Originally Posted by moondog

My understanding (as of several months ago) is that they want parity based on the number of frequencies each side is actually using going forward (I.e fresh start)...as opposed to returning to the caps that were in place during 2019.

​​​​​​ETA: The pre-covid agreement was a little more complex than straight up caps because it included a mechanism to add lower demand routes (e.g. SFO-CTU) with less red tape.

Originally Posted by boat stuck

That seems like a difficult framework to use. So if US airlines ramp up to 21x a week, Chinese carriers are given permission to match, but then say AA leaves the market and US airlines go back down to 14x, Chinese carriers have to cut? I doubt China is ever going to agree for their airlines' frequencies to be at the mercy of US airlines' route planning.

If the US side is worried about Chinese carriers flooding the market, they should just try to negotiate for a lower cap under the current framework.

Originally Posted by moondog

As I suggested a few posts up, we got to the 2020 situation slowly over the course of 20 years one batch at a time.

Carriers were allowed to remove or modify routes without too much hassel, and if a US carrier pulled out of a given route, there was no impact on China carriers' existing slots.
​​
Furthermore, the DOT was permitted to reassign the US carrier's forfeited slots to another US carrier, based on its own procedures.

In any event, if we were to return to 2020 limits now, neither side would come close to maxing out in the short term, but the Chinese would presumably ramp up faster.