jmc1975 From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3165 posts, RR: 17 Reply 1, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2818 times:
Daily JFK-TPE service would likely be possible under a scenario where EVA and China Airlines were merged to create Mandarin Airlines, the newly-formed flag-carrier of Taiwan. A daily 777-300ER on this route under this scenario would not be far-fetched at all.
foppishbum From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 746 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2738 times:
Quoting jmc1975 (Reply 1): A daily 777-300ER on this route under this scenario would not be far-fetched at all.
Right. Except I don't think China Airlines and Eva Air would merge anytime soon. And plus, as a flag carrier of Taiwan...I would expect them to name it Air Taiwan...but then China probably would pressure many other countries to ban us from landing.
I think CI and BR both want to keep the supply low and demand high. I don't know if CI will move it up to daily when they get the A350-900 but I don't see it becoming daily any time soon. Many Taiwanese flies UA or DL too since none of the flights to TPE from JFK are non-stop.
vincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2435 times:
Quoting jmc1975 (Reply 1): EVA and China Airlines were merged to create Mandarin Airlines
I doubt this will happen anytime soon, BR was created to stop CI monopoly in the first place. There's market not only for 2, but 3 players in Taiwan. GE has been trying to get rights for years but couldn't, usually it's always CI and BR getting pieces of the pie. One possibility would be BR going all cargo (which was the founder's ultimate goal and vision in the 90s, not sure if this is the same for his son), leaving passenger markets to CI and GE.
Some of us like circuitous rides through Europe or Middle East, I started going back to Taiwan using TK recently via HKG (better Y+ products, higher mileage accruals, chance to see other destinations on the way, ect), not to mention cheaper airfares in some instances.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10864 posts, RR: 100 Reply 6, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2430 times:
That was my thought. Long range. However, it will take a circa 2014 788 to have a chance to do the route. It is too far for the overweight 788s that need an engine PIP to meet promised TSFC.
817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1487 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2156 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6): That was my thought. Long range. However, it will take a circa 2014 788 to have a chance to do the route. It is too far for the overweight 788s that need an engine PIP to meet promised TSFC.
TPE-JFK is 6785nm while JAL's NRT-BOS route is at 5823nm for reference. Im not sure what the current range of today 787's are, but to me it seems doable. Do you happen to have range figures for current 787s?
Blast Reality, Burst it into shreds! Banishment, This World!
Narita routes are high yield, and Taiwan are more leisure vfr focused. I'm not sure if the 787 is suitable for TPE JFK - perhaps a high density 773 is more suited.
anonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 564 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
Quoting jmc1975 (Reply 1): Daily JFK-TPE service would likely be possible under a scenario where EVA and China Airlines were merged to create Mandarin Airlines, the newly-formed flag-carrier of Taiwan. A daily 777-300ER on this route under this scenario would not be far-fetched at all.
Mandarin Airlines already exists: it's a subsidiary of China Airlines.
trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3979 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1817 times:
Quoting christao17 (Reply 4): According to their websites (and FlightAware), while CI does stop in KIX, BR flies the TPE-JFK route nonstop in both directions.
this summer its nonstop both ways but usually in winter for sure it stops via ANC westbound
foppishbum From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 746 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1182 times:
Both BR and CI did not order 787 and possibly won't. CI ordered 14 A350-900 with range of ~8,100 nm. According to Boeing.com, 787 has a range of 7,650 to 8,200 nm. BR ordered additional 7 B777-300ER recently IIRC.
CI plans to use the A350-900 for all North American and European routes and BR plans to use the 77W for all North American and European routes.
coolfish1103 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 385 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 917 times:
You probably won't see direct daily flights to JFK unless...
BR has excess planes (77W) and put them here (unlikely), still ANC might be used in Winter.
...in 2016 when CI receives 359 and throw some here,
even then it will probably be 4x TPE-KIX-JFK v.v. and 3x TPE-JFK v.v.
--
CI ordered more 359 than they need so pretty sure some North American routes will see 359. Perhaps the rumored ORD or the canceled IAH.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 93 posts, 
From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3165 posts, 
From Thailand, joined Apr 2005, 894 posts, 
From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, 
From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 1487 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6504 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
