SFOtoORD

Interesting rumor in this article:

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/glob...25287&fid=1725

EWR764

SFO-TLV is about as far as EWR-PVG, so it's definitely within 777 range. However, with the strong and persistent rumor that one of the EWR-TLV flights will go to a 744, I doubt they'll add a new 777 flight to the market immediately. A 777 > 744 swap and a new 777 frequency would nearly double CO's capacity to TLV, and the market is currently more competitive that it has ever been. I'd expect CO/UA to do one or the other.

I think this would be a perfect 787 route, though.

rggale

Wouldnt LAX-TLV be a lot more feasible than SFO?

Bulldog83

LY flies LAX-TLV, but not SFO-TLV, so COUA will not have any competition for now.

craz

@:-) must be a very good reason why LY doesnt fly it or even tried it in the past

its just my Opin but Id be very surprised if COUA started a non-stop from the WC, as I doubt many people in DEN,ORD,IAH etc will be willing to fly to LAX or SFO and then onto TLV. On the other hand if they started the flight in a Hub other then SFO they can get those flying out of the WC to connect there

craz

TLV still goes for over .10 per EQM and CO does a great job with Cargo, so unless theres a good demand for Cargo I dont see COUA opening up any new City to TLV, besides the NY area where CO already has 2 777s on a daily basis. By Cargo perishables is the name of the game as even CO has had a decline in the past few yrs of reg Cargo biz that is alot less expensive to send via Ship

mahasamatman

With all the high-tech in Israel right now, SFO makes a lot of sense.

rggale

Good point. Sounds like a good 787 route. About 1200 miles too far to operate with a 767-200ER.

mduell

A problem with just the east coast flights is P.S. goes to New York instead of Newark. Not a great experience for through passengers.

FriendlySkies

That would be an interesting route. Avoid the issues with EWR, and allow west-coast folks to fly non-stop.

channa

They wouldn't allow those COnnections anyway out of DEN/ORD/IAH. This would really be for West Coast folks, and I'm sure there's a ton of traffic going LAX-EWR-TLV at the moment that could be routed via SFO (LAX-SFO-TLV is shorter than LAX-EWR-TLV) to relieve EWR.

COmbined with the SFO-originating traffic, plus the high-tech appeal as has been noted, this one may make sense.

DLPhoenix

There is some demand for direct flights to TLV in the bay area, but I don't think it justifies an expensive VLH flight. An ORD-TLV flight will reduce overall trip time significantly for CA->TLV, will serve both LAX and SFO (as well as DEN, PHX, IAH and other west and midwest destinations) and will be much cheaper to operate.
I think the rumor is spread by Israely business persons who can use such a flight rather than by anyone in CO.

DLP

ctownflyer

Looks like I got beat by a minute above

I see ORD-TLV happening before SFO-TLV.

ORD would allow for easy connections from the west coast, the midwest, and the south besides for ORD O/D traffic.
And it would allow EWR-TLV to focus primarily on O/D traffic and east-coast connections.

craz

isnt there a IAH-EWR-PEK routing with the same flight # , so if that can be done anything can or is it HKG?

But my point was I didnt see enough biz to justify = fill a plane SFO-TLV non-stop. Even LY doesnt run LAX-TLV everyday that they could , I think its 3x a week and 2x some times of the yr. Yea UACO can draw some LA folks to fly it say LAX-SFO-TLV since they will draw more leisure flyers out of LA and more Biz people out of the Bay area, but I just dont see it as taking off and lasting. But then what do I know.

If anything how about a JFK-TLV since the ps flights from both LAX and SFO will offer a nice flying experience over any flight into EWR and they can pick up some of that JFK traffic from those that wont fly into EWR due to heading to Long Island or CT.

worldwidedreamer

I'd love to see a SFO-TVL nonstop. Sadly, it is hard for me to believe that a TLV can support us WC *A customers over CDG, AMS, TXL, MAD or MXP.