SAS EuroBonus - Destinations for a 13th long-haul Airbus?

Let's say that SAS would add a 13th A330/A340 to their fleet - where would you like it to fly?

(SAS recently announced a 12th A340 joining the fleet (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=754879) next summer adding DEL/SFO to the route map)

Let's say that SAS would add a 13th A330/A340 to their fleet - where would you like it to fly?TORONTO! Toronto! Toronto!

cheers,

Henry

I agree that Toronto would be nice and/or Hong Kong. Isn't South Africa popular at the moment, so maybe Cape Town?

SAS could also use the plane to add service from OSL or why not make sure that they flights they schedule do run and run 7days a week rather than these irregular schedules they are running now...

SAS could also use the plane to add service from OSL or why not make sure that they flights they schedule do run and run 7days a week rather than these irregular schedules they are running now...

Then the destination must be within 10h30m max each way. (min. 1h30m turn around).
I think that's the reason of ARN-PEK and ARN-BKK routes.

I think SAS shouldn't jump into Asia party any longer because that train has long gone already, they missed it and that's it. I think SAS should now find their own thing and concentrate on consistent strategy - maybe North America would be something for them? Toronto would be indeed contributing their San Francisco route and enhance their North America routes - there isn't anyone flying from Northern Europe to Canada at the moment so they would also get advantage.

Just adding more planes and trying to compete in the already competed routes in Asia would not allow them to build their own strategy - they would be just followers to others strategy.

Maybe add some more late night flights! I really liked that this summer. Also, I know it's not quite standard, but add a like 1-3 day a week ewr-hel. after all, finnair did arn-bos and arn-yyz.

South America: Rio or São Paulo.
Or perhaps Copenhagen-Aalborg as this route always is overbooked - I have had so many denied boarding vouchers from there.

How about DEN (UA hub) , ATL or DFW?

All three huge are North American airports.

(...) or why not make sure that they flights they schedule do run and run 7days a week rather than these irregular schedules they are running now...
Agree!^

Denver.

Cape Town would be a dream, but its too far I think.

How about KIX (Osaka)?

Denver
Denver would be a good option as it's one of the major UA hubs with plenty of connections to mid and western US. It's a rather pleasant transfer airport as well.
Only problem is that they are adding SFO now which will probably cover most of those US destinations anyway.

I vote for YYZ which is definitely a destination missing from Scandinavia.
JNB and HKG would be nice as well...

JNB and HKG would be nice as well...

With HKG, would they face the same challenges as with PVG?

I think SAS shouldn't jump into Asia party any longer because that train has long gone already, they missed it and that's it. I think SAS should now find their own thing and concentrate on consistent strategy - maybe North America would be something for them? Toronto would be indeed contributing their San Francisco route and enhance their North America routes - there isn't anyone flying from Northern Europe to Canada at the moment so they would also get advantage.

Just adding more planes and trying to compete in the already competed routes in Asia would not allow them to build their own strategy - they would be just followers to others strategy.

I agree with this. SAS could offer the same "easy and fast transfer" option to North (and maybe Latin) America that Finnair tries to provide to Asia.

I don't know anymore which major European airport to hate most: FRA, CDG, LHR...All offer the same miserable experience.

I agree, increase frequencies on the routes they have!

I think they should get a little breathing room so there's more reliability..

Besides that, OSL-EWR or ORD is of course what I'm waiting for ;)

Fly directly to SIN on the days where SQ doesn't fly (MON, WED, FRI and SUN) and get an agreement with SQ on connecting flights.

SQ from CPH to SIN is always fully booked so there should be room for a higher weekly frequency on that route..

Cheers,

Yeah, Why doesnt SQ add frequencies themselves?
lack of C demand maybe?

CPH-SIN and CPH-BKK seem to have a pretty high load in all clases aross carriers. TG has earlier aired that they are looking into adding a second daily flight from CPH-BKK - potentially as an extension of the BKK-ATH route.

I do not think however that SK has the business to run into SIN.

My guess is that SK would have to prove the viability of the 12th (and the first 11) airbuses prior to adding the 13th - and that would likely go to India, China and/or NA. YYZ would indeed be a good option. US immigration is getting more and more messy with a lot óf BS - SK could be that unique connection from norther Europe into Canada - saving hours and hours from connection time and wasted and wasted US immigration procedures

US immigration is getting more and more messy with a lot óf BS - SK could be that unique connection from norther Europe into Canada - saving hours and hours from connection time and wasted and wasted US immigration procedures

Can you explain this better? AFAIK, US immigration waiting time and BS has not changed at all the last few years. Average waiting time at ORD is around 10 minutes, IAD and SEA even shorter. EWR varies a lot, but usually there are no lines when the ARN flight lands, a little wait around the CPH flights arrival time.

I myself would fly ARN - YYZ a couple of times every year instead of going via ORD or EWR. Not that I have any big problems with that except the added travelling time.

I have passed the US immigrations probably 30 - 40 times the last two years and I have never had any problems or long waiting lines. The only time I did have a problem was when I went back to Canada.

Can you explain this better?

Happy to

I have three main issues with US immigration:
1) Timeconsuming and troublesome:
- Prior to or at check-in I need to notify US authorities of my first night stay
- Prior to or at arrival I need to fill out a rather lengthy immigration form (true many countries have this so not that unique)
- Waiting times at arrival airports to get through immigration can be pretty long. Especially at ORD, EWR and IAD this can take up to an hour or more.
(over the past 5 years my experience is mainly based SEA, SFO, ORD, EWR and IAD with approx a visit a month). We all have different experience with this - but 10 mintues I have only experienced a handfull of time
- Since 2001 the immigration process has becomme increasing cumbersome. Lately with introduction of fingerprints of all 10 fingertips starting at IAD
2) If I am connecting to e.g. Canada or Latin America this is all in vain. I have to go through US immigration AND customs just to board a plane of the country. This is AFAIK fairly unique - and very unpractical.
3) Final main point is that al lot of my personal information is handed over to US authorities. Who guards my privacy in this matter?

All in all it is easier to get in and out of China that the US - and apart from lack of currency control at US boarders it reminds way too much of the long gone GDR immigration process. No offence intended here

We all have different experiences and beliefs on this - and the effectiveness of the above. But I for one belive it is a total vaste of my and others time if I e.g. just need to connect to Canada. That is why I said that a direct YYZ connection would save you from all this BS.

Happy to

I have three main issues with US immigration:
1) Timeconsuming and troublesome:
- Prior to or at check-in I need to notify US authorities of my first night stay
- Prior to or at arrival I need to fill out a rather lengthy immigration form (true many countries have this so not that unique)
- Waiting times at arrival airports to get through immigration can be pretty long. Especially at ORD, EWR and IAD this can take up to an hour or more.
(over the past 5 years my experience is mainly based SEA, SFO, ORD, EWR and IAD with approx a visit a month). We all have different experience with this - but 10 mintues I have only experienced a handfull of time
- Since 2001 the immigration process has becomme increasing cumbersome. Lately with introduction of fingerprints of all 10 fingertips starting at IAD
2) If I am connecting to e.g. Canada or Latin America this is all in vain. I have to go through US immigration AND customs just to board a plane of the country. This is AFAIK fairly unique - and very unpractical.
3) Final main point is that al lot of my personal information is handed over to US authorities. Who guards my privacy in this matter?

All in all it is easier to get in and out of China that the US - and apart from lack of currency control at US boarders it reminds way too much of the long gone GDR immigration process. No offence intended here

We all have different experiences and beliefs on this - and the effectiveness of the above. But I for one belive it is a total vaste of my and others time if I e.g. just need to connect to Canada. That is why I said that a direct YYZ connection would save you from all this BS.

1. If your destination is the US, you still have to notify where you are staying the first night even if you connect in Canada

That long immigration form is shorter than what you need to fill out to many other countries. When you enter Canada you also need to fill out a form, although not as long as the US one, but you probably save 20 seconds. Both you and I have filled it out numerous time (although I don't fill it out anymore) and know what to write. The flight is 9 hours, there's always time to fill out this form..

To say that immigration usually takes an hour is BS. I have entered the US hundreds of times after 9-11, only once has it taken me an hour. It was in 2005 before Christmas, computers were down at ORD. Took around 1 hour. Members can verify that 1 hour is not the norm, usually it's a lot quicker.

Of course the process has changed after 9/11 but it is working smooth now. To enter the US is as quick as it was before 9/11. Remember that you are landing at the busiest airports in the world. If 10 wide bodies land at once at ORD or EWR it can take a few minutes to process 3000 people. I'm sure that would be the case as well at CPH if they had the same amount of people. All in all, I think they do a great job at these airports clearing this amount of people through immigration.

2. I agree, but this is nothing new, it has always been like that

3. If your final destination is the United States, they require the same information most other countries do. I don't see any problems at all. There's a simple solution if you don't agree with the US policy: Don't travel to the US. Also, if you go through Canada, you will have to give up the exact same info as you do now. It is provided to the US Government through your airline booking anyways.

China and other countries requires a visa to enter. Remember to take this in to account when you add up how much of your valuable time you use to enter a country.

To connect through Canada does not save time at all if your destination is the United States no matter how you slice it. If you are traveling to Canada you will of course save time. To the Caribbean or South America i doubt you will save any time because the frequency is so much lower from Canadian airports

Regardless that we disagree on US immigration policy it does not change the fact - and that was my point - that if your destination is Canada then the US immigration process is 100% waste of time. I was not talking about Canadian immigration - which certainly can take its time as well.

And oh, I did not say that it always took 1 hour in US immigration - I said it can. 10min process as a non-US citizen is extremely optimistic. True it can be done - but more often than not it will take longer, especially if you are not in the first 20 rows of the plane.

As it relates to 3): When on business that is not always a choice - regardless I suppose one is entitled to an opinion, right? Further, as you can see on other FT fora an increasing number actually try to avoid US transits if possible, when connecting to from Pacific, Asia, Latin America, Canada and Europe.

CPH-SIN and CPH-BKK seem to have a pretty high load in all clases aross carriers. TG has earlier aired that they are looking into adding a second daily flight from CPH-BKK - potentially as an extension of the BKK-ATH route.

I do not think however that SK has the business to run into SIN.

Firstly, I have read about the rumours stating SQ SIN-CPH-SIN being so popular, but frankly I doubt it. In those chats it's been a truth that the only reason for not adding frequencies is lack of aircraft. Why are SQ then doubling flights to ZRH? I think their four weekly's work fine for them on the CPH run, and adding flights would hurt yield. That's my guess.

Secondly, I do not foresee a BKK-ATH-CPH. Who on earth would be interested to fly such a route, unless it would be really cheap? But then TG wouldn't make any money on the extra leg. That's one reason for TG not extending the CPH or ARN flights to OSL. Demand - yes, profit - hardly.

Thirdly. Provided they manage to find A343 12 within the limited time they have, a 13th should go to DEN (seasonally) and IAH. HKG would be nice, but it's a dead end in regards to connections (unless QF could do it as they do ex NRT and PEK to Oz for SK).

That's my fiver,

Airbus A340-300

Secondly, I do not foresee a BKK-ATH-CPH. Who on earth would be interested to fly such a route, unless it would be really cheap? But then TG wouldn't make any money on the extra leg. That's one reason for TG not extending the CPH or ARN flights to OSL. Demand - yes, profit - hardly.

No FT'ers would do that routing, agree. But quite a few seats (also up front) are on package tours - and they simply buy "14 days in Thailand going to Bangkok with Thai".

As on the profit to TG - no idea. Only know that Thai has aired the option quite a few times - and that CPH-BKK-CPH is often fully loaded months in advance.

No FT'ers would do that routing, agree.

Well, if it gave extra milage.....:cool:

Why are SQ then doubling flights to ZRH? I think their four weekly's work fine for them on the CPH run, and adding flights would hurt yield. That's my guess.
Airbus A340-300

As on the profit to TG - no idea. Only know that Thai has aired the option quite a few times - and that CPH-BKK-CPH is often fully loaded months in advance.

Well, with both TG and SQ being heavily loaded from CPH I would still say that CPH-SIN would be a good option for a 13th SAS long haul Airbus.

One could suspect that the yield on SIN-ZRH is better than SIN-CPH given the sizes of the two financial centres and therefore it is not a surprise that SQ gives priority to the ZRH-route. SIN also operate with their new expensive F product to ZRH. But that does not mean that there is not money to be made on CPH-SIN for SK.

I guess quite a lot of the SQ traffic from CPH is transit to Australia and NZ but SQ also has good connections to SE Asia and south China.

SK has already udgraded BKK from 5xWeekly from CPH only to 8xWeekly from CPH/ARN combined. Together with the 3xWeekly and fully booked SQ a/c's from CPH to SIN it shows the demand for this area and the demand for onward connections from BKK and SIN.

Cheers,

Firstly, I have read about the rumours stating SQ SIN-CPH-SIN being so popular, but frankly I doubt it. In those chats it's been a truth that the only reason for not adding frequencies is lack of aircraft. Why are SQ then doubling flights to ZRH? I think their four weekly's work fine for them on the CPH run, and adding flights would hurt yield. That's my guess.

I don't have any inside info on SQ's profit on the SIN-CPH route but one thing you easily can see using booking engines etc is that the flight often is very well booked and not seldom sold out in C. After SK dropped the CPH-BKK-SIN route, SQ should have gained some former SK-pax on that route as well.

But how would TG manage the fact that BKK-ATH runs the Y/C/F config while BKK-CPH runs with Y/U/C? Very confusing for the customer…

Does SK really have a reason to start nonstop flights to Toronto? They already codeshare on YYZ-LHR and the fact that SK/AC both depart from T3 makes the connection *relatively* painless (although painful compared to transferring at most other cities :p)

Cheers,

I agree : CPH-GIG would be GREAT!!!

OSL-ORD-OSL-BKK-OSL - what great use of one new Airbus!

Does SK really have a reason to start nonstop flights to Toronto? They already codeshare on YYZ-LHR...Try putting the shoe on the other foot for a minute. For example, 'Oh, what's Seattle? Why in the world do they need to go to SEA? Lots of others codeshare to SEA!'

(1) I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but TO must certainly be one of the five largest cities in North America. Surely there would be plenty of passengers?!?

(2) There is presently no direct service on any *A carrier from anywhere in the Nordic countries to anywhere in Canada.

(3) Condemning passengers from Northern Europe to transit at LHR, FRA or anywhere in the USA when the final destination is Canada is inhumane. :)

cheers,

Henry

Try putting the shoe on the other foot for a minute. For example, 'Oh, what's Seattle? Why in the world do they need to go to SEA? Lots of others codeshare to SEA!'


Up till now SAS has been the only Star carrier to serve SEA from Europe, that's why

Cape Town would be a dream, but its too far I think.

CPH-CPT or maybe CPH-JNB-CPT would be fantastic. Seasonal flights would still be great. Not every day would still do fine. Flights to CPT during the (our) winter season are packed on both LH and SA in all classes.

I flew SA and it's economy is slightly better than SK. Everything's same, but a bit better IFA due to video on demand and as much South African wine as one can possibly consume :D ^ The very wide selection of juices also surprised me.

Try putting the shoe on the other foot for a minute. For example, 'Oh, what's Seattle? Why in the world do they need to go to SEA? Lots of others codeshare to SEA!'


Right, but I don't think many on *A straight from Europe - there are options via US cities but doing immigration / customs at an intermediate points is extremely annoying.




(1) I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but TO must certainly be one of the five largest cities in North America. Surely there would be plenty of passengers?!?


I don't know much about the Scandinavian - Canada market so I won't comment passenger numbers wise - but Toronto is still missing direct service flights to other major cities such Berlin, Barcelona, Manchester etc. so city size alone doesn't necessarily mean demand is there.




(3) Condemning passengers from Northern Europe to transit at LHR, FRA or anywhere in the USA when the final destination is Canada is inhumane. :)

cheers,

Henry

I definitely agree with that :) but you have many other options such as via DUS (soon) MUC ZRH etc.

Cheers,

Up till now SAS has been the only Star carrier to serve SEA from Europe, that's whyYes, but my point is that pax to SEA can _transfer_ at JFK or ORD or wherever -- just as pax for YYZ have to do now. Moreover, as OFFlyer tried to explain, it is ludicrous for European pax going to Canada to have to go through all the American transit rigamarole. Why can't the Yanks have sterile airside transfers, like civilised countries?

cheers,

Henry

Well, with both TG and SQ being heavily loaded from CPH I would still say that CPH-SIN would be a good option for a 13th SAS long haul Airbus.

One could suspect that the yield on SIN-ZRH is better than SIN-CPH given the sizes of the two financial centres and therefore it is not a surprise that SQ gives priority to the ZRH-route. SIN also operate with their new expensive F product to ZRH. But that does not mean that there is not money to be made on CPH-SIN for SK.

I guess quite a lot of the SQ traffic from CPH is transit to Australia and NZ but SQ also has good connections to SE Asia and south China.

SK has already udgraded BKK from 5xWeekly from CPH only to 8xWeekly from CPH/ARN combined. Together with the 3xWeekly and fully booked SQ a/c's from CPH to SIN it shows the demand for this area and the demand for onward connections from BKK and SIN.

Cheers,

I've been told it's a very long leg with payload restrictions for an A343, making in less viable. Plus SK's increased (renewed) cooperation with TG for Oz and NZ makes it less credible. And finally, SQ's lack of interest in increasing freq's says something. Personally, I'd love a direct SIN-flight, but that's another story.

Cheers,

CPH-CPT or maybe CPH-JNB-CPT would be fantastic. Seasonal flights would still be great. Not every day would still do fine. Flights to CPT during the (our) winter season are packed on both LH and SA in all classes.


CPH-South Africa could work as a seasonal route during the winter, but not a year round route. 3-4 weekly CPH-JNB/CPT flights would be great

CPH-South Africa could work as a seasonal route during the winter, but not a year round route. 3-4 weekly CPH-JNB/CPT flights would be great

Well maybe we could then get SK901/902 back again - I just dont understand SK longhaul prioritisation:mad:.

I dont believe in South Africa as SA flies there with a c-class product that is far superior to both LH and certainly SK.

Can you explain this better? AFAIK, US immigration waiting time and BS has not changed at all the last few years. Average waiting time at ORD is around 10 minutes, IAD and SEA even shorter. EWR varies a lot, but usually there are no lines when the ARN flight lands, a little wait around the CPH flights arrival time.

Immigration at EWR arriving from SK903 took about 40 minutes yesterday. That is 40 minutes from leaving the aircraft and before getting through immigration booths.

I agree that waiting times are very much up and down. ORD can take 10 minutes (incl the walking) and up to an hour. I have experienced both. It very much depends on if there are people from an earlier flight from a destination where a lot of papers are needed. Considering the amount of people they do a good job. (I still don't like it 100% though.)

A slightly worrying thing yesterday at EWR was that several CO international flights arrived to terminal B. A front of us where CO from ZRH and another CO flight (from France?). And while in line two more CO flights arrived to terminal B.

Is this a new thing? Or do they just want to even out the lines between terminal C (where CO usually lands) and terminal B with shorter lines???

CO has some international arrivals in Terminal B due to lack of space in Terminal C and have has this for a few years

My vote most certainly is to make DXB a "real" solution, seasonal routing is not very good for the business traveler.... you never know when they are flying and end up choosing an alternative airline

Alternatively AUH would be an option, though I think DXB is a better deal for SK

Cheers

CO has some international arrivals in Terminal B due to lack of space in Terminal C and have has this for a few years

Ok, must have been lucky to miss them so far. And hope to do so again - they just added waiting time for me.

But my feeling is still that CO has increased the number of arrivals into the B terminal lately.

My vote most certainly is to make DXB a "real" solution, seasonal routing is not very good for the business traveler.... you never know when they are flying and end up choosing an alternative airline

Alternatively AUH would be an option, though I think DXB is a better deal for SK

Cheers

Talking about DXB - how is that route doing? Anyone got any insight?

As to AUH, just by accident found out that there actually is a CPH-AUH flight today. It is primarily a charter flight on the CPH-BKK route, but as it is operated by a 737-800 (CPH-BKK on a 737 :eek:) it has taken AUH as a stop.

What's happend about CPH-Basra?:rolleyes:
Haven't SAS paid money to USA for opening the route?

My vote most certainly is to make DXB a "real" solution, seasonal routing is not very good for the business traveler.... you never know when they are flying and end up choosing an alternative airline

Alternatively AUH would be an option, though I think DXB is a better deal for SK

Cheers
SK can season all they want to DXB. Jump on QR090 with the rest of us from ARN. Quite a bunch now. I (and many other I have noticed) tend to prefere ARN-DOH in P and then DOH-DXB in F rather then ARN-CPH-DXB in Y.

Jump on QR090 with the rest of us from ARN. Quite a bunch now. I (and many other I have noticed) tend to prefere ARN-DOH in P and then DOH-DXB in F rather then ARN-CPH-DXB in Y.

Why would I want to sit 6h35m/6h50m in an A319?

Why would I want to sit 6h35m/6h50m in an A319?

Those who don't want to spend time in CPH whilst awating SK's flight I reckon ... :rolleyes: It's still way shorter a journey timewise - 6h35m rather than 8h35m.

Airbus A340-300

Why would I want to sit 6h35m/6h50m in an A319?

Doha Premium Terminal (http://www.qatarairways.com/global/en/premium-terminal.html)
Also I just can’t stand CPH, But that’s personnel.

Doha Premium Terminal (http://www.qatarairways.com/global/en/premium-terminal.html)
Also I just can’t stand CPH, But that’s personnel.

Hmm, that must be personal - ARN is far behind both CPH, OSL and HEL in the Nordic Countries (in standards).

Those who don't want to spend time in CPH whilst awating SK's flight I reckon ... :rolleyes: It's still way shorter a journey timewise - 6h35m rather than 8h35m.

Airbus A340-300

The travel time may be shorter, if you are originating in ARN, but certainly not if you are originating in CPH :-)

Cheers,
Chris

Talking about DXB - how is that route doing? Anyone got any insight?

As to AUH, just by accident found out that there actually is a CPH-AUH flight today. It is primarily a charter flight on the CPH-BKK route, but as it is operated by a 737-800 (CPH-BKK on a 737 :eek:) it has taken AUH as a stop.


I would be very interested in learning more about this CPH>AUH flight, which airline?

Regarding "performance" on the CPH>DXB>CPH, it seems very good. Have flown it a few times and was quite full in most classes. One minor issue, no upgrades were available from DXB (have noyiced this is now included on the upgrade tables). Think it is due to lack of SAS groundstaff and access to EB info, but not sure?

Cheers

I believe the CPH-AUH-BKK route is operated on a wetleased Jetx , serving primarily (if not only) charter passengers to Thailand. I just saw the flight on the CPH departure board last week - that is how I learned it. Sorry for not having more info.

Hmm, that must be personal - ARN is far behind both CPH, OSL and HEL in the Nordic Countries (in standards).
It sure is. I never fly westbound. Hardly ever do business in cities which SK flies to and I am sick and tired of being hassled for speaking English as a Swede when not understanding Danish.

Why not feeding people to CLT (Charlotte), really big hub of US, a lot of connections throughout US and Carribbeans...

BR
/Patrik

Gentlemen,

I have cleaned up this thread. Please stay on subject

Gentlemen,

I have cleaned up this thread. Please stay on subject

Thanks.^

Why not feeding people to CLT (Charlotte), really big hub of US, a lot of connections throughout US and Carribbeans...

BR
/Patrik

I think it's too close to IAD and the CPH-CLT-(east coast) flights would be competing with CPH-IAD-(east coast) for the same passengers.
US and LH fly FRA-CLT, so I don't know if they'd appreciate the competition from another *A airline.

CPH-CLT would be a good option for me, but I don't think SAS will do it.

CPH-SFO-RAR would be nice :)

CPH-SFO-RAR would be nice :)

You got my vote on that one - with onward service to SYD-HKG-CPH.:D

Just like the good old Pan Am days (except no miles then).

CPH-HAV(Havanna)-LIM?
These two destinations are covered by only AC in *A.

considering the number of passengers (does anyone have the exact figures?) travelling between scandinavia and pakistan, a once a week (or twice) route between osl (or cph) and isb ought to make sense... not convinced? check the numbers of travellers... but, hang on, i guess sas would be too frightened to start up a route to isb...

or, a safer choice for sas: how about re-launching the osl-ewr service...?

PIA operates a once weekly flight ISB-OSL-CPH-LHE (Lahore) with 777. Not sure of the loads though.

PIA operates a once weekly flight ISB-OSL-CPH-LHE (Lahore) with 777. Not sure of the loads though.