Talk:Flag carrier

List of Former Flag carriers?

Has anybody considered the possibility of adding a list of former flag carriers from every country. Nombreungenio (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

This is a fine idea, either as a separate table within this article or as another, linked article. 2600:1004:B109:BB50:C83B:65DE:7249:2B60 (talk) 18:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Since this seems to be idea of at least some editors (including in January 2026 "Proposal" comment further down) I would like to know if there is any community agreement against including historical flag carriers or at least if including them would be particularly impractical for some reason? It seems to me (and I may be wrong), that for our readers to understand the concept, historical and contemporary examples may be equally important and adequate (in fact, to some extent historical ones even more so). I guess, my question is if we need to have this list as a part of article at all? And if the answer is yes, on basis of what it would exclude former historical flag carriers?--MirkoS18 (talk) 22:08, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer:, I invite you to engage in this discussion and explain your two recent unjustified removals of my contributions.--MirkoS18 (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

The list includes current flag carriers, that's the only explanation. All airlines with flag carrier status that ceased operations were gradually removed from the list as they did so, and the removal was not made by me actually.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:05, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, that is really not an explanation as I created separate list below that one clearly indicating it includes historical flag carriers. You removed that list entirely, on this quite weak explanation that can almost be summed up into "this is because it is". You do not really give any argument why it would be necessary move to twice remove my properly referenced contributions. All this while proposal to include them was mentioned by a couple of editors on this talk page over time. I can understand for example removing them all, both contemporary and historical (in fact it was an proposal when page was nominated for deletion), but there is no reason to delete some (sometimes major) flag carriers and keeping some minor ones based solely on their present status.--MirkoS18 (talk) 00:42, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Given that you are not satisfied with my explanation I suggest raising the matter at WT:AIRLINE.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:20, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, they may have a thing or two to say about it. I hope you do not take this the wrong way, but I am really not satisfied with the explanation you provided so far, as I do not feel it addresses the actual proper reason for the removal. I created a new request for feedback. Should we add it anywhere else to ask other interested community members for their advice and opinion?--MirkoS18 (talk) 15:43, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer note that this editor has created a discussion at WT:AIRLINES, however their contributions have been hatted as AI. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 17:51, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

This conversation (as it stands at the moment of my post), may be of relevance for changes made above. Right now I tilt towards proposing splitting the list and the article into two or removing the list entirely, but I think it may be good if I take a day or two to cool down from my initial reaction before moving forwards. I hope this will help me to put everything in place.--MirkoS18 (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

As ridiculous as it may seem to me personally (and one editor up there mentioned that “personal preference absolutely comes into it”, so I guess my count as well), I am rewriting my point without using Grammarly assistance. You are still of course free to check collapsed parts as they are obviously human made and slightly polished by an assistant (I am not even sure how much of AI Grammarly uses if I consciously never use Review with AI button, I guess it still nevertheless does as it is such a useful tool for non-native speakers). Anyway, this long intro is to state that I of course admit my fault and community feedback (though it does look a bit like moral panic). To try to summarize my points here (some of which are obvious):

1) The primary topic of this article is the concept of Flag carrier itself, in some almost philosophical theory of forms way. Not the list of all flag carriers present or historical. As much as such a list may be useful (and I am sure both present and historical list is useful), it may be content for another article or two articles - some kind of lists of flag carriers...

2) I never tried to disqualify other people's personal preferences. If anything, my (and preference of a couple of other editors) was ignored by direct Undid of two appropriately referenced contributions. What I said is that, if we have divergent personal preferences (and mine is that if we are to include a list at all, there is no reason to delete properly referenced historical cases and clearly marked as such - after all I am a historian) then we need to have some kind of rational basis to decide whose personal preference is better for the article. Accusing me of ignoring other's personal preference while my contribution is just deleted without any proper argument (at least aesthetical or practical: let's say it would be hard for the reader for some reason) is certainly not okay. Being accused of ignoring it by an editor who have at least 12 edits on this page since August last year, after my first ever edit (properly referenced and researched) was undone by an editor with 1313 edits (29.89% of all edits on this page) seems a bit bizarre and not entirely fair effort to exclude me from conversation. I think you should engage with the core of the argument I try to make here, and if comments not touched with Grammarly will help you I accept that feedback and apologise for previously using it.--MirkoS18 (talk) 09:46, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Missing information

How about the flag carriers for the United States, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay and East Timor? None? Kenwick (talk) 05:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

How about adding them with proper sources if you have any?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Not all countries have a flag carrier, even ones listed here are really just nationalised airlines rather than flag carriers.

MilborneOne (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Pan American World Airways was for much of its existence at least the unofficial USA flag carrier. For decades it was the only US-based airline to operate internationally and for that reason received what were (for the era) large governmental subsidies (as other US domestic airlines did and do to serve "underserved" areas of the country). This would merit mention in the above-requested "Former flag carries" article when/if such is created. 2600:1004:B109:BB50:C83B:65DE:7249:2B60 (talk) 18:59, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Where are the sources that support your claims?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Examples of sources that describe Pan Am as unofficial flag carrier. The Pan Am article does attest to the unofficial flag carrier status, so such things could be mentioned somewhere in this article overall if not in the list. And if a particular subject (US) lacks an object (official flag carrier), the article about that object of topic can still contain sourced information about the absence of it and reasons/background, instead of omitting that subject entirely (I also used to feel that way about lack of mention of English in language regulator article in the past).

And it's annoying when in Wikipedia someone posts something plausible and it's immediately hit with "Where are the sources?" instead of thinking "Huh, is that so? (Look it up yourself) (Come to a conclusion as to whether it's justified and add info with sources if it's justified)" The sourcing requirement shouldn't be used as a weapon of dismissal in a talk page discussion. Someone stated this proposition for a reason - you should consider the proposition and adjudicate on it, instead of always prematurely assuming that it's wrong.

I mean, if someone does provide the said sources afterwards, are you going to have a 180° change of mind and think "Oh wow, I was wrong, my bad"? ~2026-19142-6 (talk) 05:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Simpleflying is simply not reliable per WP:SIMPLEFLYING. The other source indeed states it was the unofficial flag carrier, but its reliability is in doubt.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

There are also some territories that have flag carrier (the page says country or region) such as Bermuda with BermudAir.Bermuda is considered a British territory.

Cayman Islands also have Cayman Airways as a flag carrier. Ktrepas (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk: Flag carrier (Latam for Brazil?)

Dear sir or madam, According to, Latam Brazil is the flag carrier of Brazil, is this accurate? PatrickChiao (talk) 05:29, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the source says so.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It does not seem accurate. Nowhere does LATAM Airlines Brasil claim to be Brazil's flag carrier. Their website's about page makes no mention of them being of flag carrier status. Furthermore, Azul Brazilian Airlines has an aircraft that reads "Brasil's [sic] Flag Carrier" on its fuselage, the only available source of an operational Brazilian airline claiming flag carrier status. Even in Azul's case, it is an unofficial claim, as the Brazilian government has not offered preferential status to any airline since the end of the military regime in the 1980s. I suggest reevaluating the reliability of the source provided in the article, as it gives no basis for its claim. In any case, there is only one operational Brazilian airline claiming to be a flag carrier (Azul), and it is not LATAM Airlines Brasil. 2603:8001:B300:F0:F56C:DBD4:CB7C:A03B (talk) 20:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I think Brazil does not have a flag carrier, as a few other countries like Armenia, Azerbaijan,The Bahamas,Belize,Bosnia & Herzegovina etc. Ktrepas (talk) 14:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

References

Brazil hasn't a flag carrier. This isn't a valid source, it didn't show any solid info on why the company should be classified as a "flag carrier". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hesteriana (talk • contribs) 06:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

How about Caribbean Airlines' integration?

There are two flag carriers owned by multiple countries in this article; SAS and Caribbean airlines. While SAS is integrated in single row span, Caribbean is separated into each countries' section; Guyana, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago! So how about integration of Caribbean as SAS!? 2400:4050:2501:EC00:24C1:5199:5085:69D2(talk) 13:53, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Jetstreamer ^Talk 19:28, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

ANA

Just wanna check whether All Nippon Airways is a flag carrier of Japan. I know the JAL consensus is that it is a flag carrier, but ANA also has the Japanese flag displayed on its planes. Also I didn’t find any sources that can say for certain whether ANA is or is not an flag carrier & the Japanese version of this article states “全日本空輸” (ANA) as the sole flag carrier. Got a bit confused so wanna clarify here. SBS6577P (talk) 12:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. Japan Airlines is raising the national flag because they do not want to admit that they lost to All Nippon Airways. Aviation fans are chilling. 仲川怜汰 (talk) 09:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2022

Japan is displayed as Japan Airlines, but ANA is actually the representative of Japan. Therefore, I would like to ask you to change from Japan Airlines to All Nippon Airways.I don't mean to be mean, but since Japan Airlines went bankrupt due to the Lehman shock, I want to trust ANA as a Japanese person. In Japanese, Japan is called "Nippon". The Himalayas are called "Chomolungma" in the local language, and as a Japanese person, "All Nippon Airways" feels more secure.Speaking of Japanese airlines, Japan Airlines tends to be the representative, but for Japanese, All Nippon Airways is the representative. However, the world is in chaos because people who like Japan Airlines try to represent Japan Airlines. Please correct me If you look at the UK ratings, you can see that All Nippon Airways is in the lead in almost every rating. All Nippon Airways has the most sales, so I don't think I can complain.Sorry for the long sentence. There are only a few left this year. Enjoy not only Christmas, but also 2022! ! May you find more happiness. 仲川怜汰 (talk) 09:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Where are your sources?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:53, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lemonaka (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It is controversial which to call Japan Airlines (JAL) or All Nippon Airways (ANA) "Flag carrier". In ja:ノート:フラッグ・キャリア#日本のフラッグ・キャリア, we concluded that any company in Japan would not be listed as a flag carrier.--SinjukuWest (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Controversial to whom? There are sources in the article supporting JAL's flag carrier status. Your removal has been reverted and you have been warned.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:32, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Some people say ANA is the flag carrier (for example, ANA announces uniform redesign, 政府専用機の座がJAL（日本航空）からANA（全日空）へ変わった本当の理由). SinjukuWest (talk) 15:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

In that case add ANA as a flag carrier as well. Wiping out the current supported entry is definitely not the solution.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:44, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. I had assumed that only one flag carrier per country was allowed. SinjukuWest (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

My pleasure. Please note that the United Arab Emirates have two flag carriers actually.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

More archived references no longer used in the article

• Dron, Alan (8 August 2018). "New Chadian national carrier set to launch operations". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 10 August 2018.
• "Participaciones significativas – Iberia". Grupo.iberia.es. Archived from the original on 29 September 2011. Retrieved 22 May 2009.
• Hofmann, Kurt (4 April 2016). "Nordica launches services from Tallinn to Vienna, Berlin". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 11 April 2016 --Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:22, 21 December 2025 (UTC). {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |archive-date= (help)
• "Estonian state mismanaged, should sell Nordica - auditor". ch-aviation GmbH. 22 September 2023. Archived from the original on 22 September 2023.
• Massy-Beresford, Helen (17 April 2018). "Lufthansa's bid for Alitalia called 'most promising'". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 18 April 2018.
• Hofmann, Kurt (6 July 2018). "Romania's Tarom issues RFP to dry lease 13 regional jets". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 13 July 2018.
• Dron, Alan (18 September 2018). "New national carrier for Albania launched". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 19 September 2018.
• "TAAG Angola Airways boosts capacity, justifying Angola's investment in airport infrastructure". CAPA Centre for Aviation. 22 July 2013. Archived from the original on 6 October 2014.
• Ihuhua, Corry (24 February 2012). "Air Namibia aims to soar higher". Windhoek: Namibian Sun. Archived from the original on 7 January 2016. Retrieved 15 October 2012. Air Namibia intends to further spread its wings by acquiring more modern planes and expanding its routes, in view of restoring its credibility as the country's flagship air carrier.
• "National carrier: it's a matter of definition". Australian Financial Review. 4 March 2014. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020.
• "No plans to buy Estonia's Nordica, says airBaltic CEO". ch-aviation GmbH. 7 August 2023. Archived from the original on 25 September 2023.
• Torr, Jeremy (7 August 2015). "Pakistan International Airlines privatization plans delayed to 2016". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 7 August 2015.
• Moores, Victoria (18 October 2016). "Sweden, Norway sell 7% of SAS Scandinavian Airlines". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 22 October 2016. This reduces Sweden's stake to 57 million shares, or around 17% of SAS, down from 21%.
• "Norska staten har sålt sitt innehav i SAS" [the Norwegian Government has sold its holdings in SAS] (in Swedish). TT. 27 June 2018. Archived from the original on 4 July 2018. Retrieved 4 July 2018.
• "Ariana Afghan Airlines :: Corporate Information". www.flyariana.com. Archived from the original on 28 January 2012.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Flag carrier definition

Someone has pointed out on the Cathay Pacific talk page, that they think Cathay Pacific shouldn't be considered a flag carrier because Hong Kong isn't considered a sovereign state. The lede in this article states that a flag carrier is one that is locally registered in a given sovereign state, enjoys preferential rights or privileges accorded by the government for international operations. Probably the definition might need a bit of tweaking to include flag carriers of non-sovereign states/regions/territories/whatever such as Cathay Pacific, Air Greenland, Air Macau, etc. Fork99 (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Merge proposal: Chosen instrument

Proposing to merge Chosen instrument into Flag carrier: based on Google search results, "chosen instrument" is an archaic term for an airline (specifically back in the 1930's, Pan Am and Imperial Airways) chosen by a government to become what we now refer to as a "flag carrier" with government subsidies and favorable legal treatment (i.e., National champions). Topic merits historical consideration but current article is merely a Wiktionary redirect. Wl219 (talk) 17:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

No such article in Wikipedia.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

There was, before this happened... https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chosen_instrument&diff=next&oldid=1170065776 Wl219 (talk) 02:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Isn't that just a simple redirect? The old article's content is a sentence and a half. Juxlos (talk) 03:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose; there's no evidence that this is a special term in this field, just a natural language description of an instrument that is chosen. For example, NIV Acts 9:15-16, where Saul is described as a chosen instrument. It's better to leave the redirect to Wikionary and fix it at that site. Klbrain (talk) 17:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Resolved

Klbrain (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Mexicana de Aviación

Mexicana de Aviación should be added, as it is owned and operated by the Mexican Military.

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-launches-military-run-airline-with-48-mln-purchase-mexicana-brand-2023-08-10/

https://mexico-now.com/mexicana-de-aviacion-starts-operations/ DaGooose (talk) 08:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

No flag carrier status mentioned in these two articles.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

List of Countries without flag carriers

It might be useful to add this to the article as well to add more information, please consider it, Thank You! MarcChess (talk) 10:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

BermudAir

It is the flag carrier of Bermuda, but it is not on list. Breck0530 (talk) 16:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

top image on page

i think the el al picture is better because el al is more known and a better example of a flag carrier 204.128.182.34 (talk) 12:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I think it's best to avoid the flag carrier of a country that's currently in the news as often as it is. Plus how do you define "better"?

Just pick a country that's currently a little more neutral and stop fighting this battle. You know why people keep changing it. 192.107.171.37 (talk) 23:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

what i mean by better is because el-al has been operating for nearly 80 years and is a very safe airline. 204.128.182.34 (talk) 10:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

That doesn’t come into it. An infobox image should be the best option to represent the topic of the article, which is flag carrier airlines. Safety doesn’t really matter, and age is only one consideration. There’s no reason why Air Canada or Air France couldn’t equally be used. I would suggest leaving the image as is unless there is consensus to change it. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 10:41, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Uruguay will have a flag carrier

It is called SUA Líneas Aéreas and it will start operation in Early 2026. AhmedEdits (talk) 17:06, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Proposal

Guys since we already have a list of flag carriers how about we create a section (or a page) about list of deufunct flag carriers and their reasons for closing? (With reliable sources). ~2025-31814-16 (talk) 02:25, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Japan Flag Carrier

Does japan have a flag carrier or no? I believe there is no official flag carrier for Japan, could someone possibly look into that as both Nippon and Japan Airlines are the biggets airlines but no reputable source says they are flag carriers AJIndoraptor16 (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

It is not what you believe but what is supported by sources, per WP:VNT. Separately, I reverted the edits you made to the article as they were unsourced. Please familiarise yourself with citing sources before commenting about them.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:25, 15 May 2026 (UTC)