Just heard from a crew chief that some of the American Airline China flights from DFW and ORD are being diverted to LAX and fueled, recrewed and rerouted to avoid Russian airspace.

Dallas to PEK via LAX https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL263

I expect it will be PEK and HKG flights

AA 263 is showing delayed and still on the ground at DFW.

I can see PEK being the most affected route, but all other DFW-Asia routes should be fine routing towards Tokyo then off to PVG, HKG, ICN, etc. and completely avoiding Russian airspace. It would add a little bit to the DFW-PEK route but that seems more ideal then making a stop in LAX, right?

This is concerning. If there is a ban on Russian airspace, East Coast USA-Asia flights are going to have to make some big adjustments.

We will see I am tracking AA 263 to see where it routes.
Add to post that the flight is now airborne leaving DFW about 1 hour 12 minutes late

Looks like PVG flights are avoiding Russian airspace for UA. UA is still going through Russia for PEK. Not sure what is going on


US airlines could be banned from Russian airspace from April 18, following a decision by Russia’s Ministry of Transport to cancel talks with the US State Department.

According to one source, Russian airspace rights for US airlines are set to expire on April 17, with the talks scheduled for April 18 and 19.



https://theloadstar.co.uk/russias-refus ... -airspace/

Looks like that UA PEK-IAD flight that departed about 8 hours ago was the last Asia-USA flight to utilize Russian airspace, and now all flights are taking a southerly route avoiding Russia...... doesn't make me feel comfortable about where USA-Russia relations are heading.

Also, Mods, should we fix the title of this thread? Maybe "AA routes to Asia are avoiding Russian airspace" or "USA airlines' Asia-USA flights avoiding Russian airspace?"

AA's #125 DFW-HKG is tracking towards LAX with a new arrival time in HKG of 2050hrs local almost five hours late.

All UAL polar flights planned to transit Russian airspace as normal.

AA263 is currently headed over PHX (in fact I could see it go over) it is definitely headed to LAX .

travaz wrote:

AA263 is currently headed over PHX (in fact I could see it go over) it is definitely headed to LAX .

Interesting that AA is doing this but none of the UA flights are rerouting....

United1 wrote:

Interesting that AA is doing this but none of the UA flights are rerouting

Interesting indeed.

The closure of Russian airspace to US commercial flights would be all over the media.

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

mfe777 wrote:

This is concerning. If there is a ban on Russian airspace, East Coast USA-Asia flights are going to have to make some big adjustments.

Is this the beginning of an era where we will see the comeback/return to prominence of ANC ?

caverunner17 wrote:

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

Doesn't seem to be any issue at this point....UA86 just entered Russian airspace enroute to PVG...it's expected to arrive early. DL doesn't seem to be avoiding Russian airspace either.

This is something specific to AA

And yet SU has 3x daily to JFK and 1x LAX?

United1 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

Doesn't seem to be any issue at this point....UA86 just entered Russian airspace enroute to PVG...it's expected to arrive early. DL doesn't seem to be avoiding Russian airspace either.

This is something specific to AA

maybe its the lethargic loads on LAX-PEK, the ORD flight is stopping to pick up the LAX passengers en-route to PEK!

On a serious note, its nNot really specific to AA other than them being the first to avoid Russian airspace. The rest will follow pretty quickly.

US airline overflight rights for Russia reportedly were set to expire this coming Tuesday, with US-Russian talks not rescheduled until after that. And that was before US airstrikes in Syria.
With tensions running high is appears that several American Airlines flights are already avoiding Russian airspace.
Today’s American Airlines Dallas – Beijing flight AA263 routed out to Los Angeles and made a stop before being scheduled to continue to China. American Airlines AA125 from Dallas to Hong Kong diverted to Los Angeles as well. So did American Airlines AA187 from Chicago to Beijing.

Apparently, there are reports of passengers being told on the affected AA flights that the reason for their re-routes was to avoid Russia.

https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.co ... -bombings/

caverunner17 wrote:

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

Would UA suspend their India flights if Russian overflights went away?

The routing on Flight Aware is south of the Aleutians and across South Japan into China. I guess the 787-8 couldn't carry enough fuel without the LA stop. Why not do a tech stop in ANC . Seems like it would be quicker for the ORD flight.

YouGeeElWhy wrote:

Would UA suspend their India flights if Russian overflights went away?

I mean, if you look at flightaware, it would appear as if the UA flights to India enter the western part of Russia. It looks like they would have to stay further west and fly over Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and Turkey before heading east again into India. Russia extends pretty far down south so who knows?

Rookie87 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

I think you mean i.e. Korean Airlines. As they were shot down near Russian airspace in Asia. Malaysian was shot down over a war zone in Ukraine. Different issues going on there.

US aircraft are in Russian airspace at nearly all hours of the day. You guys forget (or are unaware) of K4 and Atlas's operations over there. FX and UPS as well.

travaz wrote:

The routing on Flight Aware is south of the Aleutians and across South Japan into China. I guess the 787-8 couldn't carry enough fuel without the LA stop. Why not do a tech stop in ANC . Seems like it would be quicker for the ORD flight.

FAR 117 is why ANC is a pain to use for tech stops. Max fuel tankage is only one small part of the issue and not itself an issue. Max takeoff Weight and flight times are even more of an issue. The extra flying time caused by the longer routes makes it hard to stay within FAR 117 limits and the fuel needed also can result in stiff weight restrictions.

Varsity1 wrote:

US aircraft are in Russian airspace at nearly all hours of the day. You guys forget (or are unaware) of K4 and Atlas's operations over there. FX and UPS as well.

Big difference in risk & potential liability between cargo and pax ops.
Nothing wrong with AA being conservative if they feel it warranted.

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

travaz wrote:

The routing on Flight Aware is south of the Aleutians and across South Japan into China. I guess the 787-8 couldn't carry enough fuel without the LA stop. Why not do a tech stop in ANC . Seems like it would be quicker for the ORD flight.

FAR 117 is why ANC is a pain to use for tech stops. Max fuel tankage is only one small part of the issue and not itself an issue. Max takeoff Weight and flight times are even more of an issue. The extra flying time caused by the longer routes makes it hard to stay within FAR 117 limits and the fuel needed also can result in stiff weight restrictions.

I am no expert here so really this is a question. If you are going DFW ANC or ORD ANC it seems you would need a lot less fuel from ORD or DFW to ANC than if you were going to PEK non stop. I do however get your point on the time limits for the crew.

travaz wrote:

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

I am no expert here so really this is a question. If you are going DFW ANC or ORD ANC it seems you would need a lot less fuel from ORD or DFW to ANC than if you were going to PEK non stop. I do however get your point on the time limits for the crew.

It is less fuel to get to ANC than nonstop to PEK but when you take into account the long flight time and the time needed to fuel stop, the crews would be at or over their max duty and flight time per day. ANC isnt a crew base. LAX is a crew base for 777/787 and SEA can easily have a crew deadheaded in the night before if it is known ahead of time there will be these fuel stops. ANC is a lot farther to deadhead a replacement crew the night before and more costly as this time of year it would be on another carrier.

Siberia airspace again
Hope this was just an individual case

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

travaz wrote:

MSJYOP28Apilot wrote:

I am no expert here so really this is a question. If you are going DFW ANC or ORD ANC it seems you would need a lot less fuel from ORD or DFW to ANC than if you were going to PEK non stop. I do however get your point on the time limits for the crew.

It is less fuel to get to ANC than nonstop to PEK but when you take into account the long flight time and the time needed to fuel stop, the crews would be at or over their max duty and flight time per day. ANC isnt a crew base. LAX is a crew base for 777/787 and SEA can easily have a crew deadheaded in the night before if it is known ahead of time there will be these fuel stops. ANC is a lot farther to deadhead a replacement crew the night before and more costly as this time of year it would be on another carrier.

Thanks for the INFO

Probably Russia is using the ending date of the overflight rights and negotiations of renewal for political reasons, to pressure the USA to end sanctions placed by President Obama and still continuing to some extent under President Trump. I expect they also may be seeking large increases in the fees to continue, to extort rights for their airlines to fly to the USA. By targeting USA based airliners, Russia expects the airlines affected will sic their best lobbyists, lawyers and bribes...um campaign donations...to key members of the Senate and Congress to achieve the end of the sanctions.

Rookie87 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

as739x wrote:

Russia has condemned the bombing in Syria. Relations are not great right now between the US and Russia. AA may be playing it safe, in case relations further sour?

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

No, it's not. As of right now, other airlines are flying through Russian airspace without issue. If you paid extra for a N/S flight to Asia and it became a planned one-stop, I'd be livid. It's not like LAX is on the way either for a 1-2 hour fuel diversion. Until the rights expire and other airlines have to follow suit, they are at a huge disadvantage to every other competitor. I'd understand if there was a threat, but there isn't. And there isn't an issue with the overfly rights for a few days.

rbavfan wrote:

Rookie87 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

I think you mean i.e. Korean Airlines. As they were shot down near Russian airspace in Asia. Malaysian was shot down over a war zone in Ukraine. Different issues going on there.

Oops yes

caverunner17 wrote:

Rookie87 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

No, it's not. As of right now, other airlines are flying through Russian airspace without issue. If you paid extra for a N/S flight to Asia and it became a planned one-stop, I'd be livid. It's not like LAX is on the way either for a 1-2 hour fuel diversion. Until the rights expire and other airlines have to follow suit, they are at a huge disadvantage to every other competitor. I'd understand if there was a threat, but there isn't. And there isn't an issue with the overfly rights for a few days.

Then be livid. Two countries are playing tit for tat and you want to be in the middle of it? You honestly believe AA would make a decision like what they did without genuine concern? That is delusional. One or two tech stops due to political issues doesn’t create a “disadvantage”. Something happened, and I’m sure you’re aware that something must be serious enough for them to do these diversions since you kinda hinted at that.
Who knows, maybe they didn’t get clearance but UA and DL did? Who knows. What we do know is that, one of the legacy carriers, made a decision to divert all flights that had to go through Russian airspace.

rbavfan wrote:

Rookie87 wrote:

caverunner17 wrote:

Relations between Russia and US have been bad for awhile now...

Also, a business wouldn't play it safe "in case" if it costs them money. Diversions to LAX cost money and time and if their competitors don't have this issue, puts them at a severe disadvantage. No doubt that there's something going on behind the scenes.

A severe disadvantage is overreaching on your part. You’re implying that all or most of the ticket purchases on these particular flights were done last minute. No announcements were made saying that this was a permanent change or even one that would last more than a day during the period that the rights were expired. Would you want to fly on an airline that doesn’t care whether an overflight right is expired or not???
And what costs more money? Being safe and avoiding issues OR your plane being shot down i.e Malaysian Airlines?
I’m sure AA took a good look at what is going on and made the best decision for their customers and themselves as a company. Any business should be precautious right now considering what is going on.

I think you mean i.e. Korean Airlines. As they were shot down near Russian airspace in Asia. Malaysian was shot down over a war zone in Ukraine. Different issues going on there.

The Russians shot down both planes.

Odd though...on flight radar, every one of their Asia flights left late

Looks like AA just over reacted. All AA, and to no surprise, DL and UA flights are scheduled to be on time today and will be flying the usual route.

I mean, NATO can easily play tit for tat and say no Russian aircraft are allowed to overfly Great Britain and France and if they really want to make a point, the U.S.A. Definitely an overreaction by AA.

I don't think we know all of the facts on these diversions. We don't know what intelligence agencies know and may have passed on to AA. What would have happened if an AA flight was ready to enter Russian airspace and was denied. It would have created a real problem and possibly a dangerous situation. If I was Russia and wanted to make a statement why would I deny Delta or United when I could call out AMERICAN Airlines. AA did the right thing in my opinion.

it's a fluid situation that keeps evolving. As of yesterday evening, the flight plan for today's 263 showed stop SEA enroute PEK, however it has since been amended to non-stop PEK.

NATO doesn’t control European air space, each country controls their own.

travaz wrote:

I don't think we know all of the facts on these diversions. We don't know what intelligence agencies know and may have passed on to AA.

I agree we do not know all the facts about these diversions. But the intelligence agencies are not going to pass on information only to AA. There would be an advisory for all commercial airlines if it was really unsafe. If it was really a matter of great concern, DL and UA would have avoided the airspace.

DTWLAX wrote:

travaz wrote:

I don't think we know all of the facts on these diversions. We don't know what intelligence agencies know and may have passed on to AA.

I agree we do not know all the facts about these diversions. But the intelligence agencies are not going to pass on information only to AA. There would be an advisory for all commercial airlines if it was really unsafe. If it was really a matter of great concern, DL and UA would have avoided the airspace.

I could see where the Feds could develop information through various contacts (Dept of State, FAA?) that didn't pose a danger as such and maybe it was passed on to all carriers but was more specific to AA and AA chose to act on it. It appears that AA 263 entered Russian airspace over Sakhalin island and flew many miles over Russian Territory before turning South into China. I don't mean to argue or disagree with your statement as this is all speculation on my part but I find it interesting that eventually AA did enter Russian airspace. Today's flight (4-15-2018) appears to be heading North out of DFW and the SEA portion shows cancelled. I really would love to know all the facts to see how international relations played a part in this decision.

Cheers!

travaz wrote:

DTWLAX wrote:

travaz wrote:

I don't think we know all of the facts on these diversions. We don't know what intelligence agencies know and may have passed on to AA.

I agree we do not know all the facts about these diversions. But the intelligence agencies are not going to pass on information only to AA. There would be an advisory for all commercial airlines if it was really unsafe. If it was really a matter of great concern, DL and UA would have avoided the airspace.

I could see where the Feds could develop information through various contacts (Dept of State, FAA?) that didn't pose a danger as such and maybe it was passed on to all carriers but was more specific to AA and AA chose to act on it. It appears that AA 263 entered Russian airspace over Sakhalin island and flew many miles over Russian Territory before turning South into China. I don't mean to argue or disagree with your statement as this is all speculation on my part but I find it interesting that eventually AA did enter Russian airspace. Today's flight (4-15-2018) appears to be heading North out of DFW and the SEA portion shows cancelled. I really would love to know all the facts to see how international relations played a part in this decision.

Cheers!

I’m with you there. I’d love to know how this all played out at AA. It clearly was a serious enough concern.

Boof02671 wrote:

NATO doesn’t control European air space, each country controls their own.

and just about every European country belongs to NATO. All it would take is a few of them getting together to restrict Russian flights. So while your obviously right, you need to look at the big picture here.

jumbojet wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

NATO doesn’t control European air space, each country controls their own.

and just about every European country belongs to NATO. All it would take is a few of them getting together to restrict Russian flights. So while your obviously right, you need to look at the big picture here.

Why would any European country do it though? It would seriously impact their own airlines' operations to Asia not to mention that it would favour airlines such as Turkish Airlines, Qatar and Emirates. Remember how quickly AMS found slots for AirBridge Cargo when they had theirs revoked due to excessive delays. All it took was for Moscow to threaten the suspension of overflight rights to KLM.

Can any US airline allowed to fly over Russian airspace then?

SQ789 wrote:

Can any US airline allowed to fly over Russian airspace then?

Any formal government prohibition would be published here: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publica ... restrictKN

Airlines are free to make their own operational decisions based on overflight costs, their internal risk assessments or operational reasons.

glbltrvlr wrote:

SQ789 wrote:

Can any US airline allowed to fly over Russian airspace then?

Any formal government prohibition would be published here: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publica ... restrictKN

Airlines are free to make their own operational decisions based on overflight costs, their internal risk assessments or operational reasons.

Well, I gather the transit royalties agreements are specific to each carrier, wishing to overfly Russia. So if any of these agreements is up to renegotiation, and there are discords -- like exact money to be paid to Aeroflot for transiting Russia, then possibly this specific airline could find itself locked out of Russian airspace, upon expiration of the previous agreements.
Could it be the case here?

Looks like its really about tensions:https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/american-reroutes-asia-flights-to-avoid-russian-airs-447709/
Are they rerouting today as well?
Hope everything will be safe, but I doubt Russia will be that aggressive.

AA issued a Travel Alert and is waiving change fees on flights to PEK/HKG for flights from 4/14-4/21
https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/travel-alerts.jsp

SumChristianus wrote:

Looks like its really about tensions:https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/american-reroutes-asia-flights-to-avoid-russian-airs-447709/
Are they rerouting today as well?
Hope everything will be safe, but I doubt Russia will be that aggressive.

I doudt Russia would be that agressive (and stupid). Shooting down a United States carrier would lead to an armed conflict that would probably eventually go nuclear.