Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Service To Asia From MEX?  
User currently offlineolli From Mexico, joined Mar 2001, 341 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9292 times:

We all have been witnessing of how GRU is experiencing a boom with new service and increased frequency / capacity to a lot of places. For example: DOH, DXB, TLV, IST, SIN (via BCN to start), ICN (via LAX) etc (Not mentioning service to Western Europe besides for the SQ flight). I understand that we are very close to one of the most well connected countries in the world (USA), that our airport is very restricted for long haul operations and, that our authorities are very protective to allow 5th freedom rights. However, we will ever see new top notch players landing in MEX anytime soon? (e.g EK, SQ, KE, EY, etc.)

There has been rumors regarding KE and HU intentions, but there is nothing definite yet.

Any thoughts?

Best Regards,

[Edited 2010-12-27 10:36:57]

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9234 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting olli (Thread starter):
There has been rumors regarding KE and HU intentions, but there is nothing definite yet.

Yes...there had been some interest in opening up ICN-SEA-MEX with KE and Beijing-TBD-MEX with HU, which in my opinion, would also be an extension of SEA. Wow! Nothing but widebody service to MEX from SEA...I don't believe it for a second.


User currently offlinescorp82 From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9224 times:

KE has indeed expressed interest in MEX and has been wanting to starting flights for quite awhile now. Ideally they wanted to be able to fly ICN-LAX-MEX with fifth freedom rights but seeing that they wouldn't be granted traffic rights on the LAX-MEX-LAX sectors, they started to seek alternate stopover cities. ICN-SEA-MEX may indeed materialize sooner than later.

I also believe that EK will commence flights to MEX at some point.

Additionally, in a recent interview, TK's CEO expressed interest in linking IST and MEX as well.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6466 posts, RR: 32
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9109 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting olli (Thread starter):
I understand that we are very close to one of the most well connected countries in the world (USA),
Quoting olli (Thread starter):
our airport is very restricted for long haul operations
Quoting olli (Thread starter):
our authorities are very protective to allow 5th freedom rights.

Without sounding pedantic, I believe you answered your own question.


User currently offlinemfe777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 8977 times:

Quoting scorp82 (Reply 2):
KE has indeed expressed interest in MEX and has been wanting to starting flights for quite awhile now. Ideally they wanted to be able to fly ICN-LAX-MEX with fifth freedom rights but seeing that they wouldn't be granted traffic rights on the LAX-MEX-LAX sectors, they started to seek alternate stopover cities. ICN-SEA-MEX may indeed materialize sooner than later.

I also believe that EK will commence flights to MEX at some point.

Additionally, in a recent interview, TK's CEO expressed interest in linking IST and MEX as well.

Does anyone think KE could do MEX as a tag on to existing ICN-DFW service, ICN-DFW-MEX? I know AA would try and fight it, but KE is expanding DFW service, and with a MEX tag on maybe they could increase DFW service to daily.


User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 8893 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mfe777 (Reply 4):
Does anyone think KE could do MEX as a tag on to existing ICN-DFW service, ICN-DFW-MEX? I know AA would try and fight it, but KE is expanding DFW service, and with a MEX tag on maybe they could increase DFW service to daily.

It's possible. The argument for ICN-SEA-MEX would be that:

1. There is no existing nonstop service between SEA-MEX (even AS only offers it through LAX). AA and maybe AM offers DFW-MEX service.

2. A number of airlines could codeshare through SEA include AS/QX and DL. Likewise, AM could codeshare on the KE flight from MEX to both SEA and ICN. DFW has very few SkyTeam members to feed KE.

3. I think there's a higher likelihood that the Mexican government would allow 5th Freedom authority through SEA, since there is no service to the Mexican Capital.

On the other side of the coin, if KE were to fly the ICN-DFW-MEX route...that could leave HU open to offer the Beijing-SEA-MEX.

As much as I would like to see both operate, that's probably way too much capacity.


User currently offlineMayaviaerj190 From Mexico, joined Jan 2008, 324 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8276 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 1):
Wow! Nothing but widebody service to MEX from SEA...I don't believe it for a second.

If there was nothing but widebody service to MEX from YVR for decades...why don't believe SEA "for a second"?

What about ICN/PEK-YVR-MEX? It is perfectly possible.

YVR-MEX traffic has been proved to be sustainable from the times of CPAir, then its succesors and then Mexicana, and during all this time JAL kept the 5th freedom. Why not SEA instead of YVR? Why not both?

Also... someone should be interested in abandoned Mexicana's codeshares with NZ & QF. Let the kangaroo revive the Fiesta route and have it wear a sombrero again.



My other plane is an A380.
User currently offlineBretonRLong From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8237 times:

Quoting mfe777 (Reply 4):
Without sounding pedantic, I believe you answered your own question.

What are they so protective for about these rights if no airline currently flys from MEX to these destinations?

[Edited 2010-12-27 20:47:03]

User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7616 posts, RR: 42
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8099 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):
There is no existing nonstop service between SEA-MEX (even AS only offers it through LAX). AA and maybe AM offers DFW-MEX service.

AM canceled MEX-DFW flights in 2005 if I am not mistaken. I doubt they will ever return because AA would just crush them. The KE ICN-DFW-MEX idea is an interesting proposition I must say. There was a time when we had 6 daily flights between DFW and MEX spread out throughout the day and with very interesting fares (also, AM had very attractive fares even in business... I once flew MEX-DFW-MEX on AM one way in coach and the return on business and I don't think I paid more than $350.00 all taxes and charges included!). So yeah, KE would help maybe keep fares realistic. Last month I had to go to Dallas for work (and take advantage of the weekend and see a friend) and there were no more seats on my preferred outbound flight and the cheapest fare available was over $800 in coach!!! Outrageous!

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):
As much as I would like to see both operate, that's probably way too much capacity.

Yes, I concur. I think that if KE goes ahead and launches ICN-SEA-MEX service, HU will probably have to find a different stopover if it still wants to fly to MEX... YVR anyone? How about YYC??? I am just speculating here.

Quoting Mayaviaerj190 (Reply 6):
If there was nothing but widebody service to MEX from YVR for decades...why don't believe SEA "for a second"?

What about ICN/PEK-YVR-MEX? It is perfectly possible.

YVR-MEX traffic has been proved to be sustainable from the times of CPAir, then its succesors and then Mexicana, and during all this time JAL kept the 5th freedom. Why not SEA instead of YVR? Why not both?

What killed JL's MEX-YVR-NRT was the imposition of visa requirements for Mexicans by the Canadian government. Or at least that is what I have read here a couple of times.

Now that MX is gone, AC is flying to MEX from YVR (or will start doing so soon) with A319s, and AM is also looking at launching nonstop MEX-YVR service on 73Ws (btw, AM placed its code on JL's flight, but only on the YVR-MEX-YVR segments).

If AM launches YVR, we will have up to 14 weekly nonstop flights, and sadly there will be no room for additional widebody fifth freedom service on top of that. It is just my opinion btw. I may of course be wrong.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6466 posts, RR: 32
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7696 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The thing with the KE flight to DFW and its possible tag on to MEX is sort of complicated.

1) The Korean community in DFW is huge, probably the 1st. or 2nd. in the US (I dated one lovely Korean lady from there, don´t ask) So thus, the flight is already filled with O&D traffic ICN-DFW year long.

2) The business traffic. Not that big, but I imagine that between a city like Seoul and DFW it must be mildly isgnificant.

In conclusion, there is no room in that flight for passengers tagging on to MEX.

If there ever is a KE flight between ICN and MEX,it´s going to be either nonstop by AM, or KE. The DFW is just not feasible and the SEA one does not make much sense to me.

Regards.


User currently offlineLH506 From Ecuador, joined May 2007, 466 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6670 times:

What are the current frequencies from European carriers to MEX?? What a/c are they using?

LH still 7/7 744
AF 14/7 772
KL 7/7 74M
BA 3/7 744
IB 14/7 343/346 ??????

How are they doing?

Any chance/rumours of LH adding MUC or BA going 7/7??



NOT FLOWN: 707 717 736/9 764 77L 787 300B2 300B4 345 RJ70/146-100 F27 ATR72 CRJ1/4/10 E120/135/40/95 Q1/2/3 M87
User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2681 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6501 times:

KE ICN-ANC-MEX and no need for U.S. visas to transit.
Other options for KE: ICN-SEA-MEX, ICN-PDX-MEX or ICN-SLC-MEX; and if KE wants to add additional service to Bay Area or Great Los Angeles ICN-SJC/SMF-MEX or ICN-ONT-MEX repectively.
Major problem with a route via U.S. West Coast is the likehood of Mexico granting 5th liberty to KE and how less attractive those flight would be for those without U.S: visas (doesn't apply to ANC).



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6289 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 9):
The thing with the KE flight to DFW and its possible tag on to MEX is sort of complicated.

1) The Korean community in DFW is huge, probably the 1st. or 2nd. in the US (I dated one lovely Korean lady from there, don´t ask) So thus, the flight is already filled with O&D traffic ICN-DFW year long.

2) The business traffic. Not that big, but I imagine that between a city like Seoul and DFW it must be mildly isgnificant.

In conclusion, there is no room in that flight for passengers tagging on to MEX.

If there ever is a KE flight between ICN and MEX,it´s going to be either nonstop by AM, or KE. The DFW is just not feasible and the SEA one does not make much sense to me.

Well, its not the first of second in the US. Those distinctions belong to LA and New York accordingly. But it is, by far, the largest in the Southwest (outside of California). Dallas and one of its suburbs (Carrollton) have significantly sized Koreatowns. Also Dallas (along with Atlanta and Seattle) do have the fastest growing Korean communities on a percentage basis in the US.

Another thing is that DFW-ICN has loads in the mid 80's to mid 90's year round. I dont know if there is enough room to add MEX to that tag. SEA-ICN also has high loads and a larger market to ICN, but the local traffic to MEX is not nearly as high, and they have Asiana flying there as well. ICN-SEA-MEX makes more sense to me. However, YVR would probably be the best tag because of visa issues.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineCODCAIAH From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 177 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6186 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 11):
and no need for U.S. visas to transit.

Interesting-- so ANC like many airports outside the US has a sterile transit area precluding the need to officially enter the US? What's the story behind this? I mean, why did ANC think to build a sterile international transit area? Seems many other airports in the US could benefit from setups like this.



CO/IAH-loyalist happily driven into the arms of WN/HOU
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8576 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5980 times:

Quoting CODCAIAH (Reply 13):

Interesting-- so ANC like many airports outside the US has a sterile transit area precluding the need to officially enter the US? What's the story behind this? I mean, why did ANC think to build a sterile international transit area? Seems many other airports in the US could benefit from setups like this.

LAX also has a sterile area i think. I would think the reason is that historically ANC has always been a transpac stopping point (not a hub), more than a domestic hub whereas other US airports are predominantly domestic hubs/airports. In addition to that, in order to make use of a sterile area at an airport, every airport in the country must be setup to receive international passengers. For example, the cost of providing a sterile area at JFK doesn't stop at JFK. You also have to make sure that each and every destination airport for the passengers transiting in JFK has to have a sterile area capable of receiving international passengers and baggage. That essentially means that every single airport in the US has to be modified to operate like this. It's a virtual impossibility.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6466 posts, RR: 32
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5741 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
Well, its not the first of second in the US.

Thanks for the correction, that was exactly what I was meaning to say.


User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5703 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 11):
KE ICN-ANC-MEX and no need for U.S. visas to transit.
Other options for KE: ICN-SEA-MEX, ICN-PDX-MEX or ICN-SLC-MEX; and if KE wants to add additional service to Bay Area or Great Los Angeles ICN-SJC/SMF-MEX or ICN-ONT-MEX repectively.
Major problem with a route via U.S. West Coast is the likehood of Mexico granting 5th liberty to KE and how less attractive those flight would be for those without U.S: visas (doesn't apply to ANC).

Unless KE wants to open another US market, the tag will open within an existing market. I don't think you'll find KE flying to secondary markets like SJC, SMF or ONT.

I think KE would have to apply, inaugurate and develop new markets like PDX or SLC before venturing into MEX from those destinations.

In a previous thread, the most likely route was going to be ICN-SEA-MEX.


User currently offlineCODCAIAH From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 177 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5443 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 14):
For example, the cost of providing a sterile area at JFK doesn't stop at JFK.

Good point, but what about having a sterile area with only international flights? So, if you're flying LHR-JFK-LIT, you get off the plane at JFK, clear customs, and go to the non-sterile area for JFK-LIT. No need for LIT to be set up to receive int'l pax. Versus if you're flying YYZ-JFK-EZE, you stay entirely within the sterile area and don't 'enter' the US. Seems like more airports could set something like that up for passengers who are just transiting.



CO/IAH-loyalist happily driven into the arms of WN/HOU
User currently offlinemfe777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5295 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
Another thing is that DFW-ICN has loads in the mid 80's to mid 90's year round. I dont know if there is enough room to add MEX to that tag.

True, but those loads are on a 3x weekly 747 service (which will move to 5x daily 777 in the summer). But, if they changed the service to daily (either 747 or 777), wouldn't that add the extra needed capacity? Like someone mentioned above, there is not enough capacity or competition between DFW and MEX. AA is the only carrier flying the route, and it's planes are regularly filled, and fares are high. Isn't the pie between DFW-MEX much larger to split than the SEA-MEX pie?

Also, it is no secret that AA plans to launch ICN sometime in the near future, with an eye to knock out KE. I would imagine that this would be a daily flight. AA's daily flight would be much more convenient to ICN bound travelers than a 3x or 5x a week service by KE. I think routing daily Mexico service through DFW would ensure that 1.) the tag on loads and yields are sufficient to make the service profitable, and 2.) that the ICN-DFW route is protected against AA's future DFW-ICN route.


User currently offlinewingedtaurus From Mexico, joined Mar 2007, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5068 times:

Aside from the obvious, could we anticipate any other Asian airlines or destination in the near future? I’m thinking SYD or HKG. I hope that TK will be able to fly to MEX sooner rather than later and so LY, maybe MEA that is now in Skyteam.

User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5045 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mfe777 (Reply 18):
Also, it is no secret that AA plans to launch ICN sometime in the near future, with an eye to knock out KE. I would imagine that this would be a daily flight. AA's daily flight would be much more convenient to ICN bound travelers than a 3x or 5x a week service by KE. I think routing daily Mexico service through DFW would ensure that 1.) the tag on loads and yields are sufficient to make the service profitable, and 2.) that the ICN-DFW route is protected against AA's future DFW-ICN route.

When AA starts ICN and if it starts through DFW and not LAX or ORD, then there would some impact to KE's loads on the DFW-ICN route. However, the Korean travel agencies would have a tendency to book through KE since they would most likely have better deals through KE. It happens out here in the west coast. AA's ICN flights would deal more with connections throughout AA's hub system. Dallas has a huge Korean population...so KE could probably hold its own.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8576 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5027 times:

Quoting CODCAIAH (Reply 17):
Good point, but what about having a sterile area with only international flights? So, if you're flying LHR-JFK-LIT, you get off the plane at JFK, clear customs, and go to the non-sterile area for JFK-LIT. No need for LIT to be set up to receive int'l pax. Versus if you're flying YYZ-JFK-EZE, you stay entirely within the sterile area and don't 'enter' the US. Seems like more airports could set something like that up for passengers who are just transiting.

That's exactly what happens in LAX for the CDG-LAX-PPT flights for example, although I'm not sure that is still the case and it's only one/two daily flights. But it's still not practical or feasible on a bigger scale. Besides the initial cost of redesigning the terminals you lose a lot of operating flexibility. If you only setup a few gates with sterile transit area, essentially every flight with international connecting passengers would be limited to using those gates. And in a busy airport like JFK where gates are already in short supply, that would limit operations significantly.
The idea of a sterile terminal for connections is great but not feasible in the US where the domestic market is far greater and the backbone of the air travel market, so naturaly all infrastructure is built first and foremost for the domestic market.


User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2681 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4989 times:

For the record, passengers flying LHR-LAX-AKL and CDG-LAX-PPT which need U.S. visas and don't have those, are denied bording.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 21):
The idea of a sterile terminal for connections is great but not feasible in the US

It's not only that. All passengers which are required to have visa to enter the U.S.need to have valid visas in order to use those airport sterile terminal areas except in ANC.
I remember having seen one of those at IAH terminal D, I think it was used for TWOV passengers when TWOV was allowed.
Even with a sterile area in DFW, a possible KE MEX tag-on, would mean all those MEX passengers required to have U.S. visas would need them just to be allowed to board the flights.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6301 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4901 times:

If we assume that most of the logical intermediate stops on ICN-MEX would involve the USA...and if we assume that most of the ICN-MEX traffic would be more business oriented...why not make the stop HNL. Transit times should be minimal and they would have no problem filling the Y (if 5th freedom were granted) from either end.


When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2681 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4733 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 23):
why not make the stop HNL.

The shortest ICN-MEX goes via YVR/SEA/PDX.. Flying via HNL is actually a detour.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
25 wedgetail737 : ICN-SEA-MEX or ICN-YVR-MEX are probably the most feasible. I don't PDX is in the running for KE's new gateway to the US.
26 Post contains images kiwimex : MEX-AKL-SYD would suit me fine.
27 CX288 : I am sure Singapore Airlines has looked into a SIN-MAD-MEX routing, though I doubt they would receive 5th freedom rights from Spain, particularly as t
28 Post contains links LAXintl : Very wrong assumption. Per US Census Bureau American community survey in 2009, the largest Korean American communities in the US are: Los Angeles - 2
29 Viscount724 : That gives European carriers a big advantage. ICN-GRU via the major European hubs is also roughly 700 nm shorter than via LAX. Example: ICN-LAX-GRU 1
30 legacyins : How it works is that there are CBP Officers within the "Transit " room processing the passengers. The passengers are not exempt their document requir
31 Post contains links LAXdude1023 : That contradicts with the Census data. These were the numbers in 2008: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet...id=31000US19100&-format=&-_lang
32 LAXintl : Well both our numbers are right, except we are looking at different data sets. You pulled up broader MSA numbers, and I pulled up "Urbanized Area" de
33 Post contains images LAXdude1023 : Its tough to do that because in a lot of places (especially places like Dallas), very few Koreans actually live in the city or even in Dallas county.
34 AR385 : If you had cared to read the entire thread, which is no hard task as it is a 28 post one, you would have noticed, that in post 15 I apologized for my
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...
Why No Service To Asia From Ireland? posted Mon May 31 2004 11:50:57 by UTA_flyinghigh
New Service To EWR From Shannon posted Tue Jan 6 2004 13:47:43 by Dstc47
New Service To Slovakia From Stansted! posted Fri May 23 2003 17:17:07 by DoorsToManual
AA New Service To Asia posted Mon Mar 26 2001 11:43:28 by StarAlliance
New Service To MEX?! posted Wed Feb 11 2004 22:47:57 by CALMSP
New AA Service To LGA From BOS posted Wed Sep 18 2002 20:53:16 by Mf3864
F9 Announces New Service To FAI posted Thu Dec 17 2009 04:47:33 by NZblue
Woah, All This New Service To HOU? Since When? posted Sat Sep 19 2009 19:36:33 by JetBlueAUS
New Service To GRR To Be Announced Tues posted Mon Jul 27 2009 08:57:16 by Venuscat2
Cathay Pacific Announces New Service To Jeddah posted Wed Jul 22 2009 04:38:55 by LIPZ