I have a feeling that number includes other codeshare flights, operated by neither the mainline carrier, nor a regional affiliate. But because the article doesn't cite the "government study" that they get their info from. Does anyone have any other sources on this subject? HuffTheWeevil / talk / contribs 16:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Low cost not opposite of legacy

Legacy merely means dates from before 1978. Low-cost airlines can be new or old. The words are not opposites or antonyms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royalcourtier (talk • contribs) 02:21, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I don't understand why legacy has anything to do with low cost. I suspect someone is trying to highlight the 'low cost' of subsidized tickets. The cited articles both deal with 'legacy vs low cost', but it doesn't explain anywhere why they are comparing the two. A low cost airline is one that strives to be the cheapest, highest volume possible. A legacy carrier is just one that was one of the national airlines before 1978. None of the legacy lines were or are focused on a low-cost operating procedure, so this just doesn't make sense. A person that doesn't know would read this and assume that legacy and low cost must be very similar and subtly different, or they wouldn't have an article just describing the ways in which they are different. Of course if you actually read the article it becomes obvious that there is no relation at all. So why mention the low cost airline at all? The only way it makes sense is if someone came here with the notion that a nationalized airline provides cheap tickets, and wondering what makes that different from a 'low cost' airline. If there IS some relation between the two the article needs to explain what it IS, not just why they are different. Because saying that alone implies that in all other ways they are the SAME. It's like saying 'a railroad is different from an airline in that a rail passenger buys a ticket in the station before boarding, while an airline passenger buys it in advance. Yea, cool, but there are some other minor differences that might be mentioned as well. Like one flying and one rolling. But this is even worse, they aren't even similar categories. A legacy carrier COULD be a low-cost carrier, and vice versa, but otherwise they are totally distinct concepts. I mean, its possible that someone was just really confused and thought that 'legacy' was a synonym for 'conventional' carrier, as opposed to a low-cost model? And then someone came and fixed the definition of legacy, but left the confusing article intact. Which is thefore a total mess. It ought to say 'a conventional airline is different from a low-cost airline in...', not 'legacy'.

64.222.108.200 (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Types?

The distinction between "transcontinental" and "regional" legacy carriers seems completely arbitrary, given that Alaska and Hawaiian both have flights to the East Coast, and to international destinations. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That distinction is, if you'll pardon the pun, a legacy of the pre-deregulation era, when national airlines with transcontinental route networks, such as TWA and American, were regulated differently than smaller airlines such as Allegany and Piedmont (the forerunners of USAir), which were treated as higher than true regional feeder services, but below the transcons. Of course, since deregulation things have changed, and now Alaska, for example, is a transcontinental airline, which they weren't before deregulation. oknazevad (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do some Wiki users insist on discounting Hawaiian Airlines and Alaska Airlines from the list of legacy airlines? Per the definition of a legacy US carrier, “ airline that had established interstate routes before the beginning of the route liberalization permitted by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 “ both Hawaiian and Alaska are legacy airlines

Non US Legacy carriers

GRALISTAIR (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC) I have started this new section and will fill in and expand and reference as time permits. It will also make the article less US Centric.[reply]

It is really an American term, I have removed the section as a US reference doesnt really indicate usage outside the US. Welcome to add with reliable non-US references. MilborneOne (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alaska/Hawaiian are technically legacy airlines

Why do some Wiki users insist on discounting Hawaiian Airlines and Alaska Airlines from the list of legacy airlines? Per the definition of a legacy US carrier, “ airline that had established interstate routes before the beginning of the route liberalization permitted by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 “ both Hawaiian and Alaska are legacy airlines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tribaltech35 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

United was acquired by Continental

On March 31, 2013, United merged with and into Continental, with Continental continuing as the surviving corporation of the Merger and as a wholly-owned subsidiary of UAL. Upon the closing of the Merger on March 31, 2013, Continental’s name was changed to “United Airlines, Inc.” (the “Survivor”).

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/100517/000119312513140583/d514659d8k.htm 2601:646:9A00:8F70:402E:70CA:1937:5BD0 (talk) 17:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]