olddominion727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 404 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8302 times:
I have heard this a few times around the UA water cooler with the 788 at SFO. The flight will begin in LAX then fly nonstop to SAO from SFO 5x a week. Does this seem doable? How's the service on KE from LAX? The last time I flew to SAO it was $9000.00 r/t on KE. I flew CM the second time and third time via PTY $3200.00 r/t and It was great. 48 min lay-over and the flight attendants were hot. unlike the stuffy KE flights. The flights were late and flight attendants seemed like they needed to get some action in the mile high club. Granted a 772 is a much different experience than a 737 but not much different in the customer service.
*A has not had direct west-coast service since RG went under. Is this someone's pipe dream or does this have some real viability?
Apparently it would be used as an Asian connecting point? which would be good for ORD if there's snow. I heard them say leave LAX around and leave SFO around 2pm? Arrive in time to turn back around for a red-eye back to SFO and land the next morning with a 1am departure from SAO? At first I didn't give it much interest until I heard it would be starting from LAX and what the schedules would seemingly look like...
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6077 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8235 times:
I didn't realize Korean Airlines flew from LAX to SAO.... not being familiar with SAO, I'm not exactly sure what airport that is, or what city, but I gather it's in South American, since you also flew Copa.
Codes are cool, but not all of us know them.
Otherwise, I think UA has a LOT of other priorities when it comes to the 787 before some of these also-good-ideas.
For starters, convincing the aircraft to fly reliably to LAX or ORD or EWR from IAH, namely!
Given that of all US airline hubs UA@SFO has the most Asian flights, itd be interesting to see the numbers of passengers from various asian destinations to GRU. The only problem is that transit in the US would require a visa...
Currently, I can think of 3 Asian far east/southeast routes to South America...
and JL used to fly NRT-JFK-GRU.
UA@SFO serves the following cities in Asia,
BKK (via NRT)
SIN (via NRT or HKG)
Given all of these, as well as domestic feed from the west coast, and the local SFO-GRU market, maybe a 788 on SFO-GRU would actually make sense. SFO-GRU is shorter than NRT-BOS for example, and JL is making that work.
A schedule something like this could work:
SFO 1230 - 0705+1 GRU
GRU 0105 - 0920 SFO
This would fit well with all of UA's asian flights, departures as follows;
Lufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3245 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6331 times:
It's the transit visa. California worked well a billion years ago to get between Brazil and Asia but the transit visa and issues associated with it mean pax pick plenty of other options. I wouldn't hold your breath. yes there is a market, bit it has a massive road block in it, so that really means any such flight needs to cater to the American market. and that is largely better served by a southern hub, if you're relying on connections. might change in the future though, Canada seems to have smelled opportunity and is getting in on this act, as has emirates etc. Maybe if the US started building international terminals that allowed connections without clearing customs you might see things change.
LAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 8009 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5738 times:
SFO-GRU being a starter depends on what the local market is between destinations like KIX and TPE and GRU. If its not significant, I dont see SFO-GRU being on the radar. There are many options to get between GRU and NRT/PEK/HKG/PVG (which are the big ones) so SFO brings nothing new there. The local market is about 70 passengers but with marginal yields.