fassy

Funny enough I often enough book CPH/ARN to US (like EWR or ORD) connecting to UA for the domestic leg on the UA webpage at reasonable prices without any issues while the same flights won’t ticket through SAS - or if the phone agent can manage to put together the itinerary the price called out makes me gasp - and I get back to UA.com. :/

pseudoswede

That is interesting. There is no way for me to book the SK TATL on UA.com when ex-US on UA's US website. Maybe it's different if I were to book via UA's European websites?

SuperFlyBoy

Just suggesting that SK lost out big-time as Brussels Airlines now started the BOM route - SK could have used that better than the earlier DEL option if they allowed smart, practical individuals (rather than the earlier characters in Delhi) to administrate the local station...

(Oh yes, AC also started direct YYZ service as well from BOM! )

Now we have:

LX, LH, SN and TK to Europe, with UA and AC to USA direct...

GUWonder

BRU passport control to exit Schengen is amongst the worst of the Schengen ports of exits for me. Last couple of times for me, BRU passport control has taken me nearly 45 minutes in the line. If that BRU-BOM flight were to go out before 11 a.m, the wait time in the line can be pretty bad -- at least if using say a US or Indian passport.

I'd much prefer some SK service to India -- it's not like the VFR and business travel demand to India is any lower now than it was last time when SK had India service -- but SK just doesn't seem primed to compete again the GCC3/TK type airlines.

But this begs the question of what is left for SK long-haul. The US and East Asia were picked by it to be where it was supposed to go, but now FI and WW and DY are chomping at it TATL. And on the Europe-Asia front, the will get eaten alive given their cost structure and the potential competition. I guess that leaves the Nordic-Africa VFR/tourist traffic, but the bulk of the Nordic traffic market seems to have much more of a preference for North America and East Asia than anything else in the long-haul range. South America?

I won't complain if SK decides to do a seasonal CPH-GOI.

SuperFlyBoy

BRU by itself as an airport was horrible - they couldn't handle 3/6 Jet flights at one time when 9w operated a scissor hub there... (Yelling in Flemish, not English to pax from India/abroad, instructing them to line up/take certain exits...)

I am not at all surprised, and haven't (and do not plan to) taken the SN flights so far...

GUWonder

Due to some particularities, I have to fly to/via BRU a fair amount and then take US carriers to the US from there. Sunday mornings there, especially if I've started in Scandinavia, are just awful way too often.

SuperFlyBoy

I simply stay *way* away from BRU...no incentive to be there - lounges suck, staff not professional (last I was there)...

nacho

Used BRU once to connect from SN to UA - it's in the morning so there were croissants in the lounge and they were really nice. Staff there were pretty nice and they told me how much time I have in the lounge and reminded me to go to the gate earlier because of SSSS on my BP, going through passport control needed some waiting but no big deal (not more than any LH hub I have tried). Personally I found it simpler to go via BRU than LHR, I still pick LHR due to the routes that UA has from there (easier to re-route in case of schedule change).

FT Guest xyzpdq

It has been years and years since I have been to or through BRU - are you actually claiming that it is worse than AMS and their wanna be TSA attitude?

GUWonder

I've been going from CPH to BRU to the US and from CPH to AMS to the US more times this year than I care to count on my fingers (most often originating on SK flights and connecting onto US carriers). Passport control at BRU at its worst has been far worse for my travels than passport control at AMS this year. While the carriers' interrogation questions at AMS are ridiculously over the top, BRU has much of the same too. Last week, at BRU they were asking me what I would recommend seeing if going on a visit to Copenhagen; and my answer was this: the Turning Torso and the Rosengard Catholic Forsamling. You should have seen the looks on the faces of the Scandinavians with me, but the interrogator working for UA had no clue why my response was sort of out of alignment. I got cleared without issue, and there was no need for me to recall these words: "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani."

On my trips between the US and Scandinavia involving connections at AMS or BRU, I generally don't get my belongings and body re-screened at AMS in either direction; I do get rescreened at BRU on the way from the US to Scandinavia.

FlyingMoose

Plenty to be gained in North America, the mid-West and Pacific North West are still poorly served from Europe and by Star Alliance with plenty of travel. Would love to see SK bring back their SEA route or start YVR, followed by DEN or IAH. Having an alternative for AC to YYZ/YUL would be productive as well.

Lost of destinations in APAC which could work as AY is showing, perhaps its time to re-evaluate that potential merger.

Africa could work if they would find a second destination such as CPT so people can opt for night-night travel like AF does on their CDG-JNB+CPT-CDG route. Having something similar to/from APAC would be productive as well. South America I can't see much value.

Don't use a US-carrier to the states and you don't have that problem.

FT Guest xyzpdq

^
Copy that - it has been 7 years since I last took a US carrier across the pond for that exact reason (plus the miserable in-flight experience).

Also I would love to have SK937 to SEA back. YVR would be a decent alternative

Daner

Amen to all of this! SEA is probably a strong enough draw to be worth it even without trying to get cozy with AS, but DEN and IAH would especially benefit if they were accompanied by a bit of effort on the code-sharing front, as they are both potentially very interesting not only as destinations, but for the range of connection possibilities that they represent.

As for South America, it seems to me that expanding direct access to MIA, adding IAH and pushing code-share agreements through both would be a much less risky way to test that market.

Not sure how many others feel the same way, but I would love to be able to get to and/or from CPT directly. I am probably not entirely objective on that one.