Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
houstontexasjack

Future International Routes Out of IAH

Recommended Posts

I hadn't read about United dropping the IAH-CDG route while trying to spite Houston for giving Southwest the international stuff out of Hobby. That was pretty stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, UtterlyUrban said:

These would be nice:

 

IAH to Paris

IAH to Berlin

IAH to zurich

IAHto Vienna

IAH to Milan

 

Actually, what I would really want is for the international flights from the Entire NY Hub (and most of Washasington DC’s) to be picked up and moved to Houston.  That would be good!!!  Oh, and they could toss in Chicago and San Fran too.  One giant superhub that would allow me to always flight direct.  YES!  

 

Oh, I will put the ‘ludes down now.

 

Lol. The logical ones would be Paris, Vienna (Star Alliance partner Austrian hub), Zurich (partner Swiss hub), and Brussels (partner hub).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, ToryGattis said:

 

Lol. The logical ones would be Paris, Vienna (Star Alliance partner Austrian hub), Zurich (partner Swiss hub), and Brussels (partner hub).

 

I'm worried about United and AF competing on IAH-CDG. AF is my favorite euro carrier out of IAH (at least when I'm flying on my own dime). Their premium economy product is the best out of IAH. Not just the seats, but overall on the plane and at the airport it's a damn good product. I would hate for AF to reduce frequency at IAH or leave all together. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

 

I'm worried about United and AF competing on IAH-CDG. AF is my favorite euro carrier out of IAH (at least when I'm flying on my own dime). Their premium economy product is the best out of IAH. Not just the seats, but overall on the plane and at the airport it's a damn good product. I would hate for AF to reduce frequency at IAH or leave all together. 

 

I flew Air France a lot in the early 90's, and it sucked, big time.  CDG has always been the worst airport in the Free World, especially if you are flying to Africa.The CDG staff are awful,in 2000 we had one security agent tell an entire Continental flight "You stupid Americans, I hope your flight doesn't go today", after the previous day flight had been cancelled due to mechanical issues. Maybe they've changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

 

I'm worried about United and AF competing on IAH-CDG. AF is my favorite euro carrier out of IAH (at least when I'm flying on my own dime). Their premium economy product is the best out of IAH. Not just the seats, but overall on the plane and at the airport it's a damn good product. I would hate for AF to reduce frequency at IAH or leave all together. 

 

 

Well, they both had it for many years just fine.  My understanding is that AF is pretty safe because they have the Schlumberger corporate contract.

 

Here's what I think it comes down to, once you get beyond European cities in the oil business: which Europeans are doing business in Mexico and Central America? Because Houston is the ideal connecting hub for that from Europe. There are some car plants in Mexico (inc. VW), but I don't know what else beyond that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ToryGattis said:

 

Well, they both had it for many years just fine.  

 

I think for just two? Continental merged with United in 2010 then United cut IAH CDG in 2012. It is true Continental and Air France operated the route just fine for many years but I assume that was because they were both SkyTeam partners. Actually, I think United's and Continental's combined operating certificate was not complete 'till late 2011, so AF may have still been benefitting from a CO code share even after the corporate merger but before the "FAA" merger. But I may be misremembering. Now, in 2018 they are competitors in every way. In my opinion I would rather have AF fly the route that UA. I am not a huge fan of UA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ross said:

I flew Air France a lot in the early 90's, and it sucked, big time.  CDG has always been the worst airport in the Free World, especially if you are flying to Africa.The CDG staff are awful,in 2000 we had one security agent tell an entire Continental flight "You stupid Americans, I hope your flight doesn't go today", after the previous day flight had been cancelled due to mechanical issues. Maybe they've changed.

 

I agree the French, especially Parisians are rude. But have you flown United lately? It's a nightmare. A rude AF employee doesn't compare to just one UA flight attendant on a power trip. The worst euro carrier on its worst day is far better than the best US carrier on its best day across the Atlantic. CDG I agree with you has issues, but most airports outside of Asia do. When I flew through CDG in March I paid 60 euros to rent a day hotel room inside the Airport. I slept for several hours, took a shower, got refreshed then cleared security in less than 2 minutes (because it was the middle of the afternoon). Made CDG much more pleasant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

I think for just two? Continental merged with United in 2010 then United cut IAH CDG in 2012. It is true Continental and Air France operated the route just fine for many years but I assume that was because they were both SkyTeam partners. Actually, I think United's and Continental's combined operating certificate was not complete 'till late 2011, so AF may have still been benefitting from a CO code share even after the corporate merger but before the "FAA" merger. But I may be misremembering. Now, in 2018 they are competitors in every way. In my opinion I would rather have AF fly the route that UA. I am not a huge fan of UA. 

 

Well, AF certainly has the stronger position, as I'm sure much more of their Paris feed is interested in going to Houston than UA's Houston feed is interested in going to Paris, mainly because of geography. Houston's logical draw zone from the southwest to go on to Paris is pretty weak - mainly Mexico (which would prefer not to connect in the USA) - and there are more logical hubs than Houston to go through from the western USA.  I can see why UA couldn't support the flight.  I'll bet it also filled up with reward tickets, and they might as well send reward fliers from Houston through Chicago, DC, or NYC hubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

United is announcing three new European routes tomorrow (San Francisco - Amsterdam, Newark - Naples, and Newark - Prague), but none from IAH. Maybe something else will come later, but United has been launching a lot of new routes lately and Houston seems to be getting shafted (Sydney was obviously a big add but that was launched very early in the year, and since then we’ve only had the minor routes of IAH-Dayton and IAH-Akron while seemingly every other hub has gotten 5-10 new routes at least). Hopefully wxman is correct and we hear something soon, but so far it’s been a disappointing year for IAH routes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, asubrt said:

United is announcing three new European routes tomorrow (San Francisco - Amsterdam, Newark - Naples, and Newark - Prague), but none from IAH. Maybe something else will come later, but United has been launching a lot of new routes lately and Houston seems to be getting shafted (Sydney was obviously a big add but that was launched very early in the year, and since then we’ve only had the minor routes of IAH-Dayton and IAH-Akron while seemingly every other hub has gotten 5-10 new routes at least). Hopefully wxman is correct and we hear something soon, but so far it’s been a disappointing year for IAH routes.

 

Beat me to it! 

https://twitter.com/united?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

I agree that IAH doesn't always get new routes like some of other hubs but I think the "shaft" should also include allocation of newer aircraft. When including aircraft types, I would say ORD gets shafted the most. Some of the United planes flying out of ORD are junk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Beat me to it! 

https://twitter.com/united?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

I agree that IAH doesn't always get new routes like some of other hubs but I think the "shaft" should also include allocation of newer aircraft. When including aircraft types, I would say ORD gets shafted the most. Some of the United planes flying out of ORD are junk. 

 

Yeah I was really just referring to new routes, but IAH did get the 737 MAX 9 which is pretty nice (although in my opinion a bit small for the 7.5 hour IAH-ANC which I flew earlier this month), and it was also the original 787 base I believe, so at least they do tend to deploy some newer aircraft here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like its been a while since we've had a new flag announced at IAH. I don't think we had a single one in 2018. Anybody know of any new flags in the works for this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 5:28 AM, wxman said:

Seems like its been a while since we've had a new flag announced at IAH. I don't think we had a single one in 2018. Anybody know of any new flags in the works for this year?

Air India, Philippine Airlines and Ethiopian Airlines have expressed interests in flying to IAH. Problem is, they've said that a while back and we haven't gotten any news of it since then.

Edited by Some one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 8:49 PM, Some one said:

Air India,

Air India, Philippine Airlines and Ethiopian Airlines have expressed interests in flying to IAH. Problem is, they've said that a while back and we haven't gotten any news of it since then.

Ask and you shall receive. Ethiopian announces 3 x weekly to Houston:

 

http://m.digitaljournal.com/pr/4127682

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethiopian is loaded in the system. Looks to start with 3 times per week in early July but quickly moving to 4 times a week using a 788 with a IAH-LFW-ADD routing. Departures from IAH will be 1-4-6-7.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2019 at 3:08 PM, KinkaidAlum said:

Ethiopian is loaded in the system. Looks to start with 3 times per week in early July but quickly moving to 4 times a week using a 788 with a IAH-LFW-ADD routing. Departures from IAH will be 1-4-6-7.

What does 1-4-6-7 mean? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wxman said:

What does 1-4-6-7 mean? 

Days of the week. Monday is day 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ross said:

Days of the week. Monday is day 1. 

 

I thought it was 3 times weekly flight? I can't find any information on it being 4 times weekly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, ET's service is no longer bookable. Looks like it was pulled even before it began. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ET = Ethiopian? I noticed it was removed from wikipedia a few weeks ago. Sad. IAH has been in a real drought lately getting new flags here. What's the deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2019 at 7:44 AM, wxman said:

ET = Ethiopian? I noticed it was removed from wikipedia a few weeks ago. Sad. IAH has been in a real drought lately getting new flags here. What's the deal?

 

No low hanging fruit. 

 

Airfares are very low, so there has to be high biz class demand, and a lot of that from Houston is very localized due to O&G only going certain places. 

 

You'd think we could see UA start IAH-HKG on a 789, but UA won't even bring back IAH-CDG which supposedly has a way bigger market.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Ethiopian will begin service to IAH in December with twice weekly service. ET flies a lot of 738max on long-thin routes and with that plane grounded they had to rework their current schedule which put expansion on hold.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly they weren't going to attempt nonstop service to Africa from Houston on a 738max, right? What's the maximum range for 737 anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, They plan of using a 787-800. However, do to the grounding of the 737-800 Max they've had to use widebodies on routes they used to fly with the narrow body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

No, They plan of using a 787-800. However, do to the grounding of the 737-800 Max they've had to use widebodies on routes they used to fly with the narrow body.

 

I know this is ultra trivial, but it's just 787-8, not -800.

 

Like mini nails on a chalkboard for me (for no real reason).

 

Also, I want to fly on that Ethiopian flight REAL BAD

 

Edited by wilcal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houston Business Journal recently had an interesting article about the top 10 international destinations not currently served non-stop from Bush Intercontinental.

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2019/11/27/these-10-nonstop-international-routes-fromdont.html#g/464257/11

#1 was a little surprising:  Ho Chi Minh City (FKA Saigon)

#2  Manila

#3  Mumbai

#4  Shanghai

#5  Rome

#6  Karachi

#7  Tel Aviv

#8  Seoul

#9  Delhi

#10  Bangkok

 

If only we had a major airline interested in maximizing their Houston hub.  As an example of how it's done, look at what American is doing at DFW. The Dallas Business Journal did the same analysis regarding DFW flights. Their No. 1 unserved destination was Tel Aviv and the passenger count was about the same as IAH's Tel Aviv passenger count.  Tel Aviv is #7 on IAH's list!  And more to the point, American is adding Tel Aviv service from DFW.   Any chance United will be adding service from Houston to ANY of our top 7 unserved destinations... ever?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Houston Business Journal recently had an interesting article about the top 10 international destinations not currently served non-stop from Bush Intercontinental.

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2019/11/27/these-10-nonstop-international-routes-fromdont.html#g/464257/11

#1 was a little surprising:  Ho Chi Minh City (FKA Saigon)

#2  Manila

#3  Mumbai

#4  Shanghai

#5  Rome

#6  Karachi

#7  Tel Aviv

#8  Seoul

#9  Delhi

#10  Bangkok

 

If only we had a major airline interested in maximizing their Houston hub.  As an example of how it's done, look at what American is doing at DFW. The Dallas Business Journal did the same analysis regarding DFW flights. Their No. 1 unserved destination was Tel Aviv and the passenger count was about the same as IAH's Tel Aviv passenger count.  Tel Aviv is #7 on IAH's list!  And more to the point, American is adding Tel Aviv service from DFW.   Any chance United will be adding service from Houston to ANY of our top 7 unserved destinations... ever?

 

Any guess what is the most likely reason for this? My thoughts, in no particular order:

 

- We pissed off United's management with the Free Hobby thing and they have put us on the backburner

- American is a much better managed airline than United (Texas vs. Chicago business culture)

- United has structured its four main hubs so that overseas flights are generally funneled through the coastal hubs (unless very profitable elsewhere); Chicago is an exception because it is their home city

- DFW has more room for expansion and more efficient facilities than IAH, at least until the new terminal is finished

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Any guess what is the most likely reason for this? My thoughts, in no particular order:

 

- We pissed off United's management with the Free Hobby thing and they have put us on the backburner

- American is a much better managed airline than United (Texas vs. Chicago business culture)

- United has structured its four main hubs so that overseas flights are generally funneled through the coastal hubs (unless very profitable elsewhere); Chicago is an exception because it is their home city

- DFW has more room for expansion and more efficient facilities than IAH, at least until the new terminal is finished

 

 

I think it's a mixture of your first three (which, when you boil them down, really come down to #2).  I don't think it has anything at all to do with room for expansion or efficiency of facilities. I don't think either of those is an issue for United at IAH. 

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's probably less of a United being spiteful thing, and more of a space thing...

 

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/12-billion-iah-international-terminal-expansion-underway/285-2fcb3588-5fb3-4717-af90-a1ad4a4e8d98

 

Quote

The demolition will create room for six new gates to fit bigger, wide-bodied planes that can fly farther, creating new routes to bring in new business to Houston.

“We did an economic assessment of the value of (a recently added Turkish Airlines) flight between Istanbul and Houston: $400 million a year,” said Mario Diaz, Director of Aviation for the Houston Airport System.

Those additional six gates will nearly double the number of wide-bodied gates to 13

 

it is fun to blame United for everything though.

Edited by samagon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, samagon said:

it's probably less of a United being spiteful thing, and more of a space thing...

 

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/12-billion-iah-international-terminal-expansion-underway/285-2fcb3588-5fb3-4717-af90-a1ad4a4e8d98

 

 

it is fun to blame United for everything though.

 

It may not be a spite thing. But it is definitely not a space thing.  The added international gates they are working on are to provide more room for non-United international flights.  United has plenty of room for additional international service.  IF Terminal E is currently fully booked, they could easily shift a domestic flight or two to their gates in Terminal C or even Terminal A to make room for an additional international arrival in E.

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

Houston Business Journal recently had an interesting article about the top 10 international destinations not currently served non-stop from Bush Intercontinental.

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2019/11/27/these-10-nonstop-international-routes-fromdont.html#g/464257/11

#1 was a little surprising:  Ho Chi Minh City (FKA Saigon)

#2  Manila

#3  Mumbai

#4  Shanghai

#5  Rome

#6  Karachi

#7  Tel Aviv

#8  Seoul

#9  Delhi

#10  Bangkok

 

If only we had a major airline interested in maximizing their Houston hub.  As an example of how it's done, look at what American is doing at DFW. The Dallas Business Journal did the same analysis regarding DFW flights. Their No. 1 unserved destination was Tel Aviv and the passenger count was about the same as IAH's Tel Aviv passenger count.  Tel Aviv is #7 on IAH's list!  And more to the point, American is adding Tel Aviv service from DFW.   Any chance United will be adding service from Houston to ANY of our top 7 unserved destinations... ever?

 

Fascinating list of O&D demand. 

 

1) SGN 8,055 nmi. Would be the second longest flight in the world. Ain't gonna happen. Also, they don't even fly this from LAX or SFO, so can't imagine those being worse than IAH.

2) MNL 7,416 nmi Would be 8th longest in the world. I've read that yields are super low, so likely doesn't make biz sense.

3) BOM 7,792 nmi This one is approaching business/yield reasoning at least. Sounds like Air India might try it, but they're kind of a mess. 

4) PVG 6,581 nmi Houston to Asia is kind of saturated. I can't see this one launching unless economy yields start coming up. Cargo has supposedly taken a hit with tariffs, so that hurts, too.

5) FCO 4,938 nmi Could definitely see this as a summer seasonal. I met with the Italian tourism board when they were in town a few years ago and they said Texas is their second biggest market in the US. 763ER has a 5,990 nmi range and could easily handle it or if United had some underutilized 787s,.

6) KHI 7,371 nmi Zero chance.  

7) TLV 6,141 nmi. Anything is possible. Evidently biz class to behind to TLV is crazy high, so who knows. 

8 ) ICN 6,138 nmi. Korea Air couldn't make it work. I guess UA could? Would rather see Asiana fly it. UA evidently sucks at marketing themselves in Asia which is why ANA operates one of the two NRT flights.

9) DEL 7,276 nmi. Same thing as BOM. Could see it, but BOM a better choice.

10) BKK 8,033 nmi Would also be the 2nd longest flight in the world. Ain't gonna happen.

 

2 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Any guess what is the most likely reason for this? My thoughts, in no particular order:

 

- We pissed off United's management with the Free Hobby thing and they have put us on the backburner

- American is a much better managed airline than United (Texas vs. Chicago business culture)

- United has structured its four main hubs so that overseas flights are generally funneled through the coastal hubs (unless very profitable elsewhere); Chicago is an exception because it is their home city

- DFW has more room for expansion and more efficient facilities than IAH, at least until the new terminal is finished

 

 

They care about making money. They can make more money elsewhere with their planes. United plays to the strength of their hubs, like every airline, and their strength in IAH is central and south america. 

 

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

It may not be a spite thing. But it is definitely not a space thing.  The added international gates they are working on are to provide more room for non-United international flights.  United has plenty of room for additional international service.  IF Terminal E is currently fully booked, they could easily shift a domestic flight or two to their gates in Terminal C or even Terminal A to make room for an additional international arrival in E.

 

Agreed. United could absolutely squeeze in more wide-body flights if they wanted to. Other foreign airlines trying to fly to/from Europe and peak times? Not so much. Off-peak times, absolutely. 

 

International wide-body destinations:

 

Europe: LHR (2X daily, occasionally 3), AMS, FRA, MUC

Asia: NRT 

South America: UIO, LIM, SCL, EZE, GIG, GRU

Oceania: SYD

 

14 whole wide-body international flights per day! I believe E has 6 wide-body capable gates and C has 8, so yeah, underutilized just a bit. 

Edited by wilcal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/\  Interesting analysis, but FWIW,  at least according to this article from Forbes, a flight has to be at least 8,439 miles to even crack the top 10.  The longest of the imaginary Houston flights would be only 8,055 miles, well short of even being the longest flight from Houston (Houston - Sydney: 8,596 miles).

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

/\  Interesting analysis, but FWIW,  at least according to this article from Forbes, a flight has to be at least 8,439 miles to even crack the top 10.  The longest of the imaginary Houston flights would be only 8,055 miles, well short of even being the longest flight from Houston (Houston - Sydney: 8,596 miles).

 

That list is in statute miles, not nautical miles, which is generally what the airline industry operates in. 

 

This list has both on it.

 

EWR-SIN is 9,534 statute miles, but 8,285 nautical miles.

 

Second longest, AKL-DOH (which my sister actually got to fly in biz earlier this year. I'm just a bit jealous) is 9,023/7,848. 

 

IAH-SGN is 9,269/8055. It would be about 18 hours one-way. Woof. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

It may not be a spite thing. But it is definitely not a space thing.  The added international gates they are working on are to provide more room for non-United international flights.  United has plenty of room for additional international service.  IF Terminal E is currently fully booked, they could easily shift a domestic flight or two to their gates in Terminal C or even Terminal A to make room for an additional international arrival in E.

 

I guess when I said space, I meant room for specific aircraft. sure there's plenty of room for flights, but according to the article...

 

Quote

The demolition will create room for six new gates to fit bigger, wide-bodied planes that can fly farther, creating new routes to bring in new business to Houston.

 

it says farther down that this will double the capacity for wide bodies, to 13, which means we only have 7 now, so if you believe their statement that wide bodied planes can fly farther, it is a space thing that this addition will help to alleviate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

I guess when I said space, I meant room for specific aircraft. sure there's plenty of room for flights, but according to the article...

 

 

it says farther down that this will double the capacity for wide bodies, to 13, which means we only have 7 now, so if you believe their statement that wide bodied planes can fly farther, it is a space thing that this addition will help to alleviate. 

 

As Wilcal showed above, United does not have space problems either for flights or for specific (wide-body) aircraft.  (There are 14 wide-body capable gates in Terminals C and E; the doubling referred to in the article is referring only to gates in Terminal D. It's easy to get misled by that article; such is the state of Houston journalism.)   Space is simply NOT an issue that is in any way keeping United from adding international destinations..

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, wilcal said:

 

That list is in statute miles, not nautical miles, which is generally what the airline industry operates in. 

 

This list has both on it.

 

EWR-SIN is 9,534 statute miles, but 8,285 nautical miles.

 

Second longest, AKL-DOH (which my sister actually got to fly in biz earlier this year. I'm just a bit jealous) is 9,023/7,848. 

 

IAH-SGN is 9,269/8055. It would be about 18 hours one-way. Woof. 

 

Interesting.  Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

I guess when I said space, I meant room for specific aircraft. sure there's plenty of room for flights, but according to the article...

 

 

it says farther down that this will double the capacity for wide bodies, to 13, which means we only have 7 now, so if you believe their statement that wide bodied planes can fly farther, it is a space thing that this addition will help to alleviate. 

 

That's just for Terminal D, which United doesn't use for departures. 

 

As I kind of mentioned before, there is somewhat of a space constraint for foreign airlines flying to Europe just in the afternoon. The rest of the day it's basically NBD. 

 

IIRC, the previous plan had United giving up a portion of the old Terminal C for an expanded D, and in exchange they could use all of the Terminal D gates. Not sure if that's still the case with the current plan. Then again, I think the old plan also had terminal B getting it's old customs/immigration so the regional jets coming from Mexico wouldn't have to use D/E gates. Airlines like Spirit were having to drop international passengers at D and then pay to have their planes towed down to A. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

As Wilcal showed above, United does not have space problems either for flights or for specific (wide-body) aircraft.  (There are 14 wide-body capable gates in Terminals C and E; the doubling referred to in the article is referring only to gates in Terminal D. It's easy to get misled by that article; such is the state of Houston journalism.)   Space is simply NOT an issue that is in any way keeping United from adding international destinations..

 

ah. so this is a United bashing party. Carry on.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, samagon said:

 

ah. so this is a United bashing party. Carry on.

 

Looks like we were so mean in this thread we caused Oscar to step down 😂

 

I'm actually pretty sad about that because he's done such a great job after $misek. Not too excited about Kirby tbh.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wilcal said:

 

Looks like we were so mean in this thread we caused Oscar to step down 😂

 

I'm actually pretty sad about that because he's done such a great job after $misek. Not too excited about Kirby tbh.

 

Curious why you're not too excited about Kirby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Curious why you're not too excited about Kirby.

 

Wasn't a fan of him at AA. Reputation as a hard cost cutter. That didn't work well with Smisek and it killed morale. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Continental had 3 hubs; Newark, Cleveland, and Houston. 

 

United now has those hubs minus CLE plus Washington Dulles, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles,  and San Francisco. 

 

That is the reason. Denver and Chicago are better East-West hubs, LAX and SFO cover Asia, and EWR and IAD cover Europe. It's geography. Our biggest hope was for growth in the Southeast and LATAM/Mexico but United has actually retreated a lot in those regions. We've lost quite a few smaller Mexican cities and United has basically handed Texas (to American) and the Southeast to Delta. 

 

Our best hope for new international service would start with domestic hub spokes being added. We've been the ugly duckling compared to DEN, SFO, IAD, and ORD lately. We've seen Del Rio, Texarkana, Tyler, Waco, Beaumont, Montgomery, Chattanooga, Augusta,Tallahassee, Sarasota, Palm Beach (year round), Asheville, Columbia, Lexington, Charleston WV, and a handful of smaller Mexican cities cut. Most of those cities are still served by AA to DFW. That allows DFW to offer connection opportunities that United would rather funnel elsewhere or not compete for to IAH's loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Continental had 3 hubs; Newark, Cleveland, and Houston. 

 

United now has those hubs minus CLE plus Washington Dulles, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles,  and San Francisco. 

 

That is the reason. Denver and Chicago are better East-West hubs, LAX and SFO cover Asia, and EWR and IAD cover Europe. It's geography. Our biggest hope was for growth in the Southeast and LATAM/Mexico but United has actually retreated a lot in those regions. We've lost quite a few smaller Mexican cities and United has basically handed Texas (to American) and the Southeast to Delta. 

 

Our best hope for new international service would start with domestic hub spokes being added. We've been the ugly duckling compared to DEN, SFO, IAD, and ORD lately. We've seen Del Rio, Texarkana, Tyler, Waco, Beaumont, Montgomery, Chattanooga, Augusta,Tallahassee, Sarasota, Palm Beach (year round), Asheville, Columbia, Lexington, Charleston WV, and a handful of smaller Mexican cities cut. Most of those cities are still served by AA to DFW. That allows DFW to offer connection opportunities that United would rather funnel elsewhere or not compete for to IAH's loss.

 

By your own analysis, geography may be A reason regarding parts of the network but it is not THE reason.  As you demonstrated, they pretty much gave away the geographical advantage they enjoyed or could have enjoyed at IAH, and now that is owned by American and DFW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Diaz mentioning Madrid, Vienna and another southeast Asia destination, I suspect one of those three will be the next nonstops added to IAH. It sounds like Air India might have some legs to it, too. I've heard Air India rumors in several places and with Diaz also mentioning it, it sounds like Delhi or Mumbai on Air India may be the next new flag at IAH. I think Rome would be a cool addition along with Tel Aviv.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...