Airline resumes flights to Italy (but turns around when airport's shut)

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
26,068
584
126
lite.cnn.com/en/article/h_ef4ad208fe00363ad4d39f9a3d9ef049

the flight was on an Airbus A320 that can hold up to 150 passengers but only had 2 for this trip. :eek:
(EU pandemic stimulus plan keeping airlines open?)

So how did this misunderstanding happen?
A Eurowings spokesperson told CNN Travel that "Against the background of the corona crisis, the situation at numerous airports in Europe is very dynamic."
 
Last edited:

OccamsToothbrush

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2005
1,390
806
136
Why would anyone fly into Italy now? Maybe the plane was heading for New Zealand and took a wrong turn. Those 2 people are now safer than they would be if the plane had been allowed to land.
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
6,155
1,758
136
Is it possible the flight only happened because of a need to satisfy EU airtraffic rules (that say if you don't run flights you can lose the landing slot?). At one point airlines were running flights in Europe completely empty because of that.
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,266
656
126
Why would anyone fly into Italy now? Maybe the plane was heading for New Zealand and took a wrong turn. Those 2 people are now safer than they would be if the plane had been allowed to land.
While I wouldn't travel yet, Italy is down to only 300 new confirmations a day (down 95.5% from its peak). So, it may be one of the safer places to actually go to. And Italy is reducing restrictions.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
55,922
7,486
126
www.uovalor.com
The idea of even trying to resume international flights is insane. This is how we get a second wave. We need to stop people from traveling all over. Even domestic flights should be stopped imo. Even if a destination is now considered safe, you don't know if people from unsafe destinations are also going there. It also goes both ways, want to stop people from bringing in the virus but also stop people from bringing it somewhere else if they happen to have it.
 

OccamsToothbrush

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2005
1,390
806
136
While I wouldn't travel yet, Italy is down to only 300 new confirmations a day (down 95.5% from its peak). So, it may be one of the safer places to actually go to. And Italy is reducing restrictions.
Is that number trustworthy enough to bet your life on it? "New confirmations" reach zero when the infection rate reaches 100%. Isn't Italy still on mandatory lockdown and quarantine for international travelers?
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,266
656
126
Is that number trustworthy enough to bet your life on it? "New confirmations" reach zero when the infection rate reaches 100%. Isn't Italy still on mandatory lockdown and quarantine for international travelers?
Like I said, I wouldn't travel now. But the Covid-19 concentration in Italy isn't that much different from Germany. So, it is basically out of the frying pan and into the fire.

As for trusting the numbers, that is all we have to go by. Virtually all western European country numbers are experiencing large declines. If one country was fudging the numbers it would stick out like a sore thumb. So to follow your logic, we'd basically have to assume that all different European countries are fudging the numbers in similar ways.

But, yes, they are on mandatory travel ban for another week. Both the airline and the Italian customers should have known.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
14,512
1,696
126
Why would anyone fly into Italy now? Maybe the plane was heading for New Zealand and took a wrong turn. Those 2 people are now safer than they would be if the plane had been allowed to land.

Both passengers were Sardinians...maybe trying to finally get home?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY