Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why JAA And Not JAL To Taiwan? And Why Not Arabs?  
User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 376 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Since every Asian airline operates to the country under their own titles, why did JL have to create the JAA sunbsidiary? considering that JAA at times operates JAL aircraft there (same goes for the Europeans) who are they trying to fool? I doubt China ever orderd this.

Also would like to know why arent Emirates or Qatar Airways adding Taipei to their passenger network? Arabs dont have a cosy realtionship with Communist China to be afraidd of hurting ties by going to Taiwan, at present Saudi Arabian cargo and Emirates Cargo fly there only, will they ever add passenger services too?


.....up there with the best!
32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12407 posts, RR: 37
Reply 1, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4903 times:

The JAA situation goes back to when Japan began recognising PRC as China, in place of Taiwan. The problem was that although air travel between Japan and Taiwan was (and is still, very) lucrative, you have to recognise the country with which you're operating a bilateral agreement. So, the compromise was an offshoot which didn't have the Japanese flag on the tail; it was a convenience carrier, purely for the purposes of operating the route.

Many other carriers had the same situation; Australia/Swissair/British Asia all were subsidiaries of the main carrier - QF/SR/BA, but they didn't have flags on their livery and in the case of BA and SR, where the flag was part of the tail design, it had to be changed. (Interestingly, SR's cross caused it some problems in flying to Saudi, as they get upset at anyone else's "religious" symbols).

As for QR and EK, both have started services to Shanghai, so that might be part of the reason, but another reason might be that BR and CI operate to DXB already and there may simply not be the market for EK; can't believe the market from DOH to TPE is not great.


User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4894 times:

"Arabs dont have a cosy realtionship with Communist China "...

I thought Arabs have always had a "cozy" relationship with China...politics aside, I don't think China can order a country to fly or not to fly to Taiwan. As times, BA had BA Asia, KLM had KLM Asia, and Swiss had Swiss Asia fly into the island, same case with JAL. I've always wondered why.


User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4885 times:

but they didn't have flags on their livery

Certainly not applicable to UA/NW, even KE for that matter.


User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 376 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4880 times:

BR quit Dubai in the late 90's and CI in the early 80's, CI used to served Abu Dhabi too, which they also quit in 2003, so there's no direct service.

I sincerely doubt the Swissair-Saudi Arabia story, on the contrary Muslims do believe Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) wasnt crucified and it was some one else in his place, so the Cross is NOT considered a religious symbol by us, and it does not make us anti-Christian.



.....up there with the best!
User currently offlineSwissgabe From Switzerland, joined Jan 2000, 5266 posts, RR: 33
Reply 5, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4874 times:

Japan Airlines did the same thing as most other carriers in Europe did. They flew into Taiwan (ROC) with another title. Like Swissair Asia, KLM Asia, etc due to political reason.

Swissair/Swiss indeed had some problems in Saudi Arabia. I mean if is a cross of a country flag and doesn't have any religions meaning. Guess the Saudis got that as well.



Smooth as silk - Royal Orchid Service /// Suid-Afrikaanse Lugdiens - Springbok
User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 376 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 4850 times:

Isnt it about time this Asia farce ended?


.....up there with the best!
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (9 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 4796 times:

The CROSS is not strictly a CHRISTIAN symbol.

It was in use well before the edict of Milan in 312 A.D., but not by CHRISTIANS. As a matter of fact, the CROSS was not widely accepted until the 6th century.

The ancient Egyptians used something called the Cross of Horus, featured in many heiroglyphs and carved into many sepulchers and monuments. Usually shown held in the hand, it denotes life, and is also known as the KEY OF LIFE.

Besides the Egyptians, the CROSS was used by ancient Greeks, Phoenicians, Aztecs, Babylonians and east Indians to name a few.

As for the SWISS Cross, the origins are still a source of debate. It has definite roots in the Holy Roman Empire, as well as being the common method of recognition during times of battle....It's correct dimensions are that it must be 1/6th higher than it is wide. This was determined in the late 1889, abandoning the previous SWISS CROSS, which was made up of 5 equal squares.

With that said, I would like to know more credible and factual information on the Saudi disapproval of the SWISS aircraft bearing the CROSS, and not hearsay or speculation.



Delete this User
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 4776 times:

It really depends if you can stand up to unreasonable pressure from PRC or not. Most US carriers and others don't give a damn and fly with their U.S. flag painted on them.
Most European countries and carriers are more eager to appease to China will add "Asia" on their existing title to please the Communist Chinese.
The Saudi's use to have political ties with Taiwan and had flights there. However the PRC market is much bigger than Taiwan and most smaller carriers choose to devote their limited resources there.



747SP
User currently offlineBoeingnut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 4757 times:

One sidenote of this fiasco was that back when Tokyo Narita opened up, Air China (along with all the other int't carriers) moved their ops there. But they raised a stink about not wanting CI to be allowed there, so CI stayed at Tokyo Haneda for a while. I think it was just in the last few years that CI moved over to Narita. Quite a shame actually. I heard that a lot of Taiwanese businessmen liked landing so much closer to the city than Narita...

User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 4744 times:

Not to mention all the Japanese tourist go Honolulu becasue Haneda is so much closer than Narita. It was an extremely lucrative route for CI and JAL and ANA among others did not like it. so Despite protest from China, they ordered CI to move to Narita just like all the other carriers.


747SP
User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

"Most US carriers and others don't give a damn and fly with their U.S. flag painted on them."

I wonder if they will ever give a d*mn. And when they do, what will happen to Taiwan? The sad thing is it is not up to Taiwan.

But they raised a stink about not wanting CI to be allowed there, so CI stayed at Tokyo Haneda for a while.

They never had a problem seeing each other next to each other at HKG, even more often than NRT.

My question is why the new CI livery does not carry ROC flag? Its old livery did. On the other hand, they would have flown to PVG if they hadn't changed.


User currently offlineKEno From Malaysia, joined Feb 2004, 1842 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (9 years 12 months 10 hours ago) and read 4657 times:

Despite protest from China, they ordered CI to move to Narita just like all the other carriers.

All these sound very silly me. Why should PRC be treated any special in Tokyo? 99% of other cities in the world only has 1 large civillian airport to deal with. If Air China can share with China Airlines or Eva in Changi for example, I don't see why they can't operate in the same airport elsewhere. And that includes Tokyo.


User currently offlineWants2fly From United States of America, joined Oct 2002, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 12 months 9 hours ago) and read 4624 times:

This is just to show how bully People's Republic of China (PRC) is.
Taiwan, Republic Of China (ROC), has been trying to re-join the UN for many years, since ROC was one of the founding countries, but PRC always vote against it as it assumed the ROC position on UN.
As a Taiwanese American, its sad to see countries obey China's One China policy and not allowing Taiwan to have the same privileges. Taiwan has done so many good things to promote a peaceful global community but with the threat of China invading or overpowering Taiwan, China should be the one on the "bad" list.
I was reading the Chinese Newspaper recently and it reports that China wants to promote one of the South China airport as the new gateway to Asia. This leaves a very uneasy feeling for Hong Kong as its Airport gets the business from all of the world. Isn't Hong Kong part of China? Why is China competing with one of their own?
Just my 2 cents

Wants2fly


User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (9 years 12 months 9 hours ago) and read 4605 times:

Arabs dont have a cosy realtionship with Communist China
Do note that there is a difference between China and Taiwan.

Personally, I think airlines having to create new logos is ridiculous. While I can understand the incident where VS covered the Scarlet Lady, logos are logos and if a country does not want a logo, they should be better of now wanting the airline.  Insane

-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineCarnoc From China, joined Oct 2001, 875 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 12 months 8 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

In regard to whether it is right to have "One China Policy" or not. I urge you to please get a history book before you actually comment.

Although I do agree that airlines shouldn't be 'required' to set up a un-existing 'new company' or create a new logo in order to service Taiwan, but you do have to realize that politics is in every single industry, and civil aviation is just one of many.

For the arising issue between new Guangzhou airport and the existing Hong Kong airport, I don't see a problem there. Please do remember that competition is good for the general public overall, and especially there would still be enormous differences between CAN and HKG.

Cheers.


User currently offlineJe89_w From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 2360 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (9 years 12 months 8 hours ago) and read 4559 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Despite protest from China, they ordered CI to move to Narita just like all the other carriers.

I would imagine CI being reluctant to move to HND, since in the past, they adverstised flights from Honolulu to Tokyo . . . they would mention flying into Tokyo's Haneda Airport, which is way closer to the city, instead of the remote NRT.

I also heard that CI flew into HND because BR flew into NRT. Now whether that is true or not, I don't know. As KEno pointed out, it does sound a bit silly.


User currently offlineAlexchao From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 688 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 12 months 8 hours ago) and read 4549 times:

When BR first began flying to Tokyo, they also flew to HND.

I think the move to NRT for CI and BR had more to do with logistics. Japan probably wanted to make Narita the main international airport with Haneda as the the main domestic airport. Plus, the move for CI and BR to NRT began AFTER the completion of a new runway, which would help reduce congestion.

As for the "One China Policy," this forum isn't a good place for politics. I guess we should just hope for a peaceful resolution in the future. As for aviation, I hope cross-strait direct flights will start soon.


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 12 months 8 hours ago) and read 4548 times:

CI no longer carry the ROC flag because they were hoping to fly to China one day and vice versa on all the Chinese carrier removing their Red flag is they want to fly to Taiwan.
CI flew to HND only because it was told so by the Japanese gov. it took BR many years to be able to serve HND as well instead of NRT. However, they are taking too much business away from JAL and Japan Asia, so they ordered all the carriers to NRT now.
@Carnoc
Politics isn't everything except in China and all communist country.



747SP
User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 12 months 7 hours ago) and read 4538 times:

This leaves a very uneasy feeling for Hong Kong as its Airport gets the business from all of the world. Isn't Hong Kong part of China? Why is China competing with one of their own?

Sorry I don't see the logics here: "HK being part of China" --> "competing with one of their own"? Do you think HKG enjoys unbalanced and often one-sided privileges? Sorry it'll only get worse for HKG since the epic center has already started shifting north. PVG will be the star again as it was before there was NRT or HKG.


User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5613 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (9 years 12 months 4 hours ago) and read 4466 times:

The Saudi's use to have political ties with Taiwan and had flights there. However the PRC market is much bigger than Taiwan and most smaller carriers choose to devote their limited resources there.

I don't think this true, as one having lived in Taiwan for a few years (and where I got bit by the aviation bug) I don't recall SV ever landing there. I saw anf photo'd the 1st 747 svc by NW there, followed by SQ. I remember strange visits by carriers like Donaldson 707 (UK) Air Siam 707 and remember (photographs) of the CI fleet when it had Caravelles, 3-727-100s B-1818, B-1820 & B-1822. First 707s B-1824,26,28 & B-1830 -- followed by two more later. Cathay CV880s & 707s, I remember the 1st JAA DC-8s into Sungshan,etc. I'm sure in my parent's basement somwhere My 1st ever spotter's logs still exist. And from that point on I kept an eye on civil aviation to Taiwan (via OAGs) and never recall any SV or any carrier going there. Is there some info you can offer on this on the contrary?

BN747



"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4341 times:

@BN747
I don't know when you were in Taiwan but Taiwan and Saudi use to have very close ties. CI use to fly to Riyadh and Dahrain. SV had limited service for a little while in the early 80's.
If you look at the Taiwanese Aviation market, AA , DL, AF, BA, LH, SAA have all pulled out of Taiwan not a good sign.



747SP
User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5613 posts, RR: 51
Reply 22, posted (9 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4279 times:

Warren I was there in the 70s and 1980s. Yes CI did go to the Kingdom. But SV to TPE? I'd think that John Yu or Ben Po would have photos of that and I myself don't recall that service at all.

As for AA , DL, AF, BA, LH I'm very aware of their spotty services to TPE... esp. the US carriers. AA and DL were never serious Asia players... and still aren't at least not in the leagues NW & UA. And I'm aware of British Asia and LH.. I have shots of them there. As for SAA.. when were they there?


BN747



"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
User currently offlineCarnoc From China, joined Oct 2001, 875 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

Well, as someone else mentioned earlier, this is not good place to discuss politics, so I would not like to argue with others from a political perspective, but history is history, no-one could deny the truth.

By the way, I am not anti-TW & I do have a lot of Taiwanese friends, and you simply cannot deny that at least 30% Taiwanese people recognize themselves part of Chinese people, so I wonder if all Taiwanese really see their 'country' as an independent state, then why the hell they still see themselves as Chinese, but not purely Taiwanese? So, get a life & see the real world!

Best Regards.


User currently offlineWants2fly From United States of America, joined Oct 2002, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 11 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4097 times:

Let me first apologize if I offended anybody with my comment on the One China policy.
I DO agree this Forum is no place for politics but the reason why some airlines add the word "Asia" at the end is due to political issues between that country, China and Taiwan. Isn't this correct?

I am proud to be a Taiwanese.... I think there is an unnecessary comment on the Taiwanese people posted earlier. I guess I am part of the 70% and I DO have a life and I DO get to see the real world....


25 B2443 : CI no longer carry the ROC flag because they were hoping to fly to China one day and vice versa on all the Chinese carrier removing their Red flag is
26 Post contains images SafetyDude : Not quite..Air China still carries the red flag, not on tail but right infront of words "Air China" on its fuselage. Guess they don't want to fly to T
27 Jcs17 : In regard to whether it is right to have "One China Policy" or not. I urge you to please get a history book before you actually comment. You need to g
28 B2443 : I could not find the flag on the fuselage. Is it on both sides? The red square before the word "Air China" is the flag...and yes, on both sides.
29 B2443 : Most of the Arab world resents Red China for their crackdown on Islam in the eastern provinces. which provinces were these? I thought they were weste
30 Post contains images Alexchao : I could not find the flag on the fuselage. Is it on both sides? The red square before the word "Air China" is the flag...and yes, on both sides. I thi
31 OB1504 : What happens if say, a British Airways Asia aircraft has a technical problem and BA sends in an airplane in regular c/s to replace it? Or would they r
32 Alexchao : Actually, I don't think the livery really matters because I've seen BA, SwissAir (back in the day), JAL, Air Nippon, and KLM send in their regular C/S
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why All The 5191 Speculation And Not Others posted Thu Aug 31 2006 16:29:05 by Skibum9
Why A330's And Not 777's! posted Sat Apr 22 2006 20:38:09 by American777
Why Are Airline Employees Paying And Not Customers posted Mon Mar 6 2006 12:17:48 by Apodino
Why 747-800 And Not 747-500 Or 797? posted Tue Nov 15 2005 21:18:56 by Andahuailas
Why AC Get's The EMB170 And Not The CRJ700/900? posted Tue Sep 13 2005 15:25:44 by CV990
Why Is CPH And Not ARN SAS's Main HUB? posted Tue Mar 22 2005 14:28:36 by RootsAir
Why -800/-900 And Not -200/-300 posted Sat Jan 22 2005 17:43:42 by Amirs
Why Is NW's A319 Reg's End With NB And Not NW posted Thu Sep 2 2004 22:43:31 by JetJock
Boeing At Farnborough: Why A 747 And Not A 777 posted Mon Jul 26 2004 13:12:16 by Tolosy
Why Did AF Get The B773 And Not The A346? posted Sat Apr 17 2004 00:14:17 by Sjoerd