jackie21love

Ethiopian 546 should have arrived today. I am surprised nobody talk about it here!

People in Shanghai don't need to evacuate in typhoon season. not only skyscrapers, we also need Shanghai subway, highway, maglev, high speed train, airport......

I don't expect Asiana... Asiana is much smaller comparing with Korean Air, there wide body fleet size is only one third of KE. for airlines in China, Korea and Japan, the Aisa-Australia, Aisa-Europe lines are much more profitable. UA cancelled 2-weekly PVG-GUM, but i don't see they intend to move those to IAH-PVG though. China Eastern want to start this route, but they run out of slots. Air China flies 747-8 to JFK or IAD, if market proves, i think they can move the queen to IAH

No for China Eastern, unless the new round of protocol negotiation kick off soon... doubt this is one of the topic Trump and Xi will discuss today in Beijing. But this route is possible if United like to drop their 3 weekly PVG-GUM route (approved for 3 weekly, but currently operates 2 weekly). This route is a total loss so far, with less than 20%, but United has to keep it. When market proves, and if UA want to add a line to Asia from IAH, I believe PVG-IAH is the best choice. The new ATL-PVG route from Delta is under a similar situation, they have to drop the NRT-PVG route to exchange to ATL-PVG. One other concern is frequency. People are saying it is really not efficient or profitable to have a US-Asia route less than daily. I am not sure why, but since United only has 3 weekly slots on GUM-PVG, that may be another reason. The new airport in Beijing, and the expansion at PVG and CAN is going smoothly. With more day time flight slots, the China-US market may see another boom.

US-China civil air transportation protocol limited 180 pairs of flights per week for Chinese carriers and 160 per week for US carriers for flights to/from PEK, PVG and CAN (China zone 1). Currently all slots on Chinese side had been taken by CA (63), MU (49), CZ (35) and HU (33). all 49 MU flights are departing from PVG, and it has 14 SFO, 14 JFK, 7 LAX, 7 ORD, and 7 HNL. China Eastern need to reallocate its flight if they want to land in another US destination. The most likely option is to reduce PVG-HNL from 7 to 3/4, and reallocate to IAH. On the US side, there is a couple of them available, and I think all the left frequencies are designated to CAN per the protocol (I might be wrong). However I don't think US carrier would like to explore that market, since they have developed a good HKG (very close to CAN) market already. Currently not all approved routes are fully utilized. HA filed 7 weekly HNL-PEK although it only runs 3 per week now. AA got DOT approval for PEK-LAX last year but haven't be able to get a time slot in PEK. I doubt they will get it until the new Beijing airport completed in 2019 or 2020. DL has been considering resuming ATL-PVG for a while and the solution they went is to end PVG-NRT 7 weekly and replaced by PVG-ATL. This will begin in 2018 If any of the carriers would like to add additional route to PVG/PEK/CAN, I think the best option would be IAH-PVG, if they could figure out a way, or just wait for the next round of negotiation. From another perspective, MU only has 20 777's, and to better utilize those they would put them in routes between China-Australia, and China-Europe since those routes are just more profitable than China-US routes. They will start getting 787-9's next year, and let's see what they could do from there.

When will the club be ready?

I am not an expert in airport design, but it looks natural to me that C South (may need some expansion) and E could be merged, and the new C North and future B North could be merged too... Is it still necessary to keep the "Terminal C"?

What I was saying is Terminal D project is pushed ahead fast due to high demand from United and foreign airlines... Same for Terminal A. Demand drives everything.

"Planning Stage" means another 10 years before seeing a dozer on site. Same as Terminal D, IAH needs to attract more domestic airlines and routes to push Terminal A rebuilding ahead…

I guess no more hotel on top of it, right?

Like two layers of band aid

Consultants may refuse to work for Amegy if they arrange them to stay in La Quinta.

Drove by today. Very astonishing. Now it's time to replace the La Quinta

To compare with the HSPVA site. If you don't have a ready to go plan yet, at least make it clean and neat.

Any carrier could have delay issues. More flights they have, more delays and complaints there will be.