Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CI To Join SkyTeam In 2006?  
User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5432 times:

United Daily in Taiwan has reported that CI would try to join SkyTeam in 2006. Sorry, it's only in Chinese, I'll do a rough translation of the key points:

http://udn.com/NEWS/FINANCE/FIN9/2988906.shtml

During the meeting of CI's top managers this month, president of China Airlines listed goals for CI to achieve in 2006, one of them is to join a world airline alliance.

CI currently has code sharing with DL, KE, and AZ, all Skyteam members. CI stressed that there is no timeframe in 2006 to join SkyTeam, but it will be a long evaluation process.


I don't know if SkyTeam would let CI join due to it's historic safty records. Since CI has code share with CZ and MU, I don't think China will prevent CI from joining SkyTeam.

Let's hear your thoughts on this one...

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAirpearl From Malaysia, joined May 2001, 957 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5365 times:

On what routes do CI codeshare with CZ and MU?

User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8625 posts, RR: 13
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5303 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FlyingHippo (Thread starter):
I don't know if SkyTeam would let CI join due to it's historic safty records.

they let KE in and their record is not much better



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4358 posts, RR: 35
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5305 times:

Well they let Korean Air join as well right after their Guam and Stansted crashes. CI has really made a turn around in its safety procedures and seem to do fine in the last 3 years. I am sure they are closely monitored by the Taiwan government and the other Skyteam members as they don't want to become the Die-team. Personally I would rather have them wait for another 2 years and only welcome them if there are no further avoidable incidents (the Anchorage taxiway take off was almost as worrysome as any true crash).


nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlinePlaneboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5287 times:

CI would be a good addition to ST. But I think MH has the edge.

CI may have a good coverage of China with its code share with MU and CZ, (so is MH). But unlike MH, CI has very poor presence in Indian subcontinent (It only flies to DEL). China and India are two big markets which any alliance cannot afford to overlook.

Also it looks be competing with NW and CO on trans-pacific routes. MH who is sitting on the fence may not want a neighbor in the alliance. These may go against CI's prospects.

(Well, these are my views. I am no expert. Who knows, ST may have something else in mind)


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5280 times:

Quoting Airpearl (Reply 1):
On what routes do CI codeshare with CZ and MU?

MU is from Okinowa to PVG, not sure what cities CZ codeshares with CI. I could be wrong about this one.


User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5155 times:

Quoting Planeboy (Reply 4):
CI has very poor presence in Indian subcontinent (It only flies to DEL).

CI is trying to get more flights to India, they're looking at BOM as second Indian city, flying from LAX/SFO to India via TPE saves a lot of time compared to going all the way down to SIN or KUL.


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5069 times:

Quoting Vincewy (Reply 6):
CI is trying to get more flights to India, they're looking at BOM as second Indian city, flying from LAX/SFO to India via TPE saves a lot of time compared to going all the way down to SIN or KUL.

CI actually have a good schedule for passengers traveling from N. America and Europe who wants to connect to SE Asia.

If you fly in from JFK, SEA, LAX, SFO, VIE, or FRA, all of these flights arrive before 7AM, with flights for HKG, SGN, HAN, BKK, MNL, JKT, Bali and other SE cities leaving TPE with the next hour or so.

Flight from YVR lands at 3:20PM, with connections to most of it's SE Asia destinations leaving within 3 hours as well.

[Edited 2005-11-03 22:04:10]

[Edited 2005-11-03 22:05:26]

User currently offlineKahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4989 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 2):
they let KE in and their record is not much better

Blah Blah Blah... Their safety is nothing worse than that of American Airlines, Delta Airlines, United Airlines, or US Airways!

KAHALA777


User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4977 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 3):
I am sure they are closely monitored by the Taiwan government and the other Skyteam members as they don't want to become the Die-team

There's a nice ring to the name "Die-team"... Big grin.

Quoting Planeboy (Reply 4):
CI may have a good coverage of China with its code share with MU and CZ, (so is MH). But unlike MH, CI has very poor presence in Indian subcontinent (It only flies to DEL). China and India are two big markets which any alliance cannot afford to overlook.

CI doesn't have good coverage of China though -- they don't fly at all to China themselves, and the worst part is, all the flights have to be routed through something else -- HKG most often. It's a huge detour, and adds hours to your flight. If you're flying from TPE to PVG direct, it's a flight that should be 2 hours or less, but flying through HKG and your flight time is more than doubled, if you count transfer and all. Us in HKG don't complain, since it gives us more traffic, but it does suck for the traveler and really is an inconvenience more than anything.


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 9):
CI doesn't have good coverage of China though -- they don't fly at all to China themselves, and the worst part is, all the flights have to be routed through something else -- HKG most often. It's a huge detour, and adds hours to your flight. If you're flying from TPE to PVG direct, it's a flight that should be 2 hours or less, but flying through HKG and your flight time is more than doubled, if you count transfer and all. Us in HKG don't complain, since it gives us more traffic, but it does suck for the traveler and really is an inconvenience more than anything.

125% agree with you. Both BR and CI has this problem.

Hopefully Taiwan and China can work out direct flights between it's major cities soon, which I believe is starting again for Chinese New Years 2006, as well as other direct links are in the talks. Hopefully TPE can be a good hub for SE Asia and China in the very near future.

If that is the case, CI and BR would probably need to have their expansion plans in place!


User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4867 times:

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 10):
Hopefully Taiwan and China can work out direct flights between it's major cities soon, which I believe is starting again for Chinese New Years 2006, as well as other direct links are in the talks. Hopefully TPE can be a good hub for SE Asia and China in the very near future.

As far as I understand the problem is Taiwanese government's insistence that no direct flights be allowed. They're supposedly worried about a plane full of PLA soldiers landing in TPE. Flying via HKG, I suppose, defuses that fear. The New Year charters have been going on for some time, but it's really unfortunate they don't go on more than that. At least now they can fly over Chinese territory, which cuts their flight time down significantly for routes to Europe. They used to have to fly through SE Asia, which adds an extra hour or so as well. Such is politics.

TPE also needs some work before it can really be a regional hub of any significance though. Right now it's pretty poor, relative to the newer and shinier hubs in the region. I'm afraid the strict policies in Taiwan has left it far behind other airports and it's going to have a hard time trying to catch up even when direct flights are allowed.


User currently offlineHKGKaiTak From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1050 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4799 times:

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 11):
As far as I understand the problem is Taiwanese government's insistence that no direct flights be allowed. They're supposedly worried about a plane full of PLA soldiers landing in TPE.

I think they're worried that Mainland Chinese widebodies packed full of fuel make for far better missiles than anything else the PLA can muster ...

Pffffffffft.

IMHO this whole PRC-ROC thing is just childish, they should just get on with it rather than keep scoring cheap political points.

I wonder however, if and when they do allow direct Taiwan-Mainland scheduled flights, how much BR and CI stand to lose in terms of revenue ... and whether this is the true motive behind Taiwan's objections to allowing direct flights.



4 Engines 4 LongHaul
User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4774 times:

Quoting HKGKaiTak (Reply 12):
IMHO this whole PRC-ROC thing is just childish, they should just get on with it rather than keep scoring cheap political points.

I wonder however, if and when they do allow direct Taiwan-Mainland scheduled flights, how much BR and CI stand to lose in terms of revenue ... and whether this is the true motive behind Taiwan's objections to allowing direct flights.

Oh, I agree, it's stupid. The only thing they are achieving is making life miserable for the businessmen who need to fly back and forth all the time -- so they end up just living in the Mainland and adpot second wives. The whole system is rather dumb.

But hey, HK makes great business out of them, so keep them coming :p


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4681 times:

Quoting HKGKaiTak (Reply 12):
I wonder however, if and when they do allow direct Taiwan-Mainland scheduled flights, how much BR and CI stand to lose in terms of revenue ... and whether this is the true motive behind Taiwan's objections to allowing direct flights.

That is just not true.

Both CI and BR has begged the Taiwanese government to allow direct flights, CI and BR has a much better service and reputation than CZ, MU, and CA, and they charge more than the Chinese carriers. Having a direct link would only increase their profit.


User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4613 times:

Quoting HKGKaiTak (Reply 12):
if and when they do allow direct Taiwan-Mainland scheduled flights, how much BR and CI stand to lose in terms of revenue

They might decrease the number of flights between Taiwan and HKG or Macau but put many more flights going to the mainland. The real losers might be KA and Air Macau, even CX.


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4447 times:

Quoting B2443 (Reply 15):
They might decrease the number of flights between Taiwan and HKG or Macau but put many more flights going to the mainland. The real losers might be KA and Air Macau, even CX.

The traffic from TPE to HKG will decrease dramtically as well, not that HKG would be that much effected by it.

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 11):
TPE also needs some work before it can really be a regional hub of any significance though. Right now it's pretty poor, relative to the newer and shinier hubs in the region.

TPE's second terminal is one of the nicest terminals in Asia, ofcourse it cannot compared to HKG or KIX since they're brand new airports. I agree that TPE's Terminal 1 needs to be torn down and rebuilt, but they might do that after the direct flights are allowed and have a good enough reason to build a third terminal.


User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4432 times:

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 16):
TPE's second terminal is one of the nicest terminals in Asia, ofcourse it cannot compared to HKG or KIX since they're brand new airports. I agree that TPE's Terminal 1 needs to be torn down and rebuilt, but they might do that after the direct flights are allowed and have a good enough reason to build a third terminal.

Yeah, it's not bad, it's just not great. You are also competeing against KUL and SIN, both pretty flashy new airports. Basically, TPE is old in comparison, and needs some work. I also wish they have better links with Taipei itself (not a concern for transfers, I suppose). Right now the bus system is just not very good.


User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4401 times:

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 17):
Yeah, it's not bad, it's just not great. You are also competeing against KUL and SIN, both pretty flashy new airports. Basically, TPE is old in comparison, and needs some work. I also wish they have better links with Taipei itself (not a concern for transfers, I suppose). Right now the bus system is just not very good.

Yes, TPE is an old airport by comarison, and it does need work.

The short term improvement is to improve runway 5 to Cat II certified, and build a third runway.

The mass transit railroad link to Taipei City is starting its bidding process, and it is scheduled to be completed sometime after 2010.

Ofcourse, having corrupt officials in the government doesn't help, and the original plan to have high speed rail connection also got scrapped.


User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4382 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 2):
Quoting FlyingHippo (Thread starter):
I don't know if SkyTeam would let CI join due to it's historic safty records.

they let KE in and their record is not much better

On a side question...didn't Delta give KE the boot for codesharing a few years back after some accidents then magically reappear in SkyTeam after they cleaned up?



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 711 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4279 times:

I don't know why I didn't think of this sooner...

CI already flies to hub airports of most of the SkyTeam airlines:

AMS: NW/KLM
SEA: Sort of a DL hub, no?
IAH: CO
FCO: AZ

I know I'm missing some other hubs.

Just a thought, but it does make sense for SkyTeam to add CI, it would offer connections to SE Asia via 4 of their hub cities.

It's funny that 3 SkyTeam airlines are in Bankruptcy... NW, DL, and AZ

[Edited 2005-11-04 23:23:27]

User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3135 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4282 times:

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 20):
SEA: Sort of a DL hub, no?

Not even close. More of a NW "sort-of hub" than DL, but still a strong sky-team city, with service to:

DL:
- CVG
- ATL
- SLC
- JFK

CO:
- ANC
- IAH
- CLE
- EWR

NW:
- AMS
- NRT
- MSP
- DTW
- MEM
- IND (seasonal)
- HNL
- OGG/KOA

KE:
- ICN

Plus there is CI with SEA-TPE. On the other hand, DL, NW, and CO all Codeshare with AS. If AS were to join Skyteam, SEA would be a HUGE hub for the alliance, but I doubt that will be happening anytime soon. However, I've always thought that the facts above would make SEA an attractive Asian hub or gateway for DL or CO, or for further Asian expansion by NW.


User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4141 times:

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 18):
The mass transit railroad link to Taipei City is starting its bidding process, and it is scheduled to be completed sometime after 2010.

That's just another measure for the corrupt officials to extract tax payers' money, it never gets old, by extending current coal rail line, they can easily connect Taipei and Taoyuan to both High Speed Rail statoin and the airport, after all, the MRT transit trains in Taipei aren't suitable for airport bound passengers, imagine travellers having to hold the luggages, standing up, nuf said.


User currently offlineAlexchao From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 688 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4020 times:

Quoting FlyingHippo (Thread starter):
I don't know if SkyTeam would let CI join due to it's historic safty records. Since CI has code share with CZ and MU, I don't think China will prevent CI from joining SkyTeam.

I do not believe CI codeshares with CZ or MU. CI simply has reciprocal frequent flyer accrual agreements with CZ, MU, and CA.


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6999 posts, RR: 63
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 8):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 2):
they let KE in and their record is not much better

Blah Blah Blah... Their safety is nothing worse than that of American Airlines, Delta Airlines, United Airlines, or US Airways!

Where have you been??! KE have had several major hull losses over the past ten to fifteen years and have been slammed for their lack of safety culture. I can immediately think of two or three AA accidents and incidents (757, MD80, A300) but I struggle to recall DL, UA or US losing a plane every five years or fewer.


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...
MEA To Join Skyteam Alliance In 2004 posted Sat Dec 27 2003 16:43:54 by BA
CI Failed To Join Skyteam By The End Of 2002 posted Wed May 29 2002 01:56:15 by Jiml1126
GF's Hogan To Join Etihad In Oct. 1 posted Thu Sep 28 2006 14:09:22 by QatarA340
Austrian Airlines Wants To Join Skyteam... posted Tue Sep 19 2006 08:14:31 by Beaucaire
China Souther To Join SkyTeam posted Wed Jun 28 2006 15:24:58 by AirMailer
Portugalia To Join SkyTeam As Associate Member posted Fri Jun 2 2006 19:45:56 by Joost
737NG Appears To Be Off To Strong Start In 2006 posted Fri Apr 7 2006 00:41:00 by AviationAddict
CAL To Grow/hire In 2006 posted Fri Mar 17 2006 01:20:18 by CLE757
Aeroflot To Join Skyteam On April 14 posted Wed Mar 15 2006 08:55:17 by Skyteam10001
Transbrasil Back To The Air In 2006 posted Sun Jan 29 2006 20:10:50 by TR763