Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Qantas And US Domestic Service  
User currently offlinePDXBJV From Turkey, joined Apr 2007, 145 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2880 times:

Hello! I hope everyone had a great New Years!

So my question is, I know that Qantas operates a LAX JFK leg, and my question is, suppose Qantas were to start flying to ORD. Could a person, who was flying on a flight from SYD, and that flights final destination was JFK, could they get on the flight that left for ORD operated by Qantas? Or would it be considered cabotage?

Thanks for any input! Hope you understood my question!


TK787 PDX-BJV direct????
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32603 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2851 times:



Quoting PDXBJV (Thread starter):

So my question is, I know that Qantas operates a LAX JFK leg, and my question is, suppose Qantas were to start flying to ORD. Could a person, who was flying on a flight from SYD, and that flights final destination was JFK, could they get on the flight that left for ORD operated by Qantas? Or would it be considered cabotage?

It is not cabotage and would be allowed. In fact, Qantas planned to do exacly that in 2003. Service was canceled about a month before it was to launch...twice.



a.
User currently offlineAlangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 2106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2715 times:

I thought the ORD flight was planned far earlier than 2003. I thought it was cancelled after 9/11. It was going to operate MEL-LAX-ORD, to meet up with SYD-LAX-JFK. The flight was timetabled but it never happened.

User currently offlineJimma From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2703 times:

what aircraft are used on the LAX-JFK route?

What do you guys make of the open skies agreement talks for Australia-US in feb ?


User currently offlineQFATWA From Australia, joined Jun 1999, 730 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2698 times:

Earlier in my crew career with QANTAS, Honolulu used to be a hub point.

8-9am to the mainland and Midnight to the South Pacific.

Daily SYD-HNL-SFO,

Three times a week MEL-NAN-HNL-LAX, and later additional flights to LAX.

Twice weekly CNS-HNL-YVR.

So usually two 742s and an SP or 742 Combi would meet and greet and spill passengers - used to be a nightmare with first port of entry in HNL for US pax, but international transit for Canada pax. Coming from LAX and SFO was easy, and from YVR not too bad for the onward flights to Australia. At one time, there was even an Auckland connection in there.


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2684 times:



Quoting Alangirvan (Reply 2):
I thought the ORD flight was planned far earlier than 2003. I thought it was cancelled after 9/11. It was going to operate MEL-LAX-ORD, to meet up with SYD-LAX-JFK. The flight was timetabled but it never happened.



Correct.... Was scheduled for March 2002 start, but didn't eventuate...

I think this relates to second attempt...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2002_Dec_2/ai_94793943


User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2918 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2646 times:



Quoting Jimma (Reply 3):
what aircraft are used on the LAX-JFK route?

A Boeing 747-400 coming in from SYD.


User currently offlineTruemanQLD From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 1512 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2558 times:

I think the open skies agreement is stupid... does Australia and Singapore and UAE have an open skies agreement? Because if so then we get 5 airlines on the route 2 from other countries. Airlines based in NRT should not be able to operate HKG-SIN nor should airlines based in YVR be able to service LAX-JFK. I can understand QF -SIN- as they have to stop somehwhere but SQ can go direct so no reason but to enter a market that is not there's

User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2531 times:



Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 7):
does Australia and Singapore and UAE have an open skies agreement?

Oz & SIN - YES. The aviation market BETWEEN Oz & SIN is totally open and any airline from either country can serve any international airport in either country.
The UAE is a bit different. Dubai at least has a unilateral open skys. It has declared its sky totally open to any airline in the world and no bi-latewral needed. Now that is probably the world only real Open Skys!

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 7):
Because if so then we get 5 airlines on the route 2 from other countries. Airlines based in NRT should not be able to operate HKG-SIN nor should airlines based in YVR be able to service LAX-JFK

This was exactly the thinking of the British Foreign Office in 1944 which prevented the Chicargo Convention from reaching agreement on traffic rights and thereby setting up todays series of bi-lateral treaties. Its been fairly comprehenisvly dicredited by now. It leads to restricted services and high prices.

Given that we must now work within this now 64 year old system that is being liberlised peice meal, that does not mean one just gives every thing away, you have to get value for your right. Just what is good value in a given sitution is very very debatable.

So in the circumstances the open skys negotiations are IMHO a good thing, we (Oz) just have to make sure we get value for our rights.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4802 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2512 times:

Yes if QF did operate to ORD then that person could easily travel to ORD. they would of course then need to get on another domestic flight to NY but thats up to them. The same as a pax who currently flys to JFK who then flies to ORD or somewhere else.


56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
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...
Asiana Fined For Unauthorized US Domestic Service posted Fri Oct 18 2002 04:49:20 by Bigo747
Us Domestic Service! posted Sun Mar 21 1999 09:02:18 by Luke
US Domestic Widebody Service posted Thu Sep 14 2006 16:42:34 by LHMARK
US-Domestic: Reduced Y-class Service Questions posted Tue Feb 8 2005 16:47:12 by N593HA
Busiest US Domestic Route Without Nonstop Service? posted Fri Jan 7 2005 23:57:48 by SHUPirate1
UA And US Beef Up MSY-Northeast Service posted Sun May 23 2004 23:02:19 by MSYtristar
Domestic US L1011 Service posted Tue Jul 2 2002 23:37:32 by NHFL9
BAs Domestic Service In The US posted Wed Apr 21 1999 20:51:46 by NYC Int'l
Qantas And Their New Airbuses (332 And 380) When? posted Tue Dec 18 2007 19:21:37 by QantasHeavy
Freedom For US Domestic Market posted Sun Dec 16 2007 11:38:37 by AlexEU