Ryanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 4478 times:
Quoting Mk777 (Thread starter): Is it because not a lot of customer demand and/or cargo from IAD to BKK, HKG or SIN?
Yep, you said it! I think there was a similar thread sometime last week. Not only there isn't a lot of demand, there isn't a lot of business going on between Washington DC and Asia, as compared to Los Angeles, New York or SF. Even on sectors that are strong in cargo, I only see ORD as a likely candidate to have pax services restored before SQ would even think about anywhere else.
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
787kq From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 549 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 17 hours ago) and read 4473 times:
As much as I'd like to see more international carriers at IAD, I doubt there will be many Far East carriers like SQ or CX, which rely on premium business traffic. The carriers most likely to fly in would be those like Emirates or Qatar, who carry a lot of economy traffic.
I haven't flown ANA in a while, but I thought their business class was the worst and I refused to fly them again until they upgraded the service to IAD, which has been done. Before the business class recline was like domestic first class, which is torture, especially if Tokyo is only a fast transit to another Asian flight.
Well from "now" forward, it's not necessary, as UA will soon fly IAD-NRT (if they have not already started) and from NRT UA serves SIN, HKG and BKK.
I imagine when NH flew the route as a UA codeshare, one just connected to the UA flights at NRT, as well.
Also, I am going to guess most if not all US government travel to Asia was booked on UA from NRT and the UA codeshare to NRT. This could be why UA agreed to give NH their JFK-NRT slot (to allow NH to offer additional service) in exchange for IAD-NRT.