Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

MIflyer12 · Fri May 31, 2019 12:41 pm

c933103 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2019-0014-0081

Guam objects the allocations, asks for DOT to give UA one HND-Guam slot.

It would have make sense for Guam to get Haneda flight as that would match the stated goal of Haneda slot right expansion, which was supposed to enhance connection to short distance destinations.

What party had that as a stated goal?

amadorE175 · Fri May 31, 2019 1:57 pm

JAMBOJET wrote:
jetblastdubai wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Hawaiian Airlines' objection: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0014-0084

They're mainly talking about how HNL deserves more authority than LAX.

Not only that but they're bringing up the fact that LAWA (LAX) keeps jerking them around with terminal moves and somehow that should be factored into the DOT's HND award decisions.

"By contrast, in 2017, LAWA forced Hawaiian to move from Terminal 2 to
Terminal 5 to accommodate Delta, promising Hawaiian that it would not need to change terminals
again until a new terminal with a domestic baggage facility was opened. In breach of that promise
and to accommodate American’s growth at Terminal 5, LAWA proposes to compel Hawaiian’s
relocation in 2020 to the MSC"

That really is strange to whine about LAWA and MSC rental fees in a DOT Haneda document. What does that have to do with Hawaiian flying to Haneda..? I guess it's just a continuation of the argument that HNL should have more service than LAX, but, to an outsider, it does seem like a "Hey, why does Portland even need Haneda service" would be a better argument than LAX but oh well.

They're not going after Portland because they recognize in their objection that geographic diversity is a key factor in DOT decision making. PDX fits that and LAX does not. HA also says that, after the geographic needs are met, the DOT has historically given more slots to where the local market is largest which, for TYO, would be HNL. And PDX too has sustained a flight to TYO while there's probably a good argument that all the LAX-HND capacity will not be sustainable.

FSDan · Fri May 31, 2019 4:21 pm

tphuang wrote:
NYC to TOKYO:
https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/0 ... 0;sd:1;t:f
3 on UA/ANA and 2 on AA/JL
LAX to TOKYO
https://www.google.com/flights#flt=LAX. ... 0;sd:1;t:f
4 on UA/ANA + 1 on SQ and 3 on AA/JL, 1 on DL
I don't know how you can say their schedule to tokyo is competitive.

If you look at the flight times, there's very little variance. DL's flight to HND is within 30 minutes of AA's flight to HND. AA/JL and UA/NH have all their flights to NRT departing within about an hour and a half of each other, 1 to 2.5 hours after the HND flights depart. NH's HND flight is a late night departure, which is one of the only diverse timing options available. SQ's NRT departure is a bit later in the afternoon, but what is their level of cooperation with UA? Their flight doesn't come up as an option if I book through united.com...

So, while there's a bit of a gap (mostly between Star Alliance and the other two), DL's flight follows the same timing pattern as the majority of the other LAX-TYO flights, and is therefore reasonably competitive.

tphuang wrote:
Shanghai is simply not where big western banks put their primary TPAC office. They are there to serve the Chinese market, but due to monetary restrictions inside China, you simply can't do more than serve domestic market. It's funny that in other argument, you bring up PRISM, but here you don't discuss the corporate account travel expenses from NYC/LA to Asia market. I'd be shocked if Tokyo isn't top of the list with Hong Kong and Singapore after them.

You seem to be very narrowly focused on the Finance industry. Shanghai and Seoul have significant non-finance traffic (auto, manufacturing, tech, etc.), and to many more U.S. destinations than just LAX and NYC. If we were able to look at the volume of all business travel between the U.S. and East Asia, I'd be shocked if Singapore was higher than Seoul or Shanghai.

Star Alliance is absolutely the strongest in the U.S. to East Asia market, but SkyTeam is by no means weak when you consider the full picture.

ITSTours · Fri May 31, 2019 4:34 pm

FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Shanghai is simply not where big western banks put their primary TPAC office. They are there to serve the Chinese market, but due to monetary restrictions inside China, you simply can't do more than serve domestic market. It's funny that in other argument, you bring up PRISM, but here you don't discuss the corporate account travel expenses from NYC/LA to Asia market. I'd be shocked if Tokyo isn't top of the list with Hong Kong and Singapore after them.

You seem to be very narrowly focused on the Finance industry. Shanghai and Seoul have significant non-finance traffic (auto, manufacturing, tech, etc.), and to many more U.S. destinations than just LAX and NYC. If we were able to look at the volume of all business travel between the U.S. and East Asia, I'd be shocked if Singapore was higher than Seoul or Shanghai.

Star Alliance is absolutely the strongest in the U.S. to East Asia market, but SkyTeam is by no means weak when you consider the full picture.

When United's corporate booking data was leaked, United was proud about Apple booking 50 business seats per day for SFO-PVG route.

The ranking was PVG-HKG-TPE-LHR-ICN-SIN-MUC-HND-PEK-TLV from SFO.

TPE and ICN are obviously tech routes. TSMC, Foxconn, Samsung, Hynix, LG...

tphuang · Fri May 31, 2019 5:15 pm

FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
NYC to TOKYO:
https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/0 ... 0;sd:1;t:f
3 on UA/ANA and 2 on AA/JL
LAX to TOKYO
https://www.google.com/flights#flt=LAX. ... 0;sd:1;t:f
4 on UA/ANA + 1 on SQ and 3 on AA/JL, 1 on DL
I don't know how you can say their schedule to tokyo is competitive.

If you look at the flight times, there's very little variance. DL's flight to HND is within 30 minutes of AA's flight to HND. AA/JL and UA/NH have all their flights to NRT departing within about an hour and a half of each other, 1 to 2.5 hours after the HND flights depart. NH's HND flight is a late night departure, which is one of the only diverse timing options available. SQ's NRT departure is a bit later in the afternoon, but what is their level of cooperation with UA? Their flight doesn't come up as an option if I book through united.com...

So, while there's a bit of a gap (mostly between Star Alliance and the other two), DL's flight follows the same timing pattern as the majority of the other LAX-TYO flights, and is therefore reasonably competitive.

I'm talking about strength into certain markets. If I'm flying to tokyo a lot, DL/ST wouldn't be much carrier of choice. I might actually intentionally pick SQ at NRT more often if I think their product is that good. When I travel internationally, I like being able to try out numerous carriers and then boast about it latter. And *A gives that option. That makes them more attractive to Tokyo than OW imo.

tphuang wrote:
Shanghai is simply not where big western banks put their primary TPAC office. They are there to serve the Chinese market, but due to monetary restrictions inside China, you simply can't do more than serve domestic market. It's funny that in other argument, you bring up PRISM, but here you don't discuss the corporate account travel expenses from NYC/LA to Asia market. I'd be shocked if Tokyo isn't top of the list with Hong Kong and Singapore after them.

You seem to be very narrowly focused on the Finance industry. Shanghai and Seoul have significant non-finance traffic (auto, manufacturing, tech, etc.), and to many more U.S. destinations than just LAX and NYC. If we were able to look at the volume of all business travel between the U.S. and East Asia, I'd be shocked if Singapore was higher than Seoul or Shanghai.

Star Alliance is absolutely the strongest in the U.S. to East Asia market, but SkyTeam is by no means weak when you consider the full picture.

well, finance industry are the biggest corporate accounts from NYC. SF might be different due to tech industry, but that's a market owned by UA, so it's kind of irrelevant in the discussion here.

I look at demand to Asia in 3 groups.
Legacy fortress hubs with TPAC service - cities dominated by one legacy carrier. All hub carriers are the dominant to Asia from their fortress hub markets.

non-legacy fortress hub cities with significant TPAC service - that would be NYC/LAX/SEA (ORD borderline on this list). So there is actually competition here to see which legacy carrier/network is the best option. NYC/LAX obviously have the most demand demand here, that's why I looked at them. Again, *A is the strongest here. If we consider local industries, I'd say OW is a little better than ST given the importance of Tokyo and HK. Again, I use this to think about where the high value demands are going to
http://3rjfy21znlo631twxe405qqvzc4-wpen ... AAEerl.jpg

cities without TPAC service - This you have to look at the 1-stop options. For example, someone living in Philly might pick *A instead of AA if they do mostly TPAC flying because service to Asia either by driving to EWR or connecting through YYZ would be more convenient than what AA could offer. And when you look at the best TPAC hubs for Americans to connect at, they are all *A hubs (YYZ/YVR/SFO/EWR). OW to me is the weakest, since there is no convenient airport to connect at if you want to go to India or Singapore or Seoul or most of China. ST is a little better, but you still can't get to Singapore or India or hong kong or Taiwan with 1-stop option. *A is simply so much more convenient than the other 2.

c933103 · Sat Jun 01, 2019 5:20 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2019-0014-0081

Guam objects the allocations, asks for DOT to give UA one HND-Guam slot.

It would have make sense for Guam to get Haneda flight as that would match the stated goal of Haneda slot right expansion, which was supposed to enhance connection to short distance destinations.

What party had that as a stated goal?

Japanese government

compensateme · Sat Jun 01, 2019 5:34 am

Guam complaining is like Dayton, OH complaining about the Amazon HQ2 process.

YYZORD · Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:35 pm

Never said they'd choose DEN over IAH, they can add IAH replacing their NRT route with HND. DEN and EWR would be new NH routes from HND along with a YYZ-NRT route to compliment the AC YYZ-HND route.

LAXdude1023 wrote:
YYZORD wrote:
Any chance for NH to add HND-DEN & HND-EWR with their 6 slots?

Why would NH ever choose DEN-HND over IAH-HND?

UA857 · Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:20 am

Will AA relaunch JFK-HND?

77H · Mon Jul 08, 2019 9:02 am

compensateme wrote:
Guam complaining is like Dayton, OH complaining about the Amazon HQ2 process.

Not remotely similar and I’d wager you know that.

Dayton is a tertiary city in the rust belt of the US with little hope of attracting a massive tech, retail and logistics company.

The other is a popular tourist destination for much of East Asia, the majority of which originate from greater Tokyo and Japan at large.
Delving deeper, UA’s JV partner NH, who uses HND as a primary domestic hub allows for countless, seamless, 1-stop connections throughout Japan, connecting markets not large enough to justify nonstop service. Hence, “Japan at large”.

GUM pushing for UA service from HND is no different than HI and HA pushing for allocations to HNL and KOA. To that point, I imagine if GUM were to be included in JP-US market demand figures as detailed in above posts, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it rank above many of the “lanes” awarded to other carriers this go-around. It could also be argued that the economic gain for GUM would be greater than the economic gains to be realized in markets that were awarded.
If we analyze the HND slots awarded to date from a wholistic approach, what we’ve seen is that few airlines have been able to make HND work outside pacific tourist destinations and a handfull of routes off rhe West Coast.

77H

MIflyer12 · Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:23 am

77H wrote:
GUM pushing for UA service from HND is no different than HI and HA pushing for allocations to HNL and KOA. To that point, I imagine if GUM were to be included in JP-US market demand figures as detailed in above posts, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it rank above many of the “lanes” awarded to other carriers this go-around.

GUM is smaller in total international arrivals than DTW, PHL, CLT or MSP. See us-international-air-passenger-and-freight-statistics-september-2018 by the DOT.

kavok · Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:07 pm

The biggest reason GUM didn’t get selected is because UA ranked them 6 of 6 in their choice preference. If you look at the DOT’s selection process (for all of the airlines), they followed the requested order for every carrier.

Point being, had UA put GUM (or IAH) in their top 4, GUM (or IAH) probably would have been selected over UAs listed fourth choice in LAX.

You can make all the arguments in the world why GUM did or didn’t get selected, but the main reason they didn’t get chosen was because UA put them #6 of 6 on their list.

LAXdude1023 · Mon Jul 08, 2019 1:45 pm

UA857 wrote:
Will AA relaunch JFK-HND?

No. They showed they have no interest or they would have applied for it.

UA857 · Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:50 am

How come UA won’t fly the 777-300ER to HND?

LAXintl · Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:40 pm

Final order is out today.

UPlog · Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:47 pm

No shock, no changes from the tentative awards.

Now we wait for actual schedules and see what slot timings airlines manage to secure.

alan3 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:49 pm

So how early could these flights begin?

UPlog · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:05 pm

alan3 wrote:
So how early could these flights begin?

As it says in Reply 768 >>>>>

"The flight will begin as early as March 2020"

x1234 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:15 pm

Looks like DL put out a snazzy PR release without actually LOADING THE FLIGHTS INTO THE SYSTEM! I was searching for HND flights from ATL today from April 2020 and they aren't loaded yet (they still say Narita).

RainerBoeing777 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:18 pm

and what happened to the Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways slots ?????

LAXintl · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:26 pm

x1234 wrote:
Looks like DL put out a snazzy PR release without actually LOADING THE FLIGHTS INTO THE SYSTEM! I was searching for HND flights from ATL today from April 2020 and they aren't loaded yet (they still say Narita).

Now that the US airlines have the route authority, they will need to secure slot times at the airport. Until that is accomplished it would be bit dangerous to publish schedules as the timings are not firm. The IATA S20 slot conference will take place in November.

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
and what happened to the Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways slots ?????

That's for the Japanese government to award rights for.

hkcanadaexpat · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:27 pm

x1234 wrote:
Looks like DL put out a snazzy PR release without actually LOADING THE FLIGHTS INTO THE SYSTEM! I was searching for HND flights from ATL today from April 2020 and they aren't loaded yet (they still say Narita).

Airport authority has yet to allocate specific landing/take off slots.

jbs2886 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:43 pm

x1234 wrote:
Looks like DL put out a snazzy PR release without actually LOADING THE FLIGHTS INTO THE SYSTEM! I was searching for HND flights from ATL today from April 2020 and they aren't loaded yet (they still say Narita).

If only you bothered to read the snazzy release, which states: "These moves are contingent upon securing viable operational slots."

jayunited · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:44 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Now that the US airlines have the route authority, they will need to secure slot times at the airport. Until that is accomplished it would be bit dangerous to publish schedules as the timings are not firm. The IATA S20 slot conference will take place in November.

What happens if the US3 and HA can't secure those coveted early afternoon arrival slots and late afternoon to early evening departure slots that work perfectly for their US customers? If will be interesting to see how AA, DL, and UA respond if they are awarded late night arrival slots and overnight departure slots.

westgate · Fri Aug 09, 2019 5:58 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Final order is out today.

So other than the DL flights, which according to the other thread should all be switching over from NRT, what will the likely situation be with the other airlines ?

Is AA going to go double daily on LAX-HND and will they keep LAX-NRT ? Will they switch from NRT to HND for DFW, and if so, will ORD remain the only destination to NRT ?

Is HA going to double daily on HNL-HND ? Will they then drop or keep HNL-NRT ?

And for UA, will EWR, IAD, ORD and LAX all switch over from NRT or will the HND flights be in addition to those ?

And I also assume that even though these are what the DOT has awarded, not all these flights will actually be commenced and of course those that are could be rather short lived.

dmstorm22 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:04 pm

duplicate

MIflyer12 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:05 pm

I wouldn't expect AA or UA to anniunce what they're doing with NRT ops until HND slot times are secured,.

If a carrier doesn't commence flights it will need to file a delay or dormancy request with the DOT. Other carriers will pounce with arguments to claim slots. Yes, it's likely that eventually some new route awards will fail. Lack of demand, a fuel price spike... Slots will be reallocated. It will be many years - if ever - before U.S. carriers get enough HND slots to let many sit unused.

dmstorm22 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:07 pm

westgate wrote:
LAXintl wrote:

And for UA, will EWR, IAD, ORD and LAX all switch over from NRT or will the HND flights be in addition to those ?

I believe I remember reading EWR/LAX will be an additional flight to their NRT flight, while ORD/IAD will replace the NRT flights.
Or that is the hope at least.

ITSTours · Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:59 pm

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
x1234 wrote:
Looks like DL put out a snazzy PR release without actually LOADING THE FLIGHTS INTO THE SYSTEM! I was searching for HND flights from ATL today from April 2020 and they aren't loaded yet (they still say Narita).

Airport authority has yet to allocate specific landing/take off slots.

And the Japanese government authorized the new flight route required for the new slots just yesterday. They didn't even start the discussion for the new international slots..

STT757 · Fri Aug 09, 2019 8:30 pm

westgate wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
Final order is out today.

So other than the DL flights, which according to the other thread should all be switching over from NRT, what will the likely situation be with the other airlines ?

Is AA going to go double daily on LAX-HND and will they keep LAX-NRT ? Will they switch from NRT to HND for DFW, and if so, will ORD remain the only destination to NRT ?

Is HA going to double daily on HNL-HND ? Will they then drop or keep HNL-NRT ?

And for UA, will EWR, IAD, ORD and LAX all switch over from NRT or will the HND flights be in addition to those ?

And I also assume that even though these are what the DOT has awarded, not all these flights will actually be commenced and of course those that are could be rather short lived.

EWR and LAX -HND are in addition to the existing NRT flights. ORD and IAD- HND replaces the flights to NRT.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

CRJ200flyer · Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:28 am

I created an infographic summary of the new slots, Delta’s aircraft by route, and basic overview of the airport.

For full quality image go to:
http://facebook.com/commercialaviationinfographics

admanager · Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:50 am

CRJ200flyer wrote:
I created an infographic summary of the new slots, Delta’s aircraft by route, and basic overview of the airport.

For full quality image go to:
http://facebook.com/commercialaviationinfographics

nicely done, thanks

LAXintl · Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:17 am

U.S. carriers have until October 3, 2019 to file applications with the Japanese authorities for Haneda takeoff and landing slot times.

DOT requires the carriers to institute their proposed services within 90 days after March 29, 2020, the date on which the IATA 2020 summer season begins.

sagechan · Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:32 am

LAXintl wrote:
U.S. carriers have until October 3, 2019 to file applications with the Japanese authorities for Haneda takeoff and landing slot times.

DOT requires the carriers to institute their proposed services within 90 days after March 29, 2020, the date on which the IATA 2020 summer season begins.

Do you know if AA&UA can swap with JL/NH on slot times or only be assigned by the Japanese government?

LAXintl · Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:55 pm

AA says likely to announce its HND schedule in "next several weeks" once it ensures it can get the slot schedule timings it wants.

Per comments of VP Vasu Raja, AA-JL want to create a service pattern like JFK-LHR today where every 2-3 hours there is a flight between LA and Tokyo.

https://viewfromthewing.com/2019/09/24/ ... ext-month/

janders · Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:25 pm

Creating frequent service spread out more during the day between Tokyo and Los Angeles is interesting. Sounds like JL might itself also use one of its HND slots for a LAX flight.

mercure1 · Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:42 pm

One issue might be time zones. Timings are not as friendly for LA-TYO vs NYC-LON. Only 5 hours between NY and London vs 8 for LA and Tokyo

But suppose they could do following - each airline offer 2 departures, I used the AA proposed HND schedule and slotted JL flights in between

LAX-TYO
0900-1330
1300-1725
1600-2030
2355-0445

TYO-LAX
1340-0630
1630-0920
1900-1315
2300-1715

Prost · Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:54 pm

I always consider it a 16 hour time difference.

LAXintl · Tue Sep 24, 2019 6:07 pm

For simplicity, I pretty much also use -8/9 hours when looking at times in Far East knowing its the next day. Much easier to convert.

jayunited · Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:28 pm

janders wrote:
Creating frequent service spread out more during the day between Tokyo and Los Angeles is interesting. Sounds like JL might itself also use one of its HND slots for a LAX flight.

If JAL does use one of its slots for LAX then that is still only 3 flights on AA/JL to HND and 5 flights total if we included both AA and JL's LAX-NRT flights. I don't think "shuttle" is the correct word to use in this situation of perhpaps they shouldn't have compared LAX-TYO to JFK-LHR which has a total of 12 daily departures schedule for today September 24th.

Looking at UA/NH they have 3 flights LAX-NRT and with UA's award we know come next spring 2 flights LAX-HND. Now if NH also uses another one of their slots on LAX that would be 3 flights between LAX-HND for UA/NH.

Something that just came to my mind while typing my response was if both JAL and ANA each use one of their slots for LAX both Star and OneWorld would have a total of 6 daily flights LAX-HND-LAX not including NRT. How does DL with just one HND flight and no NRT flight compete against these two powerhouse alliances? I don't want to turn this into a JV are bad for competition thread but looking at what could happen if it was any airline other than DL I would say in 2-3 years both Star and OneWorld combined would run them off the route. I think DL is strong enough to remain on the route even if they end up loosing money. But if a smaller non-alligned airline was on LAX-HND-LAX route they may not be able to survive if this route LAX-HND-LAX goes 6x daily between the two alliances.

Aceskywalker · Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:47 pm

Time will tell but between HND and NRT, isn’t there going to be too much capacity between Los Angeles and Tokyo? AA 3/day, UA 2/day, NH 3x, JL 1x, DL 1x, SQ 1x.

MIflyer12 · Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:44 pm

jayunited wrote:
Something that just came to my mind while typing my response was if both JAL and ANA each use one of their slots for LAX both Star and OneWorld would have a total of 6 daily flights LAX-HND-LAX not including NRT. How does DL with just one HND flight and no NRT flight compete against these two powerhouse alliances? I don't want to turn this into a JV are bad for competition thread but looking at what could happen if it was any airline other than DL I would say in 2-3 years both Star and OneWorld combined would run them off the route. I think DL is strong enough to remain on the route even if they end up loosing money. But if a smaller non-alligned airline was on LAX-HND-LAX route they may not be able to survive if this route LAX-HND-LAX goes 6x daily between the two alliances.

One would like to think that DL, likely to end 2019 as the world's #1 carrier by revenue, #2 in passengers at LAX with a ~170 flight/day operation, can make LAX-HND work. I don't think awarding DL a 2nd slot would really be a great favor.

In any event, the relative importance of the Japan-USA aviation market is declining. Mexico, Canada, the UK, China, France and the Netherlands grow passenger numbers to the U.S. year after year while Japan just keeps shrinking.

notconcerned · Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:13 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
In any event, the relative importance of the Japan-USA aviation market is declining. Mexico, Canada, the UK, China, France and the Netherlands grow passenger numbers to the U.S. year after year while Japan just keeps shrinking.

Japan-US is a mature market but it offers stable and predictable yields for airlines. And essentially it's a duopoly + DL. China on the other hand is just a bloodbath with a new province subsidizing a route to US every year (LAX alone has flights to 16 different provinces in China). France has also seen its fair share of growth with new carriers to the market (LEVEL, Corsair, French Bee, and recently defunct XL Airways). I think the HND slots, 2020 Olympics, and overall Japan's push for more tourists should help drive growth, or at least profitable yields for US-Japan airlines.

LAXintl · Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:42 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
In any event, the relative importance of the Japan-USA aviation market is declining. Mexico, Canada, the UK, China, France and the Netherlands grow passenger numbers to the U.S. year after year while Japan just keeps shrinking.

Actually US-Japan is a growth market last 5-years running -- What was once a transit market for much of the seat capacity, is now backfilled by strong growing O&D demand. The USA is now the largest long-haul market from Japan with a record number of arrivals year after year.

LAXdude1023 · Thu Sep 26, 2019 3:27 am

LAXintl wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
In any event, the relative importance of the Japan-USA aviation market is declining. Mexico, Canada, the UK, China, France and the Netherlands grow passenger numbers to the U.S. year after year while Japan just keeps shrinking.

Actually US-Japan is a growth market last 5-years running -- What was once a transit market for much of the seat capacity, is now backfilled by strong growing O&D demand. The USA is now the largest long-haul market from Japan with a record number of arrivals year after year.

Not to mention yields are sky high in Japan relative to every other Asian country.

UA857 · Thu Sep 26, 2019 4:00 am

Is AA going to kill ORD-NRT in 2020 cause its their last TPAC service from ORD?

mercure1 · Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:24 am

Renderings of Delta SkyClub planned for Haneda opening in July.

https://www.aviationwire.jp/archives/196325

Ishrion · Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:34 am

UA857 wrote:
Is AA going to kill ORD-NRT in 2020 cause its their last TPAC service from ORD?

Yup

UA857 · Thu Apr 09, 2020 12:32 am

Here´s how the US3´s HND operations supposed to look like

DL:
HNL 763
SEA A339
PDX A332
LAX 77E
MSP 77E
DTW A359
JFK 77L
ATL 77L

UA:
SFO 788/789 type varies
LAX 788/789 type varies
ORD 77E (GE)
EWR 77E (GE)
IAD 77E (P&W)

AA:
LAX 788/789
DFW 77W
JFK 77W

jfk777 · Thu Apr 09, 2020 12:38 am

UA857 wrote:
Here´s how the US3´s HND operations supposed to look like

DL:
HNL 763
SEA A339
PDX A332
LAX 77E
MSP 77E
DTW A359
JFK 77L
ATL 77L

UA:
SFO 788/789 type varies
LAX 788/789 type varies
ORD 77E (GE)
EWR 77E (GE)
IAD 77E (P&W)

AA:
LAX 788/789
DFW 77W
JFK 77W

Since when do Delta & AA fly from Haneda to JFK ?

United is missing Houston ?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net