Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To add to my last post, LAX has an agreement with it's neighboring community that when it grew by 12.44% from the 2013 passengers it would begin closing gates (2 per year for a maximum of 10).
In 2014 it grew by 6.3% after years of almost no growth for years.
At this point it becomes more and more helpful to the airlines to fly bigger and bigger jets into the airport. I believe it is handling more A380's then SFO or JFK.
But the situation of developing more airports outside of California for TransPacific flights is increasing. In the USA airport authorities are not aloud to arbitrarily restrict flights (i.e. stop the turbprops from San Diego and Santa Barbara or force all the narrowbodies going to Vegas to fly out of Ontario). But the airports can begin a bidding price for slots.
Logically, LAX needs to reduce some of the flight to their top 10 Domestic Destination Airports
San Francisco,CA: SFO
New York, NY: JFK
Chicago, IL: ORD
Dallas/Fort Worth,TX: DFW
Las Vegas, NV: LAS
Honolulu, HI: HNL
Seattle, WA: SEA
Denver, CO: DEN
Atlanta, GA: ATL
Phoenix, AZ: PHX
But even for an airline like Air New Zealand, that means fewer connections for their customers.
There have been a lot of new routes announced to Asia in the past year. San Francisco is going to smaller cities in China. The DFW to sydney route was scheduled for a 777 but was upgraded to an A380 to divert traffic from LAX.
Last edited by PacoMartin; 03-04-2015 at 01:57 PM..
To add to my last post, LAX has an agreement with it's neighboring community that when it grew by 12.44% from the 2013 passengers it would begin closing gates (2 per year for a maximum of 10).
In 2014 it grew by 6.3% after years of almost no growth for years.
At this point it becomes more and more helpful to the airlines to fly bigger and bigger jets into the airport. I believe it is handling more A380's then SFO or JFK.
But the situation of developing more airports outside of California for TransPacific flights is increasing. In the USA airport authorities are not aloud to arbitrarily restrict flights (i.e. stop the turbprops from San Diego and Santa Barbara or force all the narrowbodies going to Vegas to fly out of Ontario). But the airports can begin a bidding price for slots.
Logically, LAX needs to reduce some of the flight to their top 10 Domestic Destination Airports
San Francisco,CA: SFO
New York, NY: JFK
Chicago, IL: ORD
Dallas/Fort Worth,TX: DFW
Las Vegas, NV: LAS
Honolulu, HI: HNL
Seattle, WA: SEA
Denver, CO: DEN
Atlanta, GA: ATL
Phoenix, AZ: PHX
But even for an airline like Air New Zealand, that means fewer connections for their customers.
There have been a lot of new routes announced to Asia in the past year. San Francisco is going to smaller cities in China. The DFW to sydney route was scheduled for a 777 but was upgraded to an A380 to divert traffic from LAX.
It should also be noted that DFW connects to more cities, especially in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, from DFW than LAX. It was a logical add for Qantas as the bulk of the traffic on the SYD-DFW flights are connecting onward to other destinations.
It should also be noted that DFW connects to more cities, especially in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, from DFW than LAX. It was a logical add for Qantas as the bulk of the traffic on the SYD-DFW flights are connecting onward to other destinations.
Yes, TAM88, is absolutely correct. Since the formation of the OneWorld alliance in 1999, Qantas wanted to start the SYD-DFW route since it has convenient connections to the East Coast cities.
It would have begun SYD-DFW right away, but the Melbourne-Los Angeles (7936 miles) and Sydney-Buenos Aires (7320 miles) routes were using up the long range 747's.
In December 1976 Qantas began the Sydney–San Francisco (7,417 mi) with the 747SP aircraft. The SYD-LAX and SYD-SFO set the unofficial standard for Ultra-Long Haul. In 1989, a Qantas 747-400 flew non-stop from London to Sydney, a distance of 11,190 mi, in 20 hours and 9 minutes to set a commercial aircraft world distance record.
I didn't mean to imply that the gate closing procedure at LAX which may began within the next few years was the only reason to pursue other hubs for Trans-Pacific flights. But it is the first time in history that someone will attempt to artificially stop growth in a world mega-airport.
I agree that it comes down to margins, and both Houston and Chicago have far more business travelers willing to pay higher fares than the convention & leisure reasons that put people on a plane to Las Vegas.
Also don't underestimate the people in third tier airport territory who love getting to do only one connection to international destinations instead of having to to two flights to get to SFO and LAX.
I agree that it comes down to margins, and both Houston and Chicago have far more business travelers willing to pay higher fares than the convention & leisure reasons that put people on a plane to Las Vegas.
Also don't underestimate the people in third tier airport territory who love getting to do only one connection to international destinations instead of having to to two flights to get to SFO and LAX.
If this flight has a intermittent stop in between and LAS is a tag on from an existing NZ destination then Las Vegas is a strong possibility. If it's a new nonstop destination from AKL then Houston sounds like the choice. Yes I know ORD has more O&D but I can't see NZ overflying a *A hub (SFO) to serve a low yield ULH route to ORD. The routing would be literally over SFO.
Right now, Air New Zealand has a monopoly on non-stop flights from NZ to North America. Current routes are to three cities Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver. Qantas was a one time competitor LAX, but left the route three years ago.
ANZ is not using it's Dreamliners to cross the Pacific just yet, putting it's first two on the following routes
Auckland (AKL) – Shanghai (PVG)
Auckland (AKL) – Tokyo (NRT)
Auckland (AKL) – Perth (PER)
Auckland (AKL) – Sydney (SYD)
Both United Airlines and American Airlines are considering launching non-stop routes between Auckland and California. United looking at the Auckland-San Francisco route, while American—which shares a Trans-Pacific business agreement with Australian carrier Qantas— is considering restoring the Auckland-Los Angeles route.
United is currently using it's Dreamliners on the following routes
Los Angeles (LAX) – Melbourne (MEL)
Los Angeles (LAX) – Shanghai (PVG)
Los Angeles (LAX) – Tokyo (NRT)
San Francisco (SFO) – Chengdu (CTU)
San Francisco (SFO) – Osaka (KIX)
United considered launching an Auckland-Houston route before deciding against it back in 2012.
The fact that it was under consideration three years ago must mean there is potential. Perhaps ANZ will elect to fly this route instead of Chicago.
Personally, I think United is better off opening new routes to China with its latest Dreamliners, instead of competing directly with an Alliance partner.
Right now, Air New Zealand has a monopoly on non-stop flights from NZ to North America. Current routes are to three cities Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver. Qantas was a one time competitor LAX, but left the route three years ago.
ANZ is not using it's Dreamliners to cross the Pacific just yet, putting it's first two on the following routes
Auckland (AKL) – Shanghai (PVG)
Auckland (AKL) – Tokyo (NRT)
Auckland (AKL) – Perth (PER)
Auckland (AKL) – Sydney (SYD)
Both United Airlines and American Airlines are considering launching non-stop routes between Auckland and California. United looking at the Auckland-San Francisco route, while American—which shares a Trans-Pacific business agreement with Australian carrier Qantas— is considering restoring the Auckland-Los Angeles route.
United is currently using it's Dreamliners on the following routes
Los Angeles (LAX) – Melbourne (MEL)
Los Angeles (LAX) – Shanghai (PVG)
Los Angeles (LAX) – Tokyo (NRT)
San Francisco (SFO) – Chengdu (CTU)
San Francisco (SFO) – Osaka (KIX)
United considered launching an Auckland-Houston route before deciding against it back in 2012.
The fact that it was under consideration three years ago must mean there is potential. Perhaps ANZ will elect to fly this route instead of Chicago.
Personally, I think United is better off opening new routes to China with its latest Dreamliners, instead of competing directly with an Alliance partner.
I'd like to see United use one of their Dreamliners to launch a SFO-GRU route. There is enough O&D and west coast feed to fill a flight. Perhaps a 3 or 4x weekly route?
I'd like to see United use one of their Dreamliners to launch a SFO-GRU route. There is enough O&D and west coast feed to fill a flight. Perhaps a 3 or 4x weekly route?
GRU has flights to 10 USA cities with two airlines flying to JFK.
United Airlines Chicago–O'Hare, Houston–Intercontinental, Newark, Washington–Dulles
American Airlines Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, New York–JFK
Delta Air Lines Atlanta, Detroit, New York–JFK
So how much would it cost a passenger to fly from Auckland to California or points east?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
