Airliners.net

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

Wow, that's wonderful. I'm a big ONT fan and am very, very happy to see this!

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

Like I said previously.. those that criticized this route were obviously not the target market.

Knowing the market really well, especially many friends in that region... the buzz has erupted and the surrounding areas of Chino to Arcadia are excited for this flight. The numbers have already proved itself

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

I appologize. I didn't see this thread because It was buried. I'm really happy for China Airlines & Ontario International Airport.

dc10lover wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

I appologize. I didn't see this thread because It was buried. I'm really happy for China Airlines & Ontario International Airport.

I actually saw your post being locked and just copy the link over (since the mod didn't bother to) anyway.

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

Like a few posters said already - ONT works for CI mainly b/c of the fact that it's close to where the major Taiwanese population centers in LA basin are. The whole stretch of CA-60 from 605 (Close to Hacienda Heights) to CA-57 (Close to Walnut and Diamond Bar) is heavily populated with Taiwanese, then there are those rich Taiwanese in Arcadia and San Marino that are the same distance from ONT and LAX.

So, something like SJC would work b/c the Taiwanese population in that area is also not small either. But something like BWI? Not so much.

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

It was announced daily already when the original schedule was loaded.

Look at prior replies.

So what is the new news??

janders wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

It was announced daily already when the original schedule was loaded.

Look at prior replies.

So what is the new news??

It was announced as four day venture when the original announcement was made last year, not the seven a day extension that was just announced.

janders wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

Bumping this and stealing a link from another poster (dc10lover):

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... portal_CAP

Looks like the demand exceed expectation and they are planning to go daily on this route. CI is definitely proving all the ONT doubters wrong.

It was announced daily already when the original schedule was loaded.

Look at prior replies.

So what is the new news??

Huh? It's stated right in the news document:

"ONTARIO, Calif., Jan. 23, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Prompted by strong customer demand, China Airlines has expanded its bookings between Taiwan and Ontario International Airport (ONT) to seven days a week in anticipation of the scheduled March 25 launch of service.

When China Airlines announced in September that it would initiate service between ONT and Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport (TPE), the plan was to fly the non-stop route four days a week. However, customer demand has been so strong that the airline has expanded its bookings – two months before the first scheduled flight."

Same with CI's original announcement:
https://www.china-airlines.com/us/en/di ... e/20170930

"China Airlines announced today that non-stop flights between Taipei (TPE) and Ontario (ONT), California, will commence in Spring 2018 with four weekly services flown by Boeing 777-300ERs. Travelers now have a new option when traveling to and from California with China Airlines. Apart from the time savings on local transportation, customs and luggage waiting time, they will also be closer to the popular coastal tourism destination of San Diego. Traffic demand between the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. is forecast to grow by 6.1% per year so the new route has strong potential and should foster closer ties between Taiwan and the U.S. "

It was daily announced in December.

Plenty of news stories/articles.

China Airlines Moving One Daily LAX Flight To Ontario As Of March 25, 2018
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... lines-ont/

China Airlines launches daily Taipei – Ontario service from Mar 2018
https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... ht=ontario

Also look above in reply #120 and schedule supplied by LAXintl is shown as daily

Yes indeed it was loaded as Daily in GDS more than a month ago and as media stories picked up at the time.

I have zero record of it ever being loaded in GDS as 4x weekly, matter of fact internal CI schedule supplied to LAWA with LAX flight reduction showed ONT being daily as well from start.

ONT press release is late to the party..

There is a solid chance this works out. Post incentive it will be harder. It is still a big WIN for ONT

People travelling to Asia dont travel for short time periods or too frequently in general. I don't think people mind a little drive if they got a really good deal. There will be people who want to avoid LAX and LAX parking. I could see some advantages to this flight.

It looks like ONT has a separate International Arrivals Building that has no jetbridges. Are they going to process a 77W full of people in there using stairs or are there plans to move FIS to the terminal complex?

Is there a 77W-capable gate at ONT?

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!

For anyone that did not get the reference, this is a thinly veiled joke about some very infamous coverage by a certain SF TV station in the aftermath of OZ214. Now if you'll excuse me, my friend is extremely angry at me right now for spitting my coke out all over him from laughter.

Thanks for clarifying LAXIntl

Since flight opened for sale and listed in GDS its been daily as the many December news stories confirm.

LAXintl wrote:

Yes indeed it was loaded as Daily in GDS more than a month ago and as media stories picked up at the time.

I have zero record of it ever being loaded in GDS as 4x weekly, matter of fact internal CI schedule supplied to LAWA with LAX flight reduction showed ONT being daily as well from start.

ONT press release is late to the party..

Thanks for the clarification. I guess the PR release IS really late

mhkansan wrote:

It looks like ONT has a separate International Arrivals Building that has no jetbridges. Are they going to process a 77W full of people in there using stairs or are there plans to move FIS to the terminal complex?

Is there a 77W-capable gate at ONT?

Haven't been in Terminal 2 in a little over a year but eventually, we've been told, there will be FIS in there for them with the potential of adding 2 gates to the east end of Terminal 2 that will also have a lounge area. This past Sunday Gate 212 was being restriped for a 77W. So not sure yet if they will do as Volaris does and unload at the sad looking arrivals Terminal and then reposition to Terminal 2.

zakuivcustom wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Yes indeed it was loaded as Daily in GDS more than a month ago and as media stories picked up at the time.

I have zero record of it ever being loaded in GDS as 4x weekly, matter of fact internal CI schedule supplied to LAWA with LAX flight reduction showed ONT being daily as well from start.

ONT press release is late to the party..

Thanks for the clarification. I guess the PR release IS really late

Interesting that nothing local said anything about it, maybe it was to coincide with the "first" flight which will come in Thursday night, Jan 25?

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

This service isn't about trying secondary cities. As you may have gathered, there is a huge Taiwanese-American population in the LA basin that skews toward ONT geographically. The only other region that would warrant such a consideration is the Bay Area, and if I'm not mistaken, I believe BR has expressed interest in flying to SJC once the 787-10's arrive. No other secondary city in the US would warrant such a flight.

tcaeyx wrote:

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

This service isn't about trying secondary cities. As you may have gathered, there is a huge Taiwanese-American population in the LA basin that skews toward ONT geographically. The only other region that would warrant such a consideration is the Bay Area, and if I'm not mistaken, I believe BR has expressed interest in flying to SJC once the 787-10's arrive. No other secondary city in the US would warrant such a flight.

A 787-10 non stop TPE-Bay area, good luck westbound. Maybe with a ANC or Japan stop but not nonstop.

The testing flight is about to depart within 30 minutes.

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

You probably won't see real demand until after Summer season ends. Reason?

1. Many CI 6/5 flights passengers were automatically converted to CI 24/23, their options were to change to CI 8/7 or route through CI 4/3.
2. Promotions have been disposed for ONT departures for the first 1.5 months, as low as 500s.
3. Summer is peak season so we won't see real demand till end of September.

CI's LA management did indicate the possibilities of reviving CI 6/5, we will see what happens.

trex8 wrote:

A 787-10 non stop TPE-Bay area, good luck westbound. Maybe with a ANC or Japan stop but not nonstop.

I think he/she meant 787-9.

coolfish1103 wrote:

trex8 wrote:

A 787-10 non stop TPE-Bay area, good luck westbound. Maybe with a ANC or Japan stop but not nonstop.

I think he/she meant 787-9.

I thought the 787 orders were all for the -10, or are some of the potential leased ones the -9??

trex8 wrote:

I thought the 787 orders were all for the -10, or are some of the potential leased ones the -9??

Boeing says 787-10, you can search here: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/#/orders-deliveries

trex8 wrote:

coolfish1103 wrote:

trex8 wrote:

A 787-10 non stop TPE-Bay area, good luck westbound. Maybe with a ANC or Japan stop but not nonstop.

I think he/she meant 787-9.

I thought the 787 orders were all for the -10, or are some of the potential leased ones the -9??

https://airleasecorp.com/press/air-leas ... h-eva-air/

Air Lease Corporation Announces Lease Placement of Four New Boeing 787-9s and Two New Boeing 787-10s with EVA Air

Since I live near ONT, went to check out what the operations were for their test arrival flight. They had small signs surrounding the airport for China Airlines to direct people to either departures or arrivals. From what I saw, they parked the plane on T2 and bused passengers and baggage to their small international terminal.

Walked to T2. It looked spotless. They put CI ticketing next to United at the far right of the terminal. It was nice to finally see an trans-pacific airline deck that terminal. Hoping for the best for CI.

Duplicate post.

BoeingGuy wrote:

millionsofmiles wrote:

An interesting fact (at least to me) regarding transpacific routes and ONT is the TWA route award in the 1969 Transpacific Route Case. Initially, before beginning service, TWA's transpacific flights were required to depart from ONT, not LAX. Of course, at the time, this was a recipe for disaster, and, while, arguably, TWA's transpacific routes were a loss-making disaster anyway, TWA managed to secure approval prior to route start-up allowing the flights to depart from LAX.

TWA served Okinawa, Guam, Taipei, Hong Kong and Bangkok in the Pacific/Asia. The route linked to the Atlantic system through Bombay and gave TWA its Round-the-World system.

The Pacific TWA flights originated in SFO. They are routed SFO-LAX-HNL. Then I think Guam was next.

I hope ONT-TPE works, but it’s odd that a large population base like ONT can’t even support a HNL flight. Both HA and UA have tried it in the past.

Irrelevant to my post.

My point is that TWA's original route award in the 1969 Transpacific Route proceeding was through the ONT coterminal. LGB was the other point authorized in the original award. It makes no difference to my post where it originated.

I'm still very curious if CI cut a deal with UPS to carry cargo on this route, and that is making this route so viable. I'm sure the inbound flight to ONT will have capacity for a lot of cargo.

Long time reader, first time poster.

Sean-SAN- wrote:

I'm still very curious if CI cut a deal with UPS to carry cargo on this route, and that is making this route so viable. I'm sure the inbound flight to ONT will have capacity for a lot of cargo.

As UPS crew member can confirm such would absolutely not be allowed. Without getting into the weeds, no such capacity purchase is possible to/from the US, except for short periods under very narrow circumstances.
I am sure unions on the property would have a field day if the company would ever buy capacity between two markets it already serves, especially directly into the heart of a UPS domicile of all things! If the company finds the need for additional ongoing capacity out of Taiwan it can simply add it itself.

On the broader topic, I am actually not sure CI will carry much cargo itself unless it opts to(with added cost) truck it to LAX, as others have posted there is virtually no general freight infrastructure at ONT, and regions freight forwarder community is indeed based around LAX and the LA/LB harbors.

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!
What did CI see that many others didnt! Hope this works well for them and they fill all those J/PE seats up front too.
Wonder if they will try some other "secondary" cities in N America.
Maybe BWI- catch the PHL to DC area
SJC???
They probably need something smaller than a A359/77W to start those type of routes. Or do one stops in ANC with an A333.

That there is a huge Asian population just West of ONT. LAX is a nightmare of traffic ONT not so. ONT has next to no connections For them but if they can Fill a plane load up out of ONT good for them.

I just noticed the ONT-TPE introductory airfare is $ 535 roundtrip

UPlog wrote:

Long time reader, first time poster.

Sean-SAN- wrote:

I'm still very curious if CI cut a deal with UPS to carry cargo on this route, and that is making this route so viable. I'm sure the inbound flight to ONT will have capacity for a lot of cargo.

As UPS crew member can confirm such would absolutely not be allowed. Without getting into the weeds, no such capacity purchase is possible to/from the US, except for short periods under very narrow circumstances.
I am sure unions on the property would have a field day if the company would ever buy capacity between two markets it already serves, especially directly into the heart of a UPS domicile of all things! If the company finds the need for additional ongoing capacity out of Taiwan it can simply add it itself.

The UPS pilot's scope clause allows for a set number of cans to be loaded as belly cargo between regions of the US and int'l points, even if that int'l location is aready served by UPS (TPE in this case). I would not be surprised if this flight is used by UPS to the max allowable under those terms, considering ONT is the only UPS hub in the western CONUS.

flyPIT wrote:

UPlog wrote:

The UPS pilot's scope clause allows for a set number of cans to be loaded as belly cargo between regions of the US and int'l points, even if that int'l location is aready served by UPS (TPE in this case). I would not be surprised if this flight is used by UPS to the max allowable under those terms, considering ONT is the only UPS hub in the western CONUS.

You are mixing apples and oranges.

The company is only allowed to utilize subcontract capacity for 2 pilot bid periods or otherwise must meet with union to explain why. Such capacity is meant to assist during surge periods, not ongoing regular capacity purchase.

What you reference is part of its SCS (supply chain solutions) which is the ocean/air freight forwarding and brokerage arm of UPS, not the express package side of the company. Yes they can utilize partial 3rd party air capacity, but for reference, ONT is not considered a SCS terminus as its a full express gateway instead.
SCS can be flown into LAX, SFO, SEA, etc among others on West Coast.

UPlog wrote:

flyPIT wrote:

UPlog wrote:

The UPS pilot's scope clause allows for a set number of cans to be loaded as belly cargo between regions of the US and int'l points, even if that int'l location is aready served by UPS (TPE in this case). I would not be surprised if this flight is used by UPS to the max allowable under those terms, considering ONT is the only UPS hub in the western CONUS.

You are mixing apples and oranges.

The company is only allowed to utilize subcontract capacity for 2 pilot bid periods or otherwise must meet with union to explain why. Such capacity is meant to assist during surge periods, not ongoing regular capacity purchase.

Actually it is you mixing apples and oranges. What you are talking about is subcontracting complete aircraft (or wet leasing), for short periods of higher demand as you note. This is one section of the scope clause.

A separate section of the scope clause deals with "common carriage", which includes the use of belly space on commercial airlines. This is as I explained in my prior post. It is used quite extensively from destinations UPS serves (especially from Asia) but also from destinations UPS does not such as Vietnam. Indonesia, New Zealand, etc.

SCS is completely separate from the above.

The first flight was yesterday-
https://www.dailybulletin.com/2018/03/2 ... es-flight/

That'll be pretty cool seeing a large aircraft among much smaller aircraft

GE90man wrote:

That'll be pretty cool seeing a large aircraft among much smaller aircraft

Went today to plane spot the arrival of the incoming flight, and noticed a few people also waiting to see it land. It was a sight to behold.

After that, I drove by and noticed they took the plane into their small international terminal. They're using boarding stairs that have a zig zag pattern with a canopy to off-load passengers into the small terminal.

And next to the plane there was a SIA engineering truck.

I did a dummy booking and noticed the flights for the coming week pretty much full in economy. I hope this trend keeps up and ONT starts building that FIS addition into T2 soon.

In all, I wish ONT the best of luck.

Looking at GDS, the ONT flight consistently books about $120-140 cheaper than LAX. Certainty consolidators will do it for even cheaper.

The cost to truck the cargo to LAX wouldn't be that prohibitive. We regularly have shipments bound for LAX land at SFO/LAS and trucked to LAX. ONT is way closer.

So any news of how its all working out, as it started Mar 25. Any issues with customs/immigration etc. Anyone working there notice if they are loading lots of cargo?

trex8 wrote:

So any news of how its all working out, as it started Mar 25. Any issues with customs/immigration etc. Anyone working there notice if they are loading lots of cargo?

No real issues so far. They arrive on time or early and then deplane at the international arrivals building. They then reposition to gate 212 and depart pretty much on time. There are quite a few pallets that come off with freight and quite a few that go back on. That's really the only thing I can say based off what I see from the tower.

trex8 wrote:

So any news of how its all working out, as it started Mar 25. Any issues with customs/immigration etc. Anyone working there notice if they are loading lots of cargo?

Wouldn't know about cargo.

Though, I drove passed there yesterday. I was in Fontana - nearby ONT as I saw the flight fly by. 45 Minutes later, I drove passed the International terminal and was more than surprised to see a large group of people waiting to be picked up by their relatives. Seems its a quick pass through with customs.

It is nice the see this succeed and China Airlines' out-of-the-box thinking to pay off. LA should be more than LAX.

neomax wrote:

trex8 wrote:

Ho Lee Fok!

For anyone that did not get the reference, this is a thinly veiled joke about some very infamous coverage by a certain SF TV station in the aftermath of OZ214. Now if you'll excuse me, my friend is extremely angry at me right now for spitting my coke out all over him from laughter.

BTW: The joke's name was Ho Lee FUK

Does anyone know what the departure boards at TPE say? Is it Los Angeles/Ontario, Los Angeles or just Ontario?

B747forever wrote:

Does anyone know what the departure boards at TPE say? Is it Los Angeles/Ontario, Los Angeles or just Ontario?

TPE website just lists it as Ontario on their flight status page, so I'd assume airport monitors say the same.

You just know someone from the Far East will book this thinking they will get to Toronto

Yeah, really surprised they don’t have it at least listed as Los Angeles/Ontario. Quite unusual to put in the local town the airport is located jn without using the name of the city they are serving which really is the greater Los Angeles area.

Yes it might be shortsighted from a marketing point of view, but lets remember airport authority renamed themselves and removed any reference to Los Angeles. Also anyone that uses IATA/ICAO database, the airport there has also been renamed to disassociate itself from L.A.

Though, if you book a flight in their website, China Airlines does put a blurb of 'LA/Ontario International' when selecting the flight, so highly doubt any confusion are going to occur.

I also noticed that the website lists the airport as LA/Ontario, which is what Southwest Airlines does too. More effective than the name of the airport itself. For example, most airlines and people don't mention "John Wayne" when booking flights to SNA.