Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US - Japan Reach Open-Skies Deal  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25183 posts, RR: 48
Posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7603 times:

Details pending, but looks like the largest trans-Pacific market just got liberalized.

Quote:
U.S., Japan reach "open skies" aviation pact
Friday December 11, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and Japan reached a landmark aviation agreement on Friday night, a deal that eases barriers to passenger and cargo services and opens up the possibility for stronger alliances.

story;
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-Jap...n-skies-rb-425631120.html?x=0&.v=1


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1540 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7578 times:

Now that there is an agreement, what are the estimates for when UA/NH/CO will get a JV?


717,72S,732/3/4/5/G/8/9,744,752/3,763/4,772/3,D9S/5,M8/90,D10,319/20/21,332/3,388,CR2/7/9,EM2,ER4,E70/75/90,SF3,AR8
User currently offlineAznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3662 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7446 times:

If the Japanese minister did not start of the bidding frenzy to align JL with DL or AA, would AA and JL have worked to apply for JV as well?


The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineCrosswinds21 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 698 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7349 times:

Good. Now, how about that AA/BA/IB ATI that was supposed to have been approved in October?  irked 

User currently offlineHNL-Jack From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 819 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7329 times:

This is pure speculation, but I suspect that HA will be one of the first to take advantage, by initiating service from HNL to Haneda. Almost all traffic between Tokyo and Hawaii is O&D and as a result there is very little need for connecting service. The convenience of Haneda will be very attractive to this market.


Grew up in the business and continued the family tradition.
User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2864 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7318 times:

As with the supposed "groundbreaking" U.S.-E.U. open skies deal, the significance of this pact will really only affect one market: Tokyo (in the former, it was London). Other Japanese airports (NGO, KIX) have always been easily accessible to new entrants, and probably won't see any new service at all. Though, in this case, two new airports become available: NRT, as well as HND! The question is, will NRT see any new flights, or will everyone try to serve HND? I imagine the major international NRT hubs (JL, NH, DL, and UA) will all have to stay, while HND will handle a select few O&D flights.

UA could probably replace the 2nd daily frequencies from ORD and SFO to NRT with ORD-HND and SFO-HND. This would preserve the full connectivity of the "hub" (if you can even call it that) while allowing Tokyo FFs and foreign visitors (businesspeople I'm sure) much better access to the city. DL might want to serve HND from SEA or maybe LAX (both are already strong int'l gateways for the airline and lots of O&D to Tokyo), perhaps even HNL - such a flight would appeal to the local Japanese market. Not sure if AA and CO could do much with HND flights, they may want to stay put at NRT for now given the extensive onward connecting opportunities from there. JL and NH could certainly add flights from HND to JFK, LAX, and HNL. US would be the only new airline that could conceivably benefit from this, but they aren't ready to fly to Asia yet...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineElBandGeek From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 753 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7260 times:



Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 5):
UA could probably replace the 2nd daily frequencies from ORD and SFO to NRT with ORD-HND and SFO-HND. This would preserve the full connectivity of the "hub" (if you can even call it that) while allowing Tokyo FFs and foreign visitors (businesspeople I'm sure) much better access to the city

SFO/ORD-HND is a very likely outcome here, however I think (or should I say, hope) that if UA/CO/NH start a JV then it might make more sense having NH doing the flying. Being strictly O&D would mean it wouldn't need capacity like a 777. A 787 would probably work best for the routes, and NH will have theirs quite awhile before UA does. It would be a good test for the "787 is the 757 of the Pacific" theory. On a personal note, I'd rather fly a NH 787 than a UA 772/744  Wink


User currently offlineDesertFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7215 times:

Does this hurt the US/DL deal? Wasn't part of the trade access to NRT? Overall this sounds like a good step forward.

User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8556 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7204 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting FL787 (Reply 1):
Now that there is an agreement, what are the estimates for when UA/NH/CO will get a JV?

I recall reading an article recently ( will try to find the link ) where US officials said something to the effect that an open skies agreement was a necessary prerequisite to , but not a guarantee of , ATI agreements , ie there cannot be any US carrier/Japan carrier ATI agreements without open skies , but that does not mean that they will automatically be granted if open skies happens .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineHeeseokKoo From South Korea, joined Jan 2005, 639 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7180 times:

Some of details are available on:

http://airlineroute.net/2009/12/11/usjapan-openskies/


User currently offlineAznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3662 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7061 times:

When does this take into effect?

Quoting HeeseokKoo (Reply 9):
Some of details are available on:

From the blog:

Quote:
*Removal of restrictions of 5th freedom rights beyond each country (but approval from 3rd country remains required)

So I wonder if DL will reconsider canceling SGN since they can sell tickets on SGN-NRT portion.



The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently onlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2622 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6929 times:

The agreement details posted on airlineroute.net shows that NRT will be reduced by eight weekly slots (who will lose those?) and HND will be increased by 40 roundtrips, half by Japanese airlines, 8 by U.S. carriers and the rest by other international carriers.
But, the HND slots are only available between 2200 (or 2300?) and 0700 local time. Leaving HND at 2200 places arrivals in the US Central and Eastern time zones too late for any connections. If the slots mean arrivals have to come in after 2200, then departures can only be realistically made between 0000 and 0700. Do people really want a 0000 to 0700 international departure to the U.S.?
Best departure times for open slots, example CO
IAH 1700 HND 2200-0000 IAH 2040 (too late for connections
or
IAH 1700 HND 2200-0700 IAH 0340 (ouch) too early for connections).

EWR 1700 HND 2200-0000 EWR 2235 (too late for connections
or
EWR 1800 HND 2200-0700 EWR 0535 (OK for connections).
In the case of NYC, no service is anywhere close to the above timings required by the HND slots. Same thing for timings in the LAX-TYO market.

It looks to me like the Tokyo open skies just adds flights in a time frame when the airport has open "slots". Did the U. S. get sold a lemon?


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2406 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6928 times:

I think we will see CO transpacific service at HND much sooner rather than later, along with GUM-HND... they didn't waste much time in firing out a press release to applaud the move.

User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2920 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6875 times:



Quoting CODC10 (Reply 12):
they didn't waste much time in firing out a press release to applaud the move.

None of the players wasted time. AA, UA, CO, DL all issued press releases within minutes of each other.


User currently offlineCatIII From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6855 times:

This is a joke, not so called "open skies". How can it be open skies when there are restrictions on routes and barriers to access at Haneda and Narita? Last time I looked, open skies meant none of these...

We caved big time to the Japanese.

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 11):
Did the U. S. get sold a lemon?

Damn right we did...we got rolled.

Quoting HNL-Jack (Reply 4):
This is pure speculation, but I suspect that HA will be one of the first to take advantage, by initiating service from HNL to Haneda.

Not so fast. They have to make a route case with DOT from what I hear. There's only 4 slots on each side (U.S. and Japanese), so let the bidding begin.

[Edited 2009-12-11 23:12:27]

User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6780 times:



Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 11):
Did the U. S. get sold a lemon?

In other discussions around here, Japan is considering opening up some slots during the day over time. Right now...lemon...future...lemonade



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6768 times:



Quoting CatIII (Reply 14):
Not so fast. They have to make a route case with DOT from what I hear. There's only 4 slots on each side (U.S. and Japanese), so let the bidding begin.

This makes having codeshares and JV that much more important.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3662 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6691 times:

I think the immediate benefits with the recent Open Skies deal is opening and competition for those 4 HND spots, anti-trust immunity, and 5th freedom (something AA and CO may look into, but not necessarily utilize at this moment).

The main losers will probably be DL and UA since they have the most slots to give. But I wonder if this reduction of slots for US carriers will hinder US starting proposed PHL-NRT.



The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineB747-4U3 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6520 times:



Quoting CatIII (Reply 14):
This is a joke, not so called "open skies". How can it be open skies when there are restrictions on routes and barriers to access at Haneda and Narita? Last time I looked, open skies meant none of these...

Haneda and Narita are slot restricted airports just like Heathrow. There could be open skies but if there are no slots available then airlines will not be able to operate their flights. The overall number of slots between the US and Tokyo is increasing anyway.

Quoting ElBandGeek (Reply 6):
Being strictly O&D would mean it wouldn't need capacity like a 777. A 787 would probably work best for the routes, and NH will have theirs quite awhile before UA does.

I could see it going the other way and needing large capacity aircraft. HND-SFO would, if timed correctly, get domestic feed at both ends as well as O&D traffic. I think it all depends on whether the time restriction of international flights is lifted.


User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1071 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6426 times:

It appears that the USA has settled for exactly the same deal as the Japanese have offered 4 times already this year!

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 11):
The agreement details posted on airlineroute.net shows that NRT will be reduced by eight weekly slots (who will lose those?)



Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 17):
The main losers will probably be DL and UA since they have the most slots to give. But I wonder if this reduction of slots for US carriers will hinder US starting proposed PHL-NRT.

No US carriers will have to give up NRT slots. The combined share of slots held by US carriers will decrease simply because more slots are being made available and the US side has agreed that they should not be given any of these new slots.

Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 10):
So I wonder if DL will reconsider canceling SGN since they can sell tickets on SGN-NRT portion.

The restriction on selling NRT-SGN tickets was set by Vietnam, not Japan. Therefore, it is unaltered by this deal.



Ryan / HKG
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4110 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 6281 times:

The way to get two countries to agree on an open-skies agreement is when both countries are in such desperate times with respect to their airlines. Then, magic can occur!

User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7578 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 6140 times:

I wonder if AA and CO will try and move flights to HND or keep them at NRT to take advantage of connections.


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8321 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6008 times:



Quoting CatIII (Reply 14):
This is a joke, not so called "open skies". How can it be open skies when there are restrictions on routes and barriers to access at Haneda and Narita? Last time I looked, open skies meant none of these...

As pointed out above, you're comparing apples and oranges, or seriously confused. Open Skies agreements have little to no dependency/effect on slot allocation at slot restricted airports. Go ahead and try to get a LHR slot at a busy time and let me know how you do.


User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3062 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5993 times:

I don't see why US couldn't make their A332s work on PHL-NRT. I believe that on the westbound leg, it would be restricted.

The current range for the A332(not the HGW version) is 6749 nm.

PHL-NRT IS 5870 nm.

PHL-NRT is about 800 nm longer than PHL-NRT.



E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16862 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5974 times:



Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 5):
Not sure if AA and CO could do much with HND flights, they may want to stay put at NRT for now given the extensive onward connecting opportunities from there.



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 21):
I wonder if AA and CO will try and move flights to HND or keep them at NRT to take advantage of connections.

I think CO will move their 4 daily NRT-GUM to HND, the Guam flights are all Japanese O&D traffic.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
25 Jfk777 : the reason there are no midnight departures to NRT is the airport is closed until 6:00AM so a JFK to NRT flight would have to leave at 1:00AM to land
26 HeeseokKoo : My guess is: EWR 2400 HND 0500 HND 0700 EWR 0535 The airlineroute.net link says 8 weekly roundtrip slots is to be returned, although I'm not sure wha
27 Wn676 : Just a slight correction...the proposal is for PHX-NRT.
28 DFWEagle : Definitely no NRT slots currently held by US carriers need to be returned. The proportion of slots held by US carriers at NRT will be reduced from 28
29 Post contains links DFWEagle : Here is a news article with the correct information -: http://www.nni.nikkei.co.jp/e/fr/tnks/Nni20091212D12JF044.htm
30 CatIII : Which would be a great argument, but my understanding of the agreement is that unlike LHR there is no mechanism for airlines to transfer, trade, or p
31 Cubsrule : Why are the Japanese authorities so opposed to a completely free market for NRT slots? I've never understood...
32 AznMadSci : Thanks for the clarification. I had thought it was on the Japan side that placed that restriction. PHL, PHX, same thing! It's a P-hub for US! Thanks
33 Thenoflyzone : Question, does NW (DL) have 5th freedom from NRT to all the Asian destinations it serves? I'm talking about NRT to BKK, PEK, HKG, PVG, SIN, TPE, MNL,
34 Jc2354 : Will any of the airlines that once served Haneda be given any priority or special considerations? An example from the US, would be Northwest and PanAm
35 BMI727 : It sounds like it is open skies, with the exception of Tokyo. Not a whole lot different than the case in London it seems. I believe so.
36 MAH4546 : For the HND slots, I see UA going for SFO-HND and AA going for LAX-HND. Not sure what CO and DL will want - maybe HNL-HND and SEA-HND, respectively. T
37 USPIT10L : They do from every market except SGN. SGN has traffic rights from the USA, not Japanese traffic rights, meaning DL cannot pick up Japanese O&D passen
38 FWAERJ : If UA does SFO-HND (almost a given), I expect AA to go for ORD-HND or DFW-HND instead of LAX-HND, though LAX-HND might work for AA. As for CO, I see
39 MaverickM11 : Anyone with a major operation at NRT is going to be in defense mode with more competition now allowed. That said if DL doesn't grab JL, they suddenly
40 MAH4546 : You are forgetting the time restrictions. IAH-HND will be a mess. It can't rely on O&D, and going anywhere past the West Coast makes it a disaster in
41 CALPSAFltSkeds : If you read the NIKKIE.com article, it states the 2200-0700 timings are for the four round trips until HND adds a runway, then 40 additional roundtrip
42 SW733 : AA needs to stay at NRT, due to substantial connections with JAL...but they will certainly want a presence at HND too. I see them operating at both..
43 CatIII : Except, as I said above:
44 AznMadSci : That's if JL accepts the AA offer and remains in OneWorld or they align with DL and SkyTeam.
45 LAXdude1023 : Actually regardless they should stay at NRT for the ORD and DFW flights. There are still more connections available there even if JL goes to Skyteam.
46 MAH4546 : No, that is regardless of what happens. People often forget about interlining, which is still huge business for all 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...
India Approves New US Open Skies Deal posted Wed Apr 13 2005 23:23:29 by YUL332LX
US Seeks Open Skies Deal With Canada posted Sun Jan 25 2004 21:47:36 by CanadaEH
EU To Negotiate Single US Open Skies Deal posted Thu Jun 12 2003 18:00:42 by United01
US/UK Open Skies Deal On The Table? posted Fri Aug 16 2002 21:04:22 by Qantas744
US And Cape Verde Signed Open-skies Deal posted Sat Jun 22 2002 00:29:52 by Jiml1126
US-UK Open Skies Deal Troubling For United posted Sun Dec 9 2001 18:34:02 by SFOintern
Britain Says NO To UK-US Open Skies Deal posted Tue Oct 23 2001 02:25:22 by Jiml1126
France / US Open Skies Deal Reached | SIA CDG-USA? posted Wed Oct 17 2001 23:41:40 by Singapore_Air
Canada & EU Sign Open Skies Deal posted Wed May 6 2009 12:21:21 by HarrisonRuess
EU And Canada Reach Open Skies posted Tue Dec 9 2008 07:52:24 by Flyb