Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
9W Flights To LAX/ORD From BOM/DEL Via Milan?  
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8997 times:

http://www1.economictimes.indiatimes...rways_boss/articleshow/3111033.cms
If I am reading it correctly, then BOM/DEL--LAX/ORD flights will be via Milan. Anyone with more information to confirm it?

Which American carrier has a presence in Milan that Jet can explore codeshare with?

Quotes:
To questions on the premier private carrier's growth plans, the Jet chief said the airline would continue with its global expansion programme.

He also announced plans to serve Milan in Italy from Delhi and Mumbai, besides Los Angeles and Chicago next year.

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2392 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8986 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would really be sad for BRU if this is the case... DEL-BRU-JFK will already be downgraded to an A332 (from July 1st) as the 80% load factor target wasn't reached.

From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake. Handling is terrible in MXP and a scissor hub there would be a mess. For me MXP doesn't make any sense at all, knowing all they invested in BRU.

I guess market dictates all this. But AZ failed to make that hub profitable with overseas traffic.

FB.



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8976 times:



Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake.

I too would have preferred to see these flights via BRU as it would greatly expand the no. of one-stop India-USA flights. IIRC, BRU may not be in a position to handle additional Jet flights at present.

I had expected LAX to be via PVG to utilise the remaining 7 weekly fifth freedom USA flights available to an Indian carrier.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 8938 times:

Doing a mock search on Expedia, I did not find any non-stop flights between MXP and ORD/LAX. Lack of non-stop competition should help Jet on these routes.

Is there a decent high yield business traffic between MXP-ORD and MXP-LAX?

BOM-ORD is one of the best O&D markets, along with BOM/DEL-LAX (though longer than CX's offerings via pacific). The business case for these flights is promising.


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 8832 times:



Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake. Handling is terrible in MXP and a scissor hub there would be a mess. For me MXP doesn't make any sense at all, knowing all they invested in BRU.

Jet Airways already announced it intends to start flights between India - Milan - US. The reason is very clear. There are many business links between India and Northern Italy (especially Milan). As you probably know a lot of designers (fashion and jewelery) are based in the Milan area. Given the fact that India is a large producer of cut diamonds, a direct link between India and Milan is not strange. Furthermore, the Milan - US market is bigger than the Brussels - US market. As competition on the Milan - US market is becoming less (because people start avoiding AZ) Milan is now a very interesting point to establish an European hub (Jet Airways also indicated that it wants to establish a European hub at MXP). It´s unclear what this will mean for BRU, but I doubt BRU will get all stopovers of the Jet Airways India - US flights.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7643 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8505 times:



Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 3):
Is there a decent high yield business traffic between MXP-ORD and MXP-LAX?

Between ORD and MXP, yes, but its highly seasonal and drops off enourmously in the winter.

Between LAX and MXP, a little, but not too much.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineConti764 From Belgium, joined Dec 2007, 234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8452 times:

Well, there is no room at BRU for an extra four 9W-jets at the moment. The morning is almost at max capacity, already forcing smaller carriers flying to BRU to use remote stands.

People sometimes ask how the airport managed in the nineties when Sabena had a huge number of widebodies at BRU, aside a vast number of Asian and American carriers, but times changed. Carriers like 9W, but also CO, UA, US, DL, AA, EY, and other first tier carriers demand a gate with bridge for their operation these days and there are simply not enough of those gates available at BRU.

The airport management should now focus on attracting more Asian (afternoon) carriers thus making the airport more attractive to interested carriers and when they established a strong base start building a new, all widebody and transfer friendly terminal 3 to allow a further grow.

After that, maybe 9W will reconsider routing all their flights trough BRU.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8244 times:



Quoting Conti764 (Reply 6):
Carriers like 9W, but also CO, UA, US, DL, AA, EY, and other first tier carriers demand a gate with bridge for their operation these days and there are simply not enough of those gates available at BRU.

Are there current plans to expand? If yes, how long before new gates with aerobridges will be available?

If fuel prices stay high, then India-USA non-stops may not flourish, in which case one-stop flights through DXB/Europe may remain economical. Splitting one-stop flights through BRU, PVG, and MXP does not make sense unless these intermediate points offer high yield business traffic.


User currently offlineUnitedSuperDC8 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8182 times:

Air One of Italy is launching nonstop service from Milan to Chicago on June 21, 2008. I imagine they will attract the O & D market. They also are launching service from MXP to BOS and have plans to add MIA, WAS, NYC, LAX at some point. I don't think MXP will be so free of competition.

Also, United will codeshare with Air One as a full Star Alliance partner. United also recently signed a codeshare agreement with Jet Airways. It should be interesting.



No thanks - keep the 'Change'.....Al Gore invented two things: the internet & global warming
User currently offlineLambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8174 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 5):
Between LAX and MXP, a little, but not too much

Fashion, Music, Film, Industry, Tourist, VFR

It is well known that the tourist trade and VFR are on the usual low yield end. However I believe fully that the Jet Airways product will do more than well within the Northern Italian market to both India and to North America. One thing to remember is that there is more and more Indian trade with Italy. Of note would be the fashion and IT industries. Both of which are more than strong in the Lombard region. Mixing that with the demand for cargo and passenger traffic from LAX to Milan for the various industries and you have route that just might work to a serious yield advantage

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake. Handling is terrible in MXP and a scissor hub there would be a mess. For me MXP doesn't make any sense at all, knowing all they invested in BRU.

How would it be a mistake?

There is a market between Northern Italy and Los Angeles, just as there is a market between Northern Italy and India. The cargo alone between the two markets is vast. Adding to that 2 of the Worlds business centers and you have a combination that would and will more than suffice. Just because Alitalia could not make the route work (a fault of their very own), does not mean that Jet Airways is making a bad decision.

I would gather to think there is more demand from Los Angeles to Milan than there would be to Brussels. Jet Airways is not just throwing a few city pairs on a map. Jet Airways is determined to enter market with driven yield and business. That can be seen with their recent announcement of SFO-PVG. Jet Airways is targeting business markets for yield return.

If memory serves correct LAX-MXP was flown on Alitalia from 1987-2003?, and LAX-BRU was flown by Citybird 1997-1999? There are many more Italian business and touristic ties to the Los Angeles/West Coast than there are to Belgium. Jet Airways sees a need to serve the market.

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
I guess market dictates all this. But AZ failed to make that hub profitable with overseas traffic

The problem is Alitalia, not Malpensa, or the Northern Italian market.

Quoting LAXDESI (Thread starter):
Which American carrier has a presence in Milan that Jet can explore codeshare with?

American Airlines - JFK
Continental Airlines - EWR
Delta Air Lines - ATL, JFK
US Airways - PHL


User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1289 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7346 times:



Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake. Handling is terrible in MXP and a scissor hub there would be a mess. For me MXP doesn't make any sense at all, knowing all they invested in BRU.

I would second the assumption that it seems wrong to split operations between BRU and MXP. I do understand the logic behind tapping the Chinese market on the way to LAX.

Now as far as investing in BRU, can you list me what are the substantial investments 9W has conceded at BRU in the run up to their opening of service and since that took place? Sure they are renting some office space somewhere and putting some crew to rest somewhere else but have they built a lounge, a terminal, taken a stake in the airport, hired tons of ground crew in their own name, set up local companies? I'm not saying that they are not generating jobs and revenue but it's the investment part that I highly put in doubt.

If it's only about adding ORD, then do it via BRU. And for LAX do it via PVG if you dare.



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7189 times:



Quoting BrightCedars (Reply 10):
If it's only about adding ORD, then do it via BRU. And for LAX do it via PVG if you dare.

BLR-PVG-LAX along with BOM-PVG-SFO would have been a good idea except that IT is likely to start BLR-SFO non-stop. DEL-PVG-LAX would work well as there is a lot of O&D traffic between DEL-LAX/SFO. However, CX will be a formidable competitor on BOM/DEL-LAX/SFO routes. HYD-BRU-ORD would make more sense than BLR-BRU-ORD as IT is likely to start BLR-JFK non-stop.

A lot can change between now and next year when Jet is likely to start flights through Milan.

It seems to me that at high fuel prices, ULH and near ULH India-USA flight may not be profitable--this bodes well for one-stop strategy of Jet Airways. It is also good for Euro/ME carriers which have well timed one-stop India-USA flights.


User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1195 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7159 times:

I am not sure what 9W's strategy is for NA flights. First they start a scissor hub in BRU for flights to YYZ, JFK and EWR (the latter 2 are redundant for me!!). Next they announce they want to use MXP as a hub.

Fine, maybe they can start ORD from there but what other destination. LAX seems, it could be a good choice from MXP from what i have read on this forum, but i think DEL-PVG-LAX, in the long run, would make more sense. Now the question is whether 9W has 77W for this route.

I think they do. 3 77W do BOM/DEL-LHR runs. 2 for JFK and 2 for EWR. The JFK is going to be downgraded to A332 from July, so that leaves 5 77W, 2 will be utilized from June 14th to start BOM-PVG-SFO, they have 3 more, so why not LAX from DEL via PVG.

Also, they could look into starting IAD from MXP along with ORD but what will the origin be from india, BLR and HYD come to mind.
Now what i don't understand is that a scissor hub allows pax to connect from all airports in india (with regards to 9W) to NA destinations, but having 2 hubs in Europe doesn't allow that. It would be nice if they concentrated on their BRU hub (even though BRU has few gates at peak times).

With the following flights:

BOM-BRU-EWR
DEL-BRU-JFK
MAA-BRU-YYZ

they could have added:

BLR-BRU-IAD
HYD-BRU-ORD
ATQ-BRU-YVR
CCU-BRU-IAH

But i guess the latter 4 are not happening.


9W is moving away from this "scissor hub" strategy and is trying to get yields to go up.

All in all i cannot blame them for trying something different especially at this time when the aviation industry is sufferring due to rise in fuel prices etc.

As an optimist, I am hoping the MXP hub will work for them rather than against them.  Smile



come fly with me
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17548 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7138 times:



Quoting Conti764 (Reply 6):
Well, there is no room at BRU for an extra four 9W-jets at the moment.

Did they not know this beforehand? Who is doing the planning here? It's as if they're MX or AM Wink

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 9):
There is a market between Northern Italy and Los Angeles

There may be but they're not going to fly an Indian carrier unless they partner with a local Italian airline. It's the same thing as BRU--they have to get the local market and they can't get that with a few long haul flights a day.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineJanmnastami From Italy, joined Apr 2008, 828 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7088 times:

Air One will start the new route from MXP to Boston on 27 June and the new route to Chicago on 26 June.

From MXP, at the moment, there isn't any link with India.


User currently offlineLambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7071 times:



Quoting Janmnastami (Reply 14):
From MXP, at the moment, there isn't any link with India

Alitalia Cargo to Delhi, Mumbai

Cargoitalia to Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai

Cargo exists, just not passenger traffic..


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25459 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7060 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 5):
Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 3):
Is there a decent high yield business traffic between MXP-ORD and MXP-LAX?

Between ORD and MXP, yes, but its highly seasonal and drops off enourmously in the winter.

That seems unusual. Normally, high yield business traffic is stronger in the winter than the summer when many business travellers are on vacation. It's the opposite for leisure traffic to/from Europe.


User currently offlineLambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7036 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16):
That seems unusual. Normally, high yield business traffic is stronger in the winter than the summer when many business travellers are on vacation. It's the opposite for leisure traffic to/from Europe

I would guess the original poster had meant that the leisure traffic drops off in Winter, not Business traffic. Milan is year-round business, and seasonal for tourists. The exceptions being July and August when business is somewhat in a lull do to vacations and what not on the Milanese side of things.


User currently offlineJanmnastami From Italy, joined Apr 2008, 828 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7028 times:



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 15):
Alitalia Cargo to Delhi, Mumbai

Cargoitalia to Chennai, Delhi, and Mumbai

Cargo exists, just not passenger traffic..

I was refererring to passengers, not cargo. Cargoitalia is in deep water and it's reducing the fleet.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6876 times:



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 12):
The JFK is going to be downgraded to A332 from July, so that leaves 5 77W, 2 will be utilized from June 14th to start BOM-PVG-SFO, they have 3 more, so why not LAX from DEL via PVG.

I wonder if Jet is waiting for better time slots at PVG before it starts another flight via PVG--perhaps to YVR.

Quoting Mk777 (Reply 12):
As an optimist, I am hoping the MXP hub will work for them rather than against them.

I am with you on that. I would have preferred LAX thru BRU as it would have given me one more one-stop LAX-MAA option.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6683 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Quoting Conti764 (Reply 6):
Well, there is no room at BRU for an extra four 9W-jets at the moment.

Did they not know this beforehand? Who is doing the planning here? It's as if they're MX or AM

Someone suggested they had hired AI planners.  duck 

I think Jet should also look into flying India-USA non-stop with 773ER--not sure what city pairs would make the most sense given 773ER's range limitations.


User currently offlineAbrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 55
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 6483 times:



Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 1):
I would really be sad for BRU if this is the case... DEL-BRU-JFK will already be downgraded to an A332 (from July 1st) as the 80% load factor target wasn't reached.

From an organizational point of view this would be a mistake. Handling is terrible in MXP and a scissor hub there would be a mess. For me MXP doesn't make any sense at all, knowing all they invested in BRU.

I guess market dictates all this. But AZ failed to make that hub profitable with overseas traffic.

FB.

= 9W downgrading their operations at BRU has more to do with their options at BRU than anything else. They are looking at MXP because BRU is failing to meet their strategic objective.

Quoting LJ (Reply 4):
Jet Airways already announced it intends to start flights between India - Milan - US. The reason is very clear. There are many business links between India and Northern Italy (especially Milan). As you probably know a lot of designers (fashion and jewelery) are based in the Milan area. Given the fact that India is a large producer of cut diamonds, a direct link between India and Milan is not strange. Furthermore, the Milan - US market is bigger than the Brussels - US market. As competition on the Milan - US market is becoming less (because people start avoiding AZ) Milan is now a very interesting point to establish an European hub (Jet Airways also indicated that it wants to establish a European hub at MXP). It´s unclear what this will mean for BRU, but I doubt BRU will get all stopovers of the Jet Airways India - US flights.

= This diamond thing means nothing really. Antwerp is a huge diamond entreport and there is enough traffic between the two. MXP offers significant business opportunities with India ... but dont discount Belgium just yet. If you look at India trade data, Belgium is actually very much in the top 3-5 partners.

Quoting Conti764 (Reply 6):
Well, there is no room at BRU for an extra four 9W-jets at the moment. The morning is almost at max capacity, already forcing smaller carriers flying to BRU to use remote stands.

= This is the MAJOR reason for 9W exploring MXP. When BRU was announced, the idea was to have several flights making the scissor hub idea sustainable. However, with the bullish growth of BRU, 9W has increasingly found it difficult to obtain slots and gates for added frequency. Without the added frequency and destinations beyond just YYZ, EWR, and JFK, 9W is bleeding a lot of money on these flights. They have a problem filling in J ... though, suprisingly F does ok ... and value conscious Y is fine as well. Without BRU giving more slots (and if MXP takes off), I actually expect their BRU operations to cease.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Did they not know this beforehand? Who is doing the planning here? It's as if they're MX or AM

= How did I know that you would be on this thread with your pessimism ... though, again, we will disagree ... your usual point is one'stop doesnt work, and mine is it does. Anyways, 9W had a committment which BRU has not lived up to.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
There may be but they're not going to fly an Indian carrier unless they partner with a local Italian airline. It's the same thing as BRU--they have to get the local market and they can't get that with a few long haul flights a day.

= More than a local partner, they need a pan European partner. Not sure if Air One would be eager to sleep with 9W as much as SNBRU has.

Saludos from an awesome lounge at Oporto,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6406 times:



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 21):
Without BRU giving more slots (and if MXP takes off), I actually expect their BRU operations to cease.

I tend to agree. And if BOM-PVG-SFO does not do well due to undesirable PVG slots--and Jet is unable to get better slots--then Jet may have to reconsider its PVG flights.


User currently offlineConti764 From Belgium, joined Dec 2007, 234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6380 times:



Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 7):
Are there current plans to expand? If yes, how long before new gates with aerobridges will be available?

Some people pointed out to that direction, but before a new terminal can be build, there are some major issues that need to be solved.

A) Getting the agreement of all parties to start construction.
B) Politics about the noise problems around BRU.
C) Constructing the first part of the new railway tunnel from the current station past the former DHL building they are demolishing now.
D) Finances are no problem, but there has to be a market for it.

A) and B) shouldn't be to difficult, although you never know in Belgium. C) can be arranged without much problems.

The real challenge will be D).
In order for BRU to grow so a new terminal would be viable they have to attract more carriers to use this terminal. That's a problem. The morning (mainly US, 9W-traffic, SN Africa and spread throughout the week HU and EY) is about at running at full potential. So in the morning getting a new terminal could be economically good.
But then you'll have the afternoon in which BRU actually falls asleep. The B-concourse is practically empty for a huge amount of time, and in the evening most gates are taken by smallbodies. So in the afternoon a new terminal would be an economical disaster.

To solve that issue they should focus on more Asian (afternoon) destinations, but to do so you have to offer interested companies something and for the moment BRU cannot do so. Although US-BRU traffic is big enough (at least to some destinations) there is a much smaller demand for Asia-BRU traffic.

SN is at the middle of this. A year ago, the airport was hoping 9W could fill the long haul gap Sabena left and (SN) Brussels Airlines could not fill. But now the airport has come into it's own limitations since 9W is willing to have all their planes together at BRU at the same time in the morning, but there is no room to so.

Sure, there are some short term solutions like spreading the gates over multiple flights (e.g. the SN Africa birds coming in, letting pax disembark, tow the plane to the remote area, clean, make ready, tow it back to the gate and allow pax to embark while, in the meanwhile, another plane could have used that gate), but that's expensive and takes a lot of work.

They have already implemented a short term solution by moving some flights to the A-concourse (shengen) but I don't know how they are going to solve the immigration issues over there.

Another solution could have been to use the old airport facility in a different way, less space for low cost and the construction of an extension of the B-concourse at the location where now the low cost pier will be build.

The best solution is and remains a new terminal, but in order to so, SN will have to grow and the only way they can grow is by finally joining an alliance which gives them the material and the cash to open new (long haul) routes and allows BRU to build a transfer friendly sparkling new terminal. Untill the day such terminal opens, they will have to struggle to be able to offer companies space.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17548 posts, RR: 46
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 6365 times:



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 21):
How did I know that you would be on this thread with your pessimism ... though, again, we will disagree ... your usual point is one'stop doesnt work

I didn't even bring up the one stop issue, but rather the fact that they ran out of real estate for their BRU hub. Never mind the fact that the whole scissor hub doesn't work, but they didn't even anticipate how much gate space they needed? That's poor planning, in addition to poor route planning Wink



E pur si muove -Galileo
25 Conti764 : Good question. I don't know the answer. If I remember a year ago, there were talks about 70 weekly 9W-flights (35 (5 a day) eastbound and 35 (5 a day
26 LAXDESI : Any chance AA will discontinue its JFK-BRU, and ORD-BRU(UA or AA ?) in exchange for codeshare with Jet. This way two slots can open up that may allow
27 Nimish : And what was their "strategic objective" and why did they not achieve it? Surely they'd have projected their demands to BRU and made sure they had th
28 Post contains links and images Lambert747 : The one thing that I think many are forgetting is that Jet Airways is being courted to join Star Alliance, of course at current it is at early stages.
29 Mk777 : I have to agree with you on this one. Offering both EWR and JFK doesn't make sense, send one plane to ORD instead. Also, what do the loads look like
30 Conti764 : BOM-BRU-EWR does pretty good (remains 77W), DEL-BRU-JFK is far worse. I believe in a scissor hub operation, since it is the best solution for the mom
31 Abrelosojos : = We will have to agree to continue disagreeing. Given the status of infrastructure, scissor hub works for 9W. Like any other scissor hub, it must be
32 DTWAGENT : So....They spent money to make BRU a hub and now they want to reduce this hub and try making MXP a hub??? If that is true. That is a waste of money. A
33 Behramjee : 9W should never have started JFK because if they did their home work, they would have learnt that for 42 years now Air India never could make India-J
34 Janmnastami : The problem was AZ, not MXP.
35 Mk777 : Take these flights and substitute BRU for MXP. Now speaking hypothetically, if 9W eventually wants all these routes (latter 4 as the former 3 are alr
36 Post contains links LAXDESI : Looks like Jet will not be launching any new international flights until the end of 2009. Hopefully, more slots at BRU may be available by then. http:
37 Flying Belgian : This is certainly a wise move. 9W is a very young airline (at least internationally speaking) and it certainly needs to try and consolidate itself. A
38 Flying lsd : where do you see extra capacity in Brussels airport next year?? only a small LCC pier 'll be open!!!
39 VTNYC : Booked 9W hoping to fly and 77W JFK-BRU-DEL and got shafted with a 330. Does not make much difference in the back, I guess. Any one know if the 330's
40 LACA773 : LAX will be put on hold until the end of 2009?
41 Flying Belgian : Hi VTNYC ! 9W does use the leased A332s from time to time, but I noticed them more frequently the last weeks. I have no idea at all about their cabin
42 BCA2005 : Couldn't the problem In regards to both BRU and MXP, couldn't the problem be solved by retiming flights ex India to leave around 5am, arriving late mo
43 VTNYC : Thank you FB. Keeping my fingers crossed that I get the non-leased 330's on July 17, JFK-BRU-DEL.
44 LAXDESI : I read in another site that Jet is likely to park two 773ERs.
45 MaverickM11 : That doesn't seem to be the case at all right now for 9W
46 Lambert747 : Wouldnt that make sense since JFK is being downgraded to A332 service?
47 LAXDESI : The capital cost of parking each aircraft is around $42,000 per day, for a total of $84,000. I suppose Jet is not able to identify any routes where i
48 9W748Capt : Would AA be amenable to this - seeing as they already fly ORD-BRU with their own metal? And I believe the two have signed a code-sharing agreement fo
49 Legacyins : I assume you don't know they started service into SFO this past Saturday.
50 Abrelosojos : = But I don't think 9W could be blamed for this in its entirety. Remember, BRU hub was helped by the political atmosphere in Belgium which has change
51 Flying Belgian : Waw. This would be a very bad news I imagine... As to the LAX opening, I sincerely think it'll be routed through China or HK. It makes more sense tha
52 9W748Capt : I conveniently forgot that - thanks for reminding. So yes, they HAVE ventured out of NYC, but still not utilizing the scissors-hub I'm assuming they
53 MHTripple7 : Just for the record, Jet is putting the 77W back on the JFK route for the winter season. Are loads to India from the U.S. typically better in the wint
54 LAXDESI : Loads are strongest in the winter season. I suppose they will find other routes for the A332s that will be freed up; I would think Dubai would be a p
55 VTNYC : Me thinks it's aircraft availability issue. July and August are the strongest months in terms of bookings, November-December being a close second. St
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...
Qantas Adds Another 4 Flights To LAX From '03 posted Tue Jun 25 2002 23:54:23 by Jiml1126
Why A Hundred Flights To San Diego From Lax? posted Mon Jan 17 2000 23:42:04 by Matt D
MOD Still Trying To Keep Skywest Flights To LAX posted Fri Apr 25 2008 08:06:03 by FATFlyer
AF Indian Bound Flights To Be Operated From 2C posted Sat Mar 22 2008 02:24:25 by Stevens91
Royal Jordanian Flights To LAX posted Sat Nov 3 2007 21:33:12 by 747400sp
QF Extra Flights To LAX posted Sun May 20 2007 08:00:38 by Planetime
Google Earth: Inbound Flights To LAX posted Sat Dec 3 2005 02:28:51 by GoBoeing
Flights To Eastern Europe From VIE posted Mon Sep 12 2005 17:13:43 by Pe@rson
Indy Starts Flights To SAN Tomorrow From IAD posted Wed Apr 13 2005 22:36:28 by KarlB737
Flights To BKK/HKT From UK? posted Tue Apr 5 2005 18:26:36 by Geoffm
Qantas Adds Another 4 Flights To LAX From '03 posted Tue Jun 25 2002 23:54:23 by Jiml1126
Why A Hundred Flights To San Diego From Lax? posted Mon Jan 17 2000 23:42:04 by Matt D
MOD Still Trying To Keep Skywest Flights To LAX posted Fri Apr 25 2008 08:06:03 by FATFlyer
AF Indian Bound Flights To Be Operated From 2C posted Sat Mar 22 2008 02:24:25 by Stevens91
Royal Jordanian Flights To LAX posted Sat Nov 3 2007 21:33:12 by 747400sp
QF Extra Flights To LAX posted Sun May 20 2007 08:00:38 by Planetime
Google Earth: Inbound Flights To LAX posted Sat Dec 3 2005 02:28:51 by GoBoeing
Flights To Eastern Europe From VIE posted Mon Sep 12 2005 17:13:43 by Pe@rson
Indy Starts Flights To SAN Tomorrow From IAD posted Wed Apr 13 2005 22:36:28 by KarlB737
Flights To BKK/HKT From UK? posted Tue Apr 5 2005 18:26:36 by Geoffm