Originally Posted by
EWR764
Under US-EU Open Skies, UA would be permitted to carry pax from the EU (not just CDG) to PPT over SFO.
The complicating factor, as it is with the existing CDG-LAX-PPT flights, is that transit pax must clear US customs on the intermediate stop, despite CDG-PPT being technically a domestic route. Geography is such that there really are no other, more favorable routing options.
Correct. It is cabotage, but it is legal per the agreement.
IAH already has the pilot program to allow I-I connections without going through customs. I wonder if SFO could join that program as well; not just to serve CDG-PPT traffic, which is a fairly small niche, but to ease Asia-Canada/Mexico flights. Also, AKL-SFO-Europe; for anything else to Europe, though, it makes more sense to cross Asia. Anyway, I like the idea. I can't imagine US airports ever building secure areas for I-I transit passengers, but I could see the I-I skip-customs program expanding.
Originally Posted by
HkCaGu
Well only SFO-GUM-MNL would make sense. HKG and PVG already have nonstops to CONUS. However, they just announced cuts on GUM-MNL not long ago. Unless they were going to make the 787 go SFO-GUM-MNL.
I can't see SFO-GUM making sense, as much as I like the idea. How much premium cabin traffic can there really be to GUM on a daily basis? GUM-HNL is an important route at both ends, but it's not premium-heavy (hence the Hawaiian configuration 772 they use). If you add SFO-GUM, that kills quite a bit of your connecting demand and you end up with two daily birds lightly loaded up front. Then, you end up having to cut frequency on HNL-GUM to compensate, and you create a mess for yourself.
Besides, they already own the GUM market. DL pulled out of its flight, leaving UA with 100% of domestic GUM traffic. So, unless they have this huge pent-up demand, I can't see why they'd double capacity.
Also, the saber rattling can't be good for GUM travel. Oh, and, it's not an international route.
