Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Hainan Airlines Applies For PEK-ORD 787 Service  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Posted (2 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 8572 times:

Hainan Airlines Co., Limited has applied with the DOT for permission to engage in scheduled service between Beijing China and Chicago Illinois.

Hainan proposes to initially offer service 4x weekly using 2-class 787 aircraft beginning the second quarter of 2013.

OST-2007-0066


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekl911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5260 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 8527 times:

Great, I love to see more diversity. In the US and in Europe too ofcourse. I think its save to say Hainan will not return to Budapest, not even with a small 787.

User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 800 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 8406 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well it's going to be interesting to see what time slots they get   

User currently offlineyeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 887 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 8386 times:

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 2):
Well it's going to be interesting to see what time slots they get

Time slots?
yeo



Yokoso! to my world
User currently offlineyeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 887 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 8275 times:

Although alliance unaffiliated, Hainan does have a code-sharing agreement in place with American for pax in PEK & PVG. Perhaps it extends/will be extended to connecting feed at O'Hare.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...e-sharing-amr-corp-nonstop-flights

yeo



Yokoso! to my world
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 5 hours ago) and read 7833 times:

I'm sure they will pick up PEK slots quite easily considering the airport is HU's biggest base.

I'd more curious to know what this means with AA, if HU will codeshare on the Chicago route with AA (as it does with SEA-PEK), and what is the future prospects of AA's own ORD-PEK service then?



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFSDan From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 756 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months ago) and read 7482 times:

Seems like something will have to give on this route. Three carriers is quite a lot of lift and will put ORD-PEK close to the amount of capacity on SFO-PEK.

What does the traffic mix look like on this route? I would imagine that there is quite a bit of VFR (both Chicago O&D and connecting traffic from Texas, the Midwest, and the eastern states) as well as a decent amount of premium traffic. Are there any Chicago-based companies with large operations in Beijing, or vice versa?

Without a codeshare, I think HU would have a very tough time and would pick up almost entirely low-yield traffic.



SEA SFO SJC LAX ONT SAN DEN IAH DFW OMA FSD MSP MSN MKE ORD DTW CVG MEM JAN BHM RSW ATL CLT BWI PHL LGA JFK MEX LIM KEF
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6530 times:

According to the last round of US-China route cases, Chicago barely produces 200 daily passengers to all of China. This compares to over 500 from SF as example.

So clearly the bulk of traffic on AA and UA today are connections. The new Hainan flight will thus put pressure on chasing the few ORD based clients, while lets see if they code-share with AA for connections.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6456 times:

Hainan was 'supposed' to fly to Boston, using the long-awaited 787. This was 'announced' several years ago and obviously never happened (nor will it). I know Chicago is much more appealing to an airline than Boston, but best advice to the Windy City: Don't hold your breath on these guys.

User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6456 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
I'd more curious to know what this means with AA, if HU will codeshare on the Chicago route with AA (as it does with SEA-PEK), and what is the future prospects of AA's own ORD-PEK service then?

Perhaps AA will hand ORD-PEK to HU and codeshare on that flight while moving their ORD-PEK to the originally proposed DFW-PEK. AA might be able to renegotiate the pilot's contract while in Ch. 11 to allow it. DFW probably does not have much China O&D either but AA will get almost all of it and has a greater feed there.


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6448 times:

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 2):
Well it's going to be interesting to see what time slots they get

I know what they are asking for on the U.S side and considering AA has been trying to move 186 to the afternoon (1540) it's going to make for interesting conversation politically.

Also, it's now going to operate with a A340-600 and will not depart from T3 at this time.

Since T5 is Schedules Facilitated at the IATA level, specific times need to be approved for all flights arriving into the terminal.


User currently onlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 780 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6417 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7):
According to the last round of US-China route cases, Chicago barely produces 200 daily passengers to all of China. This compares to over 500 from SF as example.
Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 8):

Hainan was 'supposed' to fly to Boston, using the long-awaited 787. This was 'announced' several years ago and obviously never happened (nor will it). I know Chicago is much more appealing to an airline than Boston, but best advice to the Windy City: Don't hold your breath on these guys.

How is the Boston-China number like? Is the JAL NRT-BOS flight any indicator ... a 787 service between PEK and BOS would do quite well ... and HU probably should revisit its BOS plans. Otherwise I'm sure some other airline will think of this route soon ...   


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6389 times:

JAL 7 & 8 are doing NRT-BOS-NRT in the high 90% range for LF. That's impressive, especially on a daily run, but that's to be expected since the plane is 'right-sized' for this kind of market.

It would be nice if one of our domestic carriers jumped on BOS-PEK, but it will likely be a foreign carrier that does...


User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2229 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6228 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 8):
Hainan was 'supposed' to fly to Boston, using the long-awaited 787. This was 'announced' several years ago and obviously never happened (nor will it). I know Chicago is much more appealing to an airline than Boston, but best advice to the Windy City: Don't hold your breath on these guys.

Agreed. However, it seems that the source on this one seems to be fairly reliable.

Quoting FSDan (Reply 6):
Seems like something will have to give on this route. Three carriers is quite a lot of lift and will put ORD-PEK close to the amount of capacity on SFO-PEK.

It will indeed be interesting (assuming the HU route does materialize). Hainan will initially start with 4x weekly services (compared to AA and UA who fly ORDPEK daily) but HU certainly has the bandwidth to up-gauge capacity if the route merits it, just like they have done with SEA.

My guess is that AA will actually feel the most challenged, but it really does boil down to a toss-up scenario IF something can be done with the landing slots situation. Currently, AA is really at a disadvantage with the timings of ORDPEK, as it does indeed severely limit facilitating onward connections to/from PEK with such a late arrival time and early departure time.

However, if AA does indeed cozy up with HU, they can hopefully leverage that relationship to improve the slot times to get more PAX from a Chinese point-of-sale. HU and AA could then coordinate schedules to accommodate the traffic flows with greater equilibrium. I'm sure that at present, the majority of people who are taking this flight are originating or terminating their journeys at PEK.

Nevertheless, it really would be a shame if AA had to drop ORDPEK. I know they have not had a LF performance as high as UA's on the same route, and I'm sure it has everything to do with the timings. They do carry more cargo than UA which has helped somewhat, but I do think it is key for AA to hold onto this route for as long as possible.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 9):
Perhaps AA will hand ORD-PEK to HU and codeshare on that flight while moving their ORD-PEK to the originally proposed DFW-PEK. AA might be able to renegotiate the pilot's contract while in Ch. 11 to allow it. DFW probably does not have much China O&D either but AA will get almost all of it and has a greater feed there.

Why would they do that? Unless there is anti-trust immunity between AA and HU (which there is not) then they would be handing over all the revenue to HU. There is also no guarantee that the proposed DFWPEK route would receive ideal slot times either, and then all of the sudden you have the same problem with a different route.



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6183 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 8):
but best advice to the Windy City: Don't hold your breath on these guys.

I think this one is fairly far along and likely to happen. They have applied with the DOT, which they did not do for the Boston service, while the City of Chicago also submitted a support letter for Hainan. So clearly the parties have been in talks, and the ball is rolling on the ORD permits and leases also.

Quoting ASA (Reply 11):
How is the Boston-China number like?

The BOS-China count must be under 100 daily as the list I saw only shows those >100pax markets.

Quoting ASA (Reply 11):
Is the JAL NRT-BOS flight any indicator

For the JAL service though its no surprise they have high LFs. The 787 has a low density 180'ish seat config (almost what southwest is putting on a 738) while Japan is by far the largest US transpacific markets. Be more interesting to see how it looks in deep winter when the tourism flow ebbs from both ends.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 13):
However, if AA does indeed cozy up with HU

Yes will be interesting to see if AA opts to build its Hainan partnership to cover the HU ORD flight also.

With loss of China Eastern into Skyteam, AA has been a bit hampered in China, so I'd think long term and strategically it needs to come up with a plan. However I've read that bringing HU closer to OW would be a mess since CX is a strong competitor (remember HU has a Hong Kong based division HX), and also Air China has a cross ownership in CX and would be unlikely want to see CX partner with HU.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2229 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6136 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
However I've read that bringing HU closer to OW would be a mess since CX is a strong competitor (remember HU has a Hong Kong based division HX), and also Air China has a cross ownership in CX and would be unlikely want to see CX partner with HU.

Good point. Although, bear in mind this wouldn't necessarily be the first example of 1+ regional airlines belonging to the same alliance despite being fierce competitors (TG and SQ in Star, MU, CZ and CI in Sky, etc).



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6136 times:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 9):
DFW probably does not have much China O&D either but AA will get almost all of it and has a greater feed there.

Does it? Most of the feed will come from the NE and SE. Does DFW really have more feed than ORD for this type of flight? Both the NE and SE via DFW are more time elapsed than via ORD. The cities served via DFW and not via ORD tend to be smaller and/or in Latin America. Perhaps there is lots of Latin traffic to China. If so then moving it to DFW makes sense. But my guess is well over 50% of the traffic to PEK flows better over ORD than over DFW.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6091 times:

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 15):
Although, bear in mind this wouldn't necessarily be the first example of 1+ regional airlines belonging to the same alliance despite being fierce competitors

But the difference is none are overlapping home base competitors.

CX(including Dragonair) and HX slog it out daily at HKG and combined would be just under 72% of the airports activity.

I doubt global regulators would be too happy about that either.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6011 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17):
But the difference is none are overlapping home base competitors.

CX(including Dragonair) and HX slog it out daily at HKG and combined would be just under 72% of the airports activity.

I doubt global regulators would be too happy about that either.

CX and HX aren't even remotely in the same sentence. That's comparing SQ to Jetstar Asia or TAM to Gol.

HX is a predominately short-haul O&D LCC with 1 single premium long haul destination - LGW. Even if the entire Hainan Group joins oneworld, I don't see any regulatory issues (HKG is neither slot nor gate constrained, so no divestures there).


User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5865 times:

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 13):
Why would they do that? Unless there is anti-trust immunity between AA and HU (which there is not) then they would be handing over all the revenue to HU. There is also no guarantee that the proposed DFWPEK route would receive ideal slot times either, and then all of the sudden you have the same problem with a different route.

That is assuming that AA is making money on ORD-PEK. It is quite possible that they are losing money on the route since they are going up against the more established UA. AA originally proposed DFW-PEK but had to switch to ORD-PEK because of a pilot's contract clause. AA initially got some really poor slot times at PEK but was granted better ones later. The can probably get reasonable ones for a DFW flight.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 16):
Does it? Most of the feed will come from the NE and SE. Does DFW really have more feed than ORD for this type of flight?

Other posts have indicated that total ORD O&D to PEK is around 200 daily seats. Demand for China from cities outside of the west coast is not that strong either so DFW may be better for AA as it does not have to compete with UA there and it is a much larger hub for AA overall. The flight time from the northeastern cities will be longer through DFW but on long haul flights like that the better facilities in Terminal D might balance out the hour of additional flight time. Total flight time connecting from the southeast through DFW would add an insignificant amount of time. As stated above, AA would have operated DFW-PEK as proposed initially to the DOT except for their inability to get a wavier from the pilots. Since the pilot's contract is likely to be renegotiated in Ch. 11, DFW-PEK will probably be possible since it was only slightly outside of the contract limit.


User currently offlineWROORD From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 963 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5811 times:

City of Chicago wants to make ORD a gateway to Asia, so expect more flights to come. I think HU flight will complement AA flight. HU has more connections via PEK while AA via ORD, so each carrier is appealing to a different segment of the market. Both PEK and PVG are very profitable to AA and UA and 4 flights a week from HU will not make a difference.I have flown with both UA and AA and each flight was full.

User currently offlineje89_w From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 2362 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5658 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 8):
Hainan was 'supposed' to fly to Boston, using the long-awaited 787. This was 'announced' several years ago and obviously never happened (nor will it). I know Chicago is much more appealing to an airline than Boston, but best advice to the Windy City: Don't hold your breath on these guys.

Déjà vu, same situation for their proposed Beijing to Honolulu service with the A346. HU announced their intent to start Hawaii flights in 2008, "worked" together with the Hawaii Tourism Authority, and even received DOT approval. Yet, after much optimism from the Hawaii authorities, the whole scheme quietly turned to nothing but hot air.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
I think this one is fairly far along and likely to happen. They have applied with the DOT, which they did not do for the Boston service, while the City of Chicago also submitted a support letter for Hainan. So clearly the parties have been in talks, and the ball is rolling on the ORD permits and leases also.

I'm not saying PEK-ORD isn't going to happen, but Hainan Airlines already has a history of making grand plans to start US service with nothing materializing. The "don't hold your breath on these guys" statement does hold some water. I'll believe it when I see it.

On a related note, China Eastern is now flying 2x weekly PVG-HNL with their new-config A332s (plus A346 subs). It appears that these flights are doing well.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26021 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5220 times:

DOT granted the application today.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineWROORD From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 963 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4981 times:

I wonder if this flight will have code-share with AA?

User currently offlinelegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2133 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4839 times:

Quoting WROORD (Reply 23):
Quoting yeogeo (Reply 4):
Although alliance unaffiliated, Hainan does have a code-sharing agreement in place with American for pax in PEK & PVG. Perhaps it extends/will be extended to connecting feed at O'Hare.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...e-sharing-amr-corp-nonstop-flights

yeo




John@SFO
25 MAV88 : Any chance you could post the list? It would be interesting to see what the numbers look like.
26 Post contains links yeogeo : There is a reciprocal code-share in place between HU and AA for each carriers' China-US/US-China flights, as is made clear in this link: http://atwon
27 LAXintl : Just because there was an existing code-share, does not mean a future HU ORD service will be covered. Matter of fact there could be some doubt, as ins
28 Post contains links yeogeo : You could be correct of course, LAX, but so far I haven't seen an inkling in public of any tension between the two airlines on this route; the media,
29 LAXintl : Not necessarily. First remember the agreement dates from December last year, and as filed with the DOT it covered a specific small number routes. Als
30 Post contains images yeogeo : Seems strange to me that they would sign a code-sharing agreement and then, 7 months later, undermine the agreement in this way, ...but i have so muc
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...
Sichuan Airlines Applies For US Service posted Wed Dec 22 2010 13:50:04 by LAXintl
Hainan Airlines Apply For Kabul Service posted Fri Jun 5 2009 12:04:15 by 777way
Spirit Airlines Applies For More Colombia Service posted Wed Jul 16 2008 18:40:42 by MAH4546
Hainan Applies For PEK-SEA posted Thu Aug 2 2007 05:29:49 by B2443
Am Applies For DGO-ORD Service posted Thu Jun 16 2005 22:11:24 by PVD757
Volaris Applies For SFO And DEN Service posted Wed May 23 2012 09:12:29 by LAXintl
Alaska Airlines Applies For DCA posted Mon Mar 12 2012 16:43:27 by nonfirm
Japan Airlines Applies For US$2Bln Government Loan posted Tue Apr 21 2009 08:08:48 by SInGAPORE_AIR
VIM Airlines Applies For US Rights. posted Wed Apr 30 2008 09:02:03 by LAXintl
Caribbean Airlines Applies For FLL posted Mon Feb 11 2008 15:56:46 by MAH4546
Spirit Airlines Applies For More Colombia Service posted Wed Jul 16 2008 18:40:42 by MAH4546
Hainan Applies For PEK-SEA posted Thu Aug 2 2007 05:29:49 by B2443
Am Applies For DGO-ORD Service posted Thu Jun 16 2005 22:11:24 by PVD757