Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Where Are The US Carriers In Guam?  
User currently offlineWolborsk From Guam, joined Aug 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5595 times:

I just read an article in one of Guam's magazines where they interviewed the business and financial consultant at the airport here, and he was talking about the airport expansion here, and after several pages of outlining the project, he began talking about new US and foreign carriers coming here. Currently, we are served by NW, CO, JL (mostly JalWays or JAA), and occasionally ANA and China Airlines. However, the article talks about adding more services to the airport. The project is being called "Expanded Air Service." My idea, and the idea of the airport's financial consultant, is to have more than two U.S carriers flying in and out of Guam, preferably to compete with CO (for Asian regional flights on CO, the prices can get very high), since NW only has three routes out of here. Also, the article says Guam needs a direct flight to the mainland, since the one way (currently) to get to the mainland involves a very annoying stop in HNL. Finally, the article talks about getting more big name international carriers (SQ, specifically) to fly to Guam and pick up people coming from everywhere in the region. So, does anyone have any info on if/when any of this will happen?

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2971 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5436 times:

The problem is Guam/Saipan is largely a leisure destination (hence low-yield), so many of the established carriers have whatever higher priced travelers under their belt.

NH & CI are both regulars at GUM plus there is also OZ & KE from South Korea.

It will be a matter of time before any one of the PRC carriers arrive in the Marianas.

Outside of the two US carriers, it is doubtful any other US airlines (not start-up) to begin service to/from the Marianas.
UA - UA used to fly from KIX to GUM with their old 741s back in the 1990s.
Widebodies are already allocated and basing a narrowbody in the Asian region is probably not what they have in mind.

DL - Negligible presence in the Pacific and would be disastrous with any type of aircraft.

US/AA - forget it.


User currently offlineMD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5320 times:

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 1):
It will be a matter of time before any one of the PRC carriers arrive in the Marianas.

Late.

starting 11NOV07.

CA987 PEK1810 - 0155+1SPN 772 47
CA988 SPN0315 - 0700PEK 772 15



http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5209 times:

I'd like to see TG or VN at GUM, but who knows when that will happen. I know TG had a ticket office in Guam in the mid 90s, I saw it when I lived there.
It would be really cool to see someone like Garuda there too, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon.


User currently offlineCOSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5132 times:

hi Guam is Only 160,000 Folks it Has many time More US, and Foreign carrier air service per capita than any USA airport with about 8 CO 737-800 and 2 767-400 in service to the Island as well as NW NRT, NGO ,KIX Guam sees almost all types of Aircraft 777,767,757,747,737,727F and A340,330,320

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5081 times:

Quoting Wolborsk (Thread starter):
Also, the article says Guam needs a direct flight to the mainland, since the one way (currently) to get to the mainland involves a very annoying stop in HNL.

As I recall, there was a related thread a couple of weeks back that brought out this point. CO will have to wait until they get their 787s to pull this off--if they want to at all. CO 1 and CO 2 are money makers for the airline. I'd love to see UA enter the fray, but I don't think the market is there now, unless they develop another source of tourists.

Doesn't Philippine Airlines do an A320 MNL/GUM?



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineSpiPLANE From UK - England, joined Jan 2005, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5019 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 5):

Lumberton,

Philippine Airlines certainly used to, I made this photo in 2004:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Spijkers



Paul



A380 fan
User currently offlineThePalauan From Guam, joined Oct 2006, 264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4997 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 5):
Doesn't Philippine Airlines do an A320 MNL/GUM?

Three times each week. Once in a while, that flight gets replaced with an A330 or A340! Very rare but I've seen it happen at least 3 times since they restarted their service.

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 1):
OZ & KE from South Korea.

OZ dropped GUM some time ago because the route wasn't profitable, if memory serves right. I haven't been to the airport in a while but I think I recall seeing some people dismantaling the counters where they used to be at.

Quoting Wolborsk (Thread starter):
Finally, the article talks about getting more big name international carriers (SQ, specifically) to fly to Guam and pick up people coming from everywhere in the region.

One of the things I've heard of is attracting tourists from Europe. To do this, they had the idea of attracting some carrier like BA or AF having an add-on on one of their Asian routes (maybe something like LHR-NRT-GUM or CDG-HKG-GUM). Such add-ons sound just as high in possibility as a nonstop HNL-Europe flight. It would only really attract die-hard vacationers looking for a different tropic scene.

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 3):
I'd like to see TG or VN at GUM, but who knows when that will happen. I know TG had a ticket office in Guam in the mid 90s, I saw it when I lived there.
It would be really cool to see someone like Garuda there too, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

Both Thai and Garuda served GUM, once upon a time. In fact, in the past, some of the carriers stopping here include Braniff, United, Aloha, Hawaiian, TWA, Pan Am, Air Nauru, and probably a few others I've overlooked. We probably won't have that many US carriers ever again but if the local government can straighten themselves up and find something else to divest in beyond tourism, I'm sure we can at least attract a few Asian carriers and maybe even QF.



You can take the boy out of the island, but not the island out of the boy!
User currently offlineCOSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4836 times:

GUM sees all PAL aircraft at one time or another as it is the fuel stop on LAX/SFO-GUM-MNL and the A320 Runs GUM MNL

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4807 times:

Quoting COSPN (Reply 8):
the fuel stop on LAX/SFO-GUM-MNL

Thanks. I had totally forgot the fuel stop on this route. IIRC, this is the time of year for it as well....



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineBasrabob From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4762 times:

Pls can someone enlighten me - a western european - why the big hoohaa over GUM - yes the US military are relocating from Okinawa to GUM . It is a boon time for traffic to/from GUM , which no doubt the US carriers will be licking their lips about ......I will leave others to id which carriers will come . But beyond the US military connx , what else is there . Mention has been made about attracting western european carriers going there . I think that there is more likelihood of BA sponsoring the next trip to the moon than them doing flights to GUM . GUM is primarily a local market . Which will be served by Pac rim carriers as well as US carriers for the US mil personnel .

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4736 times:

Quoting Basrabob (Reply 10):
But beyond the US military connx , what else is there .

Guam is a very popular tourism destination for Japanese and, I believe, South Korean's. The location is perfect for a few days visit.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2971 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4736 times:

Quoting Basrabob (Reply 10):

Guam & Saipan have and will continue to be the beach resorts for primarily Japanese tourist. This has been the case since the 1980s. Much has to do with historical ties and closest warm weather overseas destination.
From the 1990s, the Koreans have come and soon the Chinese will too as it is the closest developed tropical destination for the colder climes.

Yes, it's probably too far and expensive for most Europeans to go on a tropical destination. The Med, Canary Islands, Caribbean, Mauritius or Seychelles are much more reachable for folks in your neck of the woods, but opposite hold true for us folks here.


User currently offlineBasrabob From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4725 times:

Which is exactly what I was saying - a local tourist destination - fantastic to visit no doubt , but a local destination - perhaps the Aussies will go & have a look?

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

Looks like our posts crossed, Carpethead. GUM is also 3 hours flying from the Philippines. Lots of Phil-Am's reside on Guam and the flights (at least they used to have) have good load factors. I suspect that there are also Chinese visitors popping in for an occasional visit as well.

As for BA opting for the moon before Guam, well that's unfortunate. Guam is a gorgeous island. It was my privilege to call it home for over 5 years. I can't wait to return someday.  pray 



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineThePalauan From Guam, joined Oct 2006, 264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4628 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 9):
IIRC, this is the time of year for it as well....

I don't think this is a seasonal route. This probably might be permanent seeing how much more time to rest it gives passengers. It leaves LAX/SFO late at night giving passengers over 10 hours of rest. They stop here in the early hours of the day and continue on to MNL and make it in time for the new day. Seems convenient, I guess, compared to getting some rest before waking up to land in HNL and trying to go back to sleep for the remainder. I remember that being the reason cited by PAL on the local papers earlier this year.



You can take the boy out of the island, but not the island out of the boy!
User currently offlineCOSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 4584 times:

Ill still dont see why a 747-400 need a fuel stop ???

Basrabob,

Bottom line is Guam has 160,000 people how many planes can they fill

You are right its just wishful thinking by some local politicians because Guam is the only US territory with no non-stop to the mainland so many are calling for a LAX or IAH non-stop fight...Brantiff Used to fly LAX-GUM-HKG in the ole days..PAL is doing the fuel stop thing one way...some want cabotage to allow PAL to carry LAX-GUM but its only one way...

Others think SQ will just drop by GUM and pick up a few PAX that want to go to LAX or EWR and make the others wait, will never happen...Ints nice thoughts but with 160,000 Just can support a 12 hour non-stop and to where??? Not everyone wants to go to LAX many locals live in the PDX/SEA area so connections in NRT and HNL are just fine


User currently offlineLurveBus From Philippines, joined Mar 2007, 286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4514 times:

Quoting COSPN (Reply 16):
Ill still dont see why a 747-400 need a fuel stop ???

If you stuff a 744 with 433 passengers and their balikbayan boxes, a fuel stop is guaranteed.


User currently offlineCOSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4452 times:

Thanks well its good money for GUM can Non-revs fly LAX-GUM ????

User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5505 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4428 times:

Quoting Basrabob (Reply 10):
But beyond the US military connx , what else is there .

There are some extraordinary cargo rights available to non-US carriers that allow a limited version of hubbing; but I don't believe any line has taken advantage of them.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineJgarrido From Guam, joined Mar 2007, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4399 times:

Quoting COSPN (Reply 16):
Not everyone wants to go to LAX many locals live in the PDX/SEA area so connections in NRT and HNL are just fine

Except for the layovers they are fine. I've flown to PDX via HNL and from PDX via NRT. I had a 10 hr layover in HNL. In NRT I had an 26 hr layover. Lodging was as my expense for the 24+ hour layover. I don't have any data but my feeling is that there's a larger chamorro population in SoCal then in the PacNW. Regardless a direct flight to LAX or even IAH would give more connecting options then HNL or NRT. I have family in both SAN and PDX and would prefer a direct flight to the mainland. I start drooling every time someone talks about CMI's rumors to start such a flight.


User currently offlineWolborsk From Guam, joined Aug 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4356 times:

Quoting Jgarrido (Reply 20):
Except for the layovers they are fine. I've flown to PDX via HNL and from PDX via NRT. I had a 10 hr layover in HNL. In NRT I had an 26 hr layover.

I agree 100%. Flying from GUM to PDX or IAH direct on CO would definitely bring in the business, and would be great.

Quoting COSPN (Reply 4):
Guam is Only 160,000 Folks it Has many time More US, and Foreign carrier air service per capita than any USA airport

But, we like to travel. And, who doesn't want a vacation to paradise?

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 5):
CO will have to wait until they get their 787s to pull this off--if they want to at all

Actually, I measured the distance with this great circle calculator and found that the CO EWR-HKG (served by a 772) route is something like 50 more nautical miles than the trip fro EWR-GUM. So, I think that the route is doable on a triple seven. If you're saying that they need to get the 787s to relieve the routes of the 772s, I agree.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33053 posts, RR: 71
Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4348 times:

Quoting COSPN (Reply 16):
Others think SQ will just drop by GUM and pick up a few PAX that want to go to LAX or EWR and make the others wait, will never happen...Ints nice thoughts but with 160,000

It would never happen because that would be cabatoge and, there, illegal. Only a U.S. airline can fly between Guam and another U.S. point.



a.
User currently offlineSQ452 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4284 times:

Quoting Wolborsk (Thread starter):
Finally, the article talks about getting more big name international carriers (SQ, specifically) to fly to Guam and pick up people coming from everywhere in the region.

Simply put, never going to happen. All the way SQ has been making decisions (See T3 Changi Airport thread) nothing would surprise me! Big grin

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 22):
Quoting COSPN (Reply 16):
Others think SQ will just drop by GUM and pick up a few PAX that want to go to LAX or EWR and make the others wait, will never happen...Ints nice thoughts but with 160,000

It would never happen because that would be cabatoge and, there, illegal. Only a U.S. airline can fly between Guam and another U.S. point.

...correct.



SIN > CVG > BOS
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

Quoting Basrabob (Reply 10):
But beyond the US military connx , what else is there

Even with the relocation - the US military presence will still be only a portion of what it was back in the 60's and 70's.

When I was stationed on Guam in 1972-74 - there were almost as many US military and their dependents as local residents. Today, it's a much smaller presence. We (the Navy) used to be 75% of the flights at PGUM. No longer are 50+ aircraft based on the east side of the civilian airport.

But what Guam had then, and has gotten more of is tourist hotels which can be very popular with Asian tourists.

1. It is part of the United States, but with a strong Spanish background/ heritage. (Ruled by Spain - 1522-1898)
2. It is a very scenic island - not up to Oahu - but very good.
3. The local people are very friendly and supportive of tourism.
4. Location, Location, Location.

That said - the location is also the main reason that Guam will never be a major destination for US or European tourists. Though I must say - European tourists seem to be much more likely to fly long distances to resorts than Americans.

What will put more carriers and aircraft into Guam is resorts/ hotels marketing in new places around the world. If the resorts can create the demand for flights from UK / France / Australia to Guam - the airlines will follow.

If BA or AF sees a significant number of tickets which change from their airline to another at NRT or some other airport to a carrier serving Guam - they can determine the need to extend the service.

But until they see the tickets of passengers flying - they are not going to add service.


25 RoseFlyer : I'm wondering if the only way to get a GUM-US Mainland route would be to use a plane like a 73GER. The fares would be astronomical though. The route j
26 DxBrian : Not necessarily. EWR-HKG is operated on a polar route and is less affected by winds than a EWR-GUM flight would be. LAX-GUM would be easily doable wi
27 Analog : Didn't OZ get fined by the DOT for offering tickets from GUM to other US destinations via ICN?
28 Flysherwood : Why was your layover at your expense? I make the trip from PDX to GUM through NRT about 3 times per year. NWA takes care of layover in NRT if I don't
29 Ex_SQer : Re: SQ and GUM. SilkAir had a serious look at GUM a few years back but did not pursue because the A320s would face some payload restrictions. I doubt
30 Flysherwood : Why would they get fined for doing that? All they have to do is to have the flight from GUM terminate at ICN and transfer the passenger to another fl
31 Viscount724 : But they can't legally promote or sell GUM-USA via ICN. KE and/or OZ got in trouble for doing that in the past. There's nothing to stop a passenger f
32 Analog : Is it legal for travel agents to promote such tickets?
33 Viscount724 : I'm no lawyer but I would say not, they're acting as an agent for the airline and should thus be applying the same policies that apply when the airli
34 Post contains links Hiflyer : To heck with that...get rid of the Brown Tree Snake from Guam before any additional air service!! grin http://www.fort.usgs.gov/resources/education/bt
35 Jgarrido : The current flight though HNL is a 764(sometimes a 300) and is always packed, with only a small minority staying in HNL. My aunt is non-reved out her
36 Post contains links Viscount724 : This is the text of the US DOT announcement in 2002 of the $750,000 fine imposed on Asiana for violating cabotage laws. http://usinfo.org/wf-archive/
37 Hiflyer : So...no GUM ICN LAX thru routing is allowed if it is not a US Flag....or is it ok then if the ICNLAX leg is US Flag on a single booking. That would dr
38 Flysherwood : I can't see this happening without CO and NWA putting up one big fight! Those lobbyist in Washington DC would be very busy if this were being propose
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...
Where Are The Hidden Secrets In Virtual Tour? posted Mon May 26 2003 17:44:34 by UN_B732
Why Are US Carriers In So Much Trouble? posted Tue Aug 30 2005 09:34:06 by B787
Where Are The Major US Airlines Based? posted Sun Jul 23 2000 21:51:17 by Gtarrowhead
US Carriers In Greece posted Fri Jul 6 2007 08:15:25 by SergioAEE
A340 Picture:where Are The PTV's? posted Thu Jul 5 2007 22:41:40 by RootsAir
Why Still No US Carriers In HEL? posted Sun Jun 17 2007 01:16:26 by DLBOIFIN
Liquids In The US Now In Hand Baggage? posted Sat Apr 21 2007 05:41:07 by Ansett767
UA New Int'l Routes: Where Are The Ac Coming From? posted Fri Jan 19 2007 16:54:58 by Skycruiser
Where Are The Winglets? posted Fri Dec 29 2006 08:21:00 by Leothedog
Where Are The Engines On This Plane? posted Wed Dec 6 2006 21:18:44 by LGWspeedbird