Yes and no. What I describe in European airports would require not only sterile transit at major international arrival terminals such as IAH and JFK, but ALSO at every ultimate destination.

The reason everyone goes through passport control & customs at the entry point is that there is no Passport Control/Customs facility at the vast majority of American airports.

Imagine that a passenger goes through the technically sterile terminal at IAH, then flies to Tyler (where there is no control). Without the current Point-of Entry system, that passenger would have entered the U.S. without any passport control/customs check.

In fact, as long as even only one possible connecting domestic destination doesn't have a passport/customs facility, this will mean that the Point of Entry system currently in use will be required. Ultimately, it is just a reflection of the size of our nation and of the very deep domestic air route network we have.

Given the nature of U.S. airline travel it would never be feasible to do otherwise and the Federal Government is exercising a reasonable need to control who is entering our borders (I think anyone would agree with that).

By comparison, look at Kloten Airport in Zurich. This is a major facility with hundreds of flights per day. Any international to international connection can be made without going through Swiss passport control/customs. The difference? There are approximately 250 international departures daily and an average of 10 domestic departures (essentially GVA and BSL). AT ZRH even these connections are done without going through the controls because GVA & BSL both have points of entry. If IAH only connected to, say, EWR and LAX the same system would be possible. But the United States is clearly not Switzerland.

Additionally, as a previous poster mentioned, the U.S. operates passport control and customs facilities overseas at the departure points for travel into the United States. This is common in Canadian terminals but also in places such as Dublin, Ireland. To my knowledge, no other nation does this and these are expensive operations that are in place to provide passengers flying into the U.S. with an easier-to-manage process.

But, ALSO, it is a reflection of the fact that no U.S. carrier operates any kind of hub-and-spoke hub for international to international connections. As a previous poster pointed out, there are airports with technical stops that operate sterile terminals where connections are allowed. In these cases, of course, all connections must be only to other point-of-entry airports.

But no U.S. carrier will ever build a terminal specifically to operate an international to international hub and spoke system, the way, say, Schiphol operates in Amsterdam.

And, btw, it is possible to enter the U.S. without going through passport control/customs as long as one doesn't get off the plane and continues to another Point-of-Entry airport in the United States.

I don't want to speak for rkkwan (whom I met at the CO DO), but methinks you missed his point entirely ;)

The reason US based carriers are missing out on a ton (to use a scientific expression) of money, is that many foreign pax need to get (and pay for) a transit visa even though they would remain in "sterile enviroment" while at a place such as IAH or EWR. They would then continue to a third country, so there is no need to enter the US.

These are the pax flying to / from Europe and Latin America, but don't feel like bothering with obtaining said visa, so now just fly to Europe (or Asia, see this thread in Other US - Latin American carriers ) directly. And foreign airlines are starting to bypass US airports for exactly that reason.

EmailKid

That's it exactly. Transit without visa was never intended for a passenger flying NRT-IAH-TYR. It was intended for a passenger flying MEX-IAH-LGW, who is only in the US to change flights to connect to another non-US destination. IAH has had a sterile transit without visa lounge since Terminal D opened in the early 1990s. A similar facility was also built in Terminal E. I believe that before 9/11 the US did have a transit without visa program that allowed a passenger who was only in the US to connect to another flight to not go through the full passport control/customs process.

Passengers who arriving in the US from another country and connecting to another flight to a domestic US destination have always, and probably always will, have to go through passport control and customs (with the exception of arriving from certain Canadian and Irish airports with a pre-clear facility).

Agreed 100%. But it is simply not accurate to blame the Federal Govt if CO doesn't want to build a terminal specifically for international to international connections (which, of course, it never will, not really, that is, with outbound passport/customs controls).

If such a terminal were built by any airline operating in the United States, then sterile transfers would be possible.

The fact is that since CO's flight IAH-YYZ flights operate from gates outside the sterile zone, what is the Federal Government supposed to do?
Simply allow these passengers to enter into the United States without passport/customs control? Obviously that's not feasible.

Most of CO's flights to YYZ, in fact, are operated by CO EX and depart out of Terminal B.

Now, would CO have YYZ departures operate out of a sterile gate for the very occasional passenger who might be a non-U.S. national and also connecting from an international arrival? Of course not. This would terribly inconvenience the vast majority of the customers in order to accomodate a very ocassional potential customer.

In that respect, the system (for which CO is partly responsible) definitely hurts CO's ability to attract non-U.S. nationals (although not Canadians, it should be noted, who do not need visa [along with most Western Europeans]) who would want to use such an itinerary. On the flip side, it makes travel to Canada much more convenient for the vast majority of the likely customers.

Were CO to adopt a European-style arrangement with passport/customs control at IAH on the way to Canada I'm sure that the net result would be less total business so I'm not sure the current system really costs them anything.

They will. But regarding the issue of the sterile terminals. These are also not in use as such because airlines such as CO do not want to pay to have outbound passport/customs at facilities such as IAH Term D/E.

If these were truly used as sterile intl to intl connection terminals, this would require all passenger commencing at IAH to be screened for passport/customes as they are in Europe and Asia.

U.S. carriers do not want the expense or inconvenience of these operations and as a result all of their int'l departures are operated out of non-sterile departure gates. But Federal rules do allow them, so it is not accurate to blame the Feds.

Also, one minor note regarding the pre-clear facilities at Canadian & Irish airports. The requirements are the same as with facilities at Points of Entry (incl., of course, visa requirements for certain non-U.S. nationals) it's just that it all gets done before boarding the plane. It's not much an aid to the Kazakhstani oil mogul who wishes he could transfer at IAH the way he can at AMS.

And, btw, anyone who's ever waited in Dublin for U.S. Immigration will know this not a rapid process.

They did. Twice. IAH E and the international section of EWR C are both equipped to handle sterile transit without visa connections. IAH D before E was built also had the necessary facilities.

If transit without visa was allowed again, I'm sure the IAH-YYZ departures would quickly move to Terminal E or D. Both of those terminals have gates that can accommodate ERJs. Mexico departures on ERJs would probably also be moved to those terminals.

How? How would it inconvenience a domestic US passenger? The international transit without visa passengers would arrive in the US, go through the sterile corridors to the transit without visa lounge to wait for their next flight. I'm sure that a verification process would exist as they enter the lounge where each passenger has his/her ID and boarding pass checked for eligibility for transit without visa. They would enter the sterile lounge area to wait for the next flight (again, a flight that leaves the US - not a flight to another US city). When their next flight is ready for boarding, passengers could be escorted back through the sterile corridors to their departure gate. They would board the aircraft through the same corridors that arriving international passengers use to reach the federal inspections station. These passengers would never mix with domestic US connecting passengers until they are on the aircraft they are leaving the US on.

The one place where this could cause a problem is if, after the departing aircraft has been boarded, the flight is delayed or cancelled due to a mechanical problem. The international transit without visa passengers on board the aircraft would need to be segregated from the domestic passengers if the plane were to return to the gate, or else everyone on board would need to go through passport control/customs even though most passengers had never left the US. But this would not be an every day occurrence.

Dear Sunblaster,

You do realize that three of the four daily departures on CO from Houston to Toronto are one those tiny "regional jets." I hope you did not book yourself on one of those. I can just imagine how it would feel after your 20-hour cross Pacific marathon to fly on a puddle jumper for over three hours! :(

The issue is how does the sterility get maintained (the passport/customs cordon).

If passengers commencing at IAH do not go through outbound passport/customs then technically this is no longer a sterile area. For it to be truly sterile all passengers in the terminals must be cleared through passport/customs.

The system is like that for a good reason, otherwise it would be possible to "contaminate" the sterile area with non U.S, nationals who do not belong in the sterile area.

This the same preocedure in any sterile international to international connections area anywhere in the world. And, btw, the visa requirements the U.S. had imposed are not any more onerous than those imposed by most nations around the world.

The fact that U.S. carriers choose to save money and to add convenience to their outbound passengers commencing intenrational travel in the U.S. is a choice. It reduces the inconvenience and cost of foreign travel to those customers, while increasing the difficulty for the very small number of non U.S. national who might want to connect in the U.S. from an int'l arrival to another int'l departure.

This warning comes a little late, since Sunblaster's trip was in late summer 2005.

Um, just went to the OP, which is from Aug 21, 05, 10:02 am, so I'm guessing OP already knows that ;)

And it's Barbie's Dream Jet :eek:

EmailKid

Barbie's Dream Jet? aka the Jungle Jet? Ouch! :(

Ahh, the old "reviving the ancient thread" routine, eh?

Can you imagine three hours of that after a 20-hr marathon from SIN to IAH via NRT? Just the thought makes me weak.

I wonder if he's still in traction almost a year later.

Nice save ^ :D :eek:

And yes, I went back and checked that it wasn't you who brought this thread back to life ;)

EmailKid

No it wasn't me but I have to admit I feel a little embarrassed not having checked, here I am giving this guy all this advice! Oh well, it's pretty funny, really.... ;)

And have you noticed that the OP hasn't responded. :confused: Maybe he really is in traction. Or maybe he's still caught at IAH IAB with a visa problem and he doesn't feel like paying the $9.95/day for the wireless access :D

CO and the City of Houston have built such facilities at IAH. Why would they build it and not use it if they're allowed. Or are you saying Smisek is a liar?

CO would love to utilize their facilities, and they'll gain HUGE traffic between Latin America and Europe.

Are you saying that the US government allows it, CO and the City of Houston built it, and then they decided not to use it? You're totally missing it, dude!

What Smisek wants, allowing passengers who aren't passport/customs screened into the "sterile" area, is not allowed by the Feds.

They may have built it, but it's just a building. If they don't use outgoing passport/customs screening then it's just another bus terminal.

Smisek and his bean counter boss Kellner may not want to spend the money it takes to make their IAH Int'l Terminal fully functional, but to blame the Feds for rules which are basically pretty reasonable in the post 9/11 environment is not telling it like it is.