tris06

How Did CI shafted before? Also I presume BR is only wanting to share T3 not take all the gates. Thanks for the history lesson.

coolfish1103

Today's news: All remaining A359 not delivered will be used in Europe, possible new destinations end of the year will be Milan (MXP).

When T2 opened, BR was the one who got all the gates, none for CI. Then CI was forced to operate at T2 so the sky train will have some use.

CI could have all operations at T1 and move someone else, let's say CX.

username

In the early-mid 90s, there were all kinds of ugly battles between CI and BR - especially on gate and airport (hanger) space at TPE and on traffic rights (especially HKG when it was the Golden Route).

BR was new and Y F Chang had good relationship with Lee Teng-Hui (the KMT President who turned out to be pro-independence). So, CI, although largely owned by the government, thought Lee was favoring BR.

Then of course as Lee's anti-Mainland attitude became more obvious and started to inhibit Evergreen/EVA from business expansions in Mainland China, that relationship soured.

Who favored whom depends on whom you ask when

bzcat

If TPE gets preclerance, the airport (which is owned by Taiwan Govt) will have to pay. This is the main reason why most countries have not jumped to host US preclerance. The first step is a reconfiguration of airport itself to add secondary security screening - this can cost a lot of money and involves dedicated section of airport that are permanently removed from general use (US departures only)... so some airlines don't like it because their frequent flyers have to depart from far away from the lounge or their connecting gates. The second step is the host US CBP personnel and figure out the budgets and how to pay for everything. And the third step is a Govt to Govt agreement on law enforcement powers. The last part is really what the Taiwanese Govt is seeking... because it confers sovereignty recognition on bi-lateral agreement. Obviously the US Govt will not be able to exercise law enforcement power in another country unless it acknowledge the other country has specifically granted that right. So it is obviously a political act to engage the US in preclerance negotiation. I will just leave it at that...

On a practical level, preclerance at TPE will really help BR and CI's Southeast Asia transit business. It will give them a leg up vs. transiting via ICN or NRT or HKG. It will also really benefit Taiwanese that visit secondary US destinations that requires transit at traditional gateways (LAX/SFO/SEA etc). TPE has enough daily US departures to make a dedicated perclerance facility financially viable but it means CI and BR will need to adjust their operations and potentially add more lounges.

US Dept of Homeland Security has several active preclerance negotiations going on right now. ICN and AMS are both in negotiation as I recall. TPE will just join those other airports... but depending on how fast Taiwanese Govt can meeting those 3 steps, TPE can move ahead of the others.

BTW, preclearance is less common air travel but quite common on trains. If you ever use Eurostar from London to Paris, you precleared French (and Schengen zone) immigration and customs at St Pancras, and arrived in Paris Nord as a domestic passenger.

lolstebbo

Not necessarily; IIRC Canadian airports are configured so that a portion of the pre-clearance gates can serve as swing gates for other international departures, but trying to reconfigure TPE that type of swing gate would definitely increase cost and complexity (i.e. if they used one of the T1 concourses, they'd have to build a separate sterile corridor connecting all of the holdrooms to the adjacent T2 concourse so that passengers on US flights enter the holdroom like normal while the normal entryway can be sealed when the gate is being used for a non-US flight where passengers would use that separate corridor to access the holdroom).

On an unrelated note, it would be nice if BR and CI would participate in Precheck now that the program has been opened up for foreign carriers.

coolfish1103

I don't think there is enough flights from TPE that warrants this operation. Plus the amount of $ cost to get the facility set up is going to be enormous cause everything will be dictated by the US standard.

5x SFO - BR/CI/UA
4x LAX - BR/CI
1.5x JFK - BR/CI
1x ONT - CI
1x IAH - BR
~1x ORD - BR
~1x GUM - CI
~.5x HNL - CI

It will likely help BR and CI's transit operation but the amount of $ BR and CI has to put in getting more ground staff and lounge operations etc. in is not going to be worth the $. Not to say the countless delays that may happen with it.

tris06

If there was enough flights then the operation cost could be neutral or close to? Considering parking at a domestic terminal would be cheaper without the costs of processing in the US or cannot they not avoid that due to red tape?

Overall it seems not worth the effort and it is more of a political ploy.

bzcat

I don't disagree

Yes, it will cost a lot of money.
Yes, it will introduce operational challenges.
Yes, the airport will be doing this on the hope that more US flights materialize to help pay for the investments (plausible if transit traffic grows)

My comments are framed in the context that I believe seeking US preclearance is a political decision so the commercial justification are likely secondary.

The question is really what CI and BR want? The Govt can negotiate this but if no airline wants to participate in it (or pay for it via higher airport landing fees) then it is a moot point. AMS got pretty close to finalizing preclearance a few year ago. The Dutch Govt was on board and AMS was undergoing major renovation so timing was right. But KL was not very excited about moving its US long haul operations to a remote terminal. And this is an airport that already has dedicated US departure gates and secondary screening stations to comply with TSA requirements (e.g. no liquids, shoe scanning etc) so nothing happened.

coolfish1103

Yes, likely it's all politics. Maybe the Taiwan Act had something to go along with it (though I think that's more of getting CI to operate at ONT).

I am unsure what CI can voice on this. They typically do what the government wants them to do and Ho is pretty much an agent that enforces.

As for BR, I highly doubt they want to spend $ investing in a pre-clearance terminal. I mean most of their US flights spread apart and the likely of a decent lounge being built inside that pre-clearance facility is required. In that case, a long term $$ is going to be devoted there and none of the current 4 lounges in mid-Terminal 2 will help in that aspect. Not to say the extra ground staffs needed cause all the passengers will be stranded at the CIQ (for much longer). I don't think BR Diamonds will be happy to share a lounge with everyone else when the garden is just on the other side of the terminal.

In any case, there are no rooms in TPE as of now, so not likely to see anything done in the next 5 years or so.

tris06

BR could add more flights to the US and maybe they could pick up an additional US carrier?
However for the next 5/6 years CI is close to a definite no for any expansion of routes into the US within that time. Reason?
They don't have much spare capacity as their long haul planes are busy already servicing their current routes. Seems likely they will add a route in Europe and maybe slightly increase frequencies with the last 2 A350's coming in.
Australia SYD could be reduced to 1 daily if the 2nd flight (x2/x3 weekly)? didn't do well.
I cannot see MEL/AKL/BNE going back to an A330 as it will be even more out of place when BR and other carriers improve their business class offerings.
Of course that would change if the A350 options were firmed but I think its gradually getting more unlikely with time unless it is tied to the A320/B737 order.

username

I think it might have started with solving the ONT problem but a large part of this is now political. So, cost might not be an issue. The private sector has to "cooperate".

Given the Taiwan-Mainland situation, Taiwan has to do all it can to "get close" with other countries and raise its status / visibility. Every time there is a major event in Taiwan, there is always the obligatory news segment on "Look how we showed up on BBC, CNN and NHK!" Imagine having US government setup their immigration officers there! US, of course, is using Taiwan to get Mainland to do/not do things.

"Some people are willing to hit and some people are willing to be hit."

bmibaby737

How easy is Taiwan to visit in a day?

I'm in Hong King for 4 nights and considering taking a day trip over to Taiwan.

Arriving at 12:55 and departing again at 22:05, is it worth it? Is the city easy to visit?

I don't have a fear of flying but i've never flown a Chinese airline before and heard they can be a bit rough round the edges in terms of saftey.

lolstebbo

Your 9-ish hour day trip is really 6-ish (35 minutes each way via MRT to/from Taipei, and two hours for airport ahead of return flight). Taipei's pretty easy to visit, but I wouldn't really say it's worth it unless you got tickets for really, really cheap.

bmibaby737

Thanks - the outbound flight is 747 operated do that's a bit of a draw.

bzcat

I'm assuming you are going to visit Taipei. It the city easy to visit? I would say yes. No visa requirements for UK citizens (for now since you are still in the EU) and you can now take the metro directly from the airport to city center.

Is it worth it? That depends. You only have maybe 6 or 7 hours in the city so you can't see that much. But it is long enough to get a rough idea. And your departure time means you are going to miss the night markets, which in my opinion is a must visit in Taipei. Only you can decide if spending 6 hours in a city is worth it.

Chinese airlines? Are you talking about HX? If you are that concern, just book on CX, CI, or BR.