AlwaysAisle

DL and UA has 5th freedom flights to Asian destinations from NRT, hence one of the reasons having hub at NRT. The U.S. pre-clearance at NRT will sure increase transit time at NRT for DL and UA, airlines may not like that happening at NRT. JL and NH may not like the U.S. pre-clearance idea either, since the pre-clearance will increase the transit time at NRT for passengers transiting to the U.S. flights.

Also, it is a big investment for NRT airport authority, have to make separate gate area and the U.S. pre-clearance area dedicated to departure flights for the U.S. only. If Japan – the U.S. air traffic demand change in future and number of flights were decreased, then having the U.S. pre-clearance give less flexibility in using facilities and gate for other flights at NRT. What if DL or UA decide to close NRT hub in future?

Also, I did not know that the Homeland Security at the U.S. is a proponent of the U.S. pre-clearance at non-U.S. airports. I heard previously that one of disadvantage of the pre-clearance is that it is not on the U.S. soil. When a person with arrest warrant in the U.S., a person of interest in the U.S., or a person owning tax in the U.S. arrives at the U.S. airport on international flights, customs and immigration usually have such information in the system and can detain a person and hand over to an appropriate authority in the U.S. However, the pre-clearance is not on the U.S. soil so if a person of such situation come through the pre-clearance then all can be done is to deny entry to the U.S. and the person simply walk back to the country where the pre-clearance is located. The U.S. authority at the pre-clearance area cannot detain the person and send it over to the U.S. Pre-clearance is not on the U.S. soil so sending somebody to the U.S. involves extradition where local authority have to initiate and the U.S. government have to request the extradition. I read previously that some law enforcement officials in the U.S. do not like pre-clearance because of this.

People manning the passport control and customs area of the U.S. pre-clearance are the U.S. Homeland Security personnel, the U.S. citizens with overseas assignments. The U.S. pre-clearance at NRT will not be efficiently organized process of Japanese. I just went through the U.S. pre-clearance at YVR and I have to admit I was pleasantly surprised how efficient the pre-clearance was compare with my previous experience. However, when I went through the U.S. pre-clearance at YUL last September, there were only two people manning passport control and took everybody, not just me, about an hour and half to get to the gate area.

Yes, idea of the pre-clearance is nice one and it is all dependent on how it is executed. Do I have confident in the U.S. government so that the U.S. pre-clearance at NRT will be different experience than other pre-clearance locations…? Any case, pre-clearance will add time required to be at NRT for the U.S. flights.

gnaget

Actually, pre-clearance personnel are usually really nasty people. Also, consider the expense of these jokers. A US government employee was entitled to a $108,000 per year housing expense in 2011 on top of his salary in the Tokyo area! And then COLA on top of that.

Pre-clearance is an incredible boondoggle and waste and inconvenience. You realize that you probably have to check-in like 3 hours before the flight? Also for people with Global Entry then your benefit goes out the window. The airline is going to say that the deadline for checking a bag is going to be 2 hours, so GE is just going to get you fast track to waiting for 2 hours at a gate area with no services.

It only makes sense (minimally) for O&D traffic like Ireland or Abu Dhabi. From the short list, the only airports where it might make sense are OSL, MAN, and ARN because it's mostly O&D. In Scandinavia, CPH (a hub) forcefully rejected the idea. It seems that the airport has to pay for the staff! For 50 officers in CPH they figured $10 million per year in salaries. Also, the airport estimated $100 million to build the facility. Uncle Sam pays nothing; not even the salaries.

One key difference is that CPH is a privately owned airport so they are concerned about the bottom line while ARN (who is also on the short list) is government owned. NRT is also nominally privately owned, so why would they be interested? It is going increase costs and they will probably lose traffic.

As AlwaysAisle points out, it would be a disaster for UA connections at NRT. Neither NRT nor LHR (on the short list) make sense. Actually, HND makes more sense than NRT.

joejones

At DUB, the transatlantic check-in cutoff is 75 minutes before departure and they recommend going to pre-clearance 90 minutes before departure. That's not a huge deviation from NRT today, where the cutoff is 60 minutes. DUB handles a considerable number of flights to the US as well -- looking at today's schedule there are ten departures between 9 AM and 12 PM. So I think there is some precedent for doing pre-clearance well with a high volume of pax.

Many of my Japanese friends have US immigration horror stories and I imagine that a well-run preclearance facility would make them lean toward choosing NRT, especially when they have to connect in the US. (And doubly especially where a terminal change and baggage re-check would otherwise be required at the US hub...)

joejones

Additional note: according to the Nikkei, the US has proposed letting Japanese sign up for Global Entry, which would presumably reduce processing times at NRT preclearance...

gnaget

Comparing DUB to NRT is apples to oranges. Have you ever done pre-clearance in Ireland or Canada? The latter really sucks when you have large numbers of people.

Well-run? It is going to be run by the incompetent misanthropes known as ICE.

Also in Ireland you do not have exit passport control. So at NRT it will be security, then passport control (sometimes quite long lines). Then head over to the US pier with a second over-the-top intrusive security followed by immigration and customs. 75 min? At SNN I recall that you went to a special section for US departures with one security and the immigration process.

At AUH the cutoff for US flights is 120 minutes. The Japanese are cautious, so it's going to be at least 120 min.

Also MCT for US bound flights is probably also going to be 120 minutes and it it not like they can rush the bags if your connection is delayed. ICE has to be able to inspect the bags upon request.

Sure, there are anecdotes about US immigration nightmares stateside but surprisingly they have improved it somewhat. This is a US problem that needs to be fixed in the US. Not by exporting agents being paid $200,000 salaries.

Also, with NRT being privatized it is an idiotic business decision for them to foot the bill for this, which is a requirement. They are going to lose connecting traffic. It will no longer be functional as a hub for the two big US airlines. Like I said before, it might have some marginal merit for an O&D airport that is government owned where pandering to US interests is more important than losing money.

armagebedar

This could, as other have mentioned, destroy the hub operations of NH, JL, UA, and DL by requiring significantly more time to transit and clear US immigration prior to departure. I can't see how any of them would be in favor of this, especially if the cost is footed by them through increased airport usage or landing fees -- NRT is already quite expensive as it is relative to the competition.

joejones

UA and AA seem to like the idea of preclearance, based on reports in USA Today and WSJ.

Duke787

For those of you that have not had the pleasure of interacting with pre-clearance let me give you a quick overview of how awful it is (and I'm an American who has GE who was flying F so my experience was likely one of the better experiences), especially for transiting.

I had the pleasure of going through pre-clearance at YYZ in transit from MUC - YYZ - DCA last year. When you land per usual you go to the transfer desk and get your ticket (no different from anywhere else).

However once you have your ticket, you first have to wait in a holding area while they take the bags off your plane and then one by one identify them and put your name up on a big monitor (it took mine 20 minutes and that was after spending 30 minutes at transfer desk because UA had canceled last flight of the night and I had to be re-booked onto AC and I was in F so my bag was likely one of the first off the plane). This is because they have to screen your bag through customs (like if you entered the US) and if your bag doesn't appear on the monitor, you have to wait for your bag to be pulled so they can then hand screen it.

After that you enter the immigration line in the normal manner (separate GE line, US citizen / passport holder line, foreigner line). Once you go through immigration, you are in the secure area that you cannot leave until your flight. If you are in an airport like YYZ where there are lots of flights to the US, the airlines are willing to build lounges, food facilities, shopping, etc. If you are in an airport that has few flights to the US, there may be nothing except a restroom and your gate.

The biggest loss in the process is tied to whether the airlines / airport in question are willing to build lounges and shops in the secure area. If they are, well it's still a PITA because you need even more time to transit since you have to go through the process I laid out above (which cuts into lounge time, requires more waiting, increases the likelihood of things going wrong, etc).

If the airlines / airport in question is not willing to build lounges and shops in the secure area (which is what it sounds like occurred at AUH), you pretty much have to give up most of the lounge benefit that comes with your ticket or risk missing your flight by waiting until the last possible moment to leave the lounge and then hoping the line is short (and FWIW, it sounds like most people at AUH have been doing this which in turn has caused delays as they look for people and crews who are stuck in immigration).

This makes it particularly awful for transiting since you physically have no other opportunity to go to other parts of the terminal and stay in that lounge until boarding time. O&D isn't much better but at least in theory you could clear Japanese immigration, go to the lounge, and then make your way pre-clearance (however see AUH issues mentioned above).

jix

Was this AC or US? The process of flying YYZ-US via T3/1 should be simple and I've often done it from curb side to gate in 10-15 minutes with GE. Would it had been easier if you were to claim baggage, exit security and recheck-in?

flyingbrick

Preclearance is stupid and wasteful. Particularly for connections. It takes longer, is less predictable and costs more. If it starts at NRT I will connect elsewhere. Probably even worth switching airlines.

Duke787

It was originally and LH --> UA connection and then UA canceled the last flight back from YYZ - DC for the night (either IAD or DCA) so they re-booked me on the AC flight that was going to DCA.

joejones

Brett Snyder did a pretty good post on the topic which sums up the potential winners and losers:
http://feeds.crankyflier.com/~r/Cran...3/ULNDyLVBwZY/

abraxis

What fun there is going through NRT will be ended if they do preclearance there. No more shopping for whiskey or hanging out in the lounges with the beer machine. So is the goal to remove the joys of international travel so we won't travel at all?

evergrn

Personally I'd love to see pre-clearance at NRT. Although customs/immigration at US airports are okay on most occasions, I just can't get over a few bad experiences I've had in the past and I can't rest easy on my return flights even after probably 50-70 trips betwn US and Jpn over the years. I wouldn't mind showing up earlier to NRT if it means I get US customs done and over with. Although it would be manned by US personnel, I am pretty sure that they'll cut the attitude and perhaps conduct themselves a little differently working at NRT. There's not much airside at NRT anyways right now, so I wouldn't be missing out on much by entering US early at NRT. As far as connections, I can see the potential impact, but I personally would much rather enter US thru YVR/YYZ than thru SFO.

Really?! That doesn't seem right/fair.

I would think they will build something. Just like there's a Maple Leaf Lounge along with a few shops US-side at YVR.

jib71

Why are you sure of that? That has not been my experience with agents in Ireland and Canada.