George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH)

[Houston19514]

Cool Video of international terminal plans

[wxman]

On 10/30/2019 at 11:48 AM, Houston19514 said:

There are some clues in this video.

 

India

A "major city in China" (Shanghai?)

Another two to Southeast Asia

Secondary cities in Europe (Barcelona, Madrid, Vienna)

That video mentions nothing of the airlines you mentioned. Insider info?

[Houston19514]

On 10/31/2019 at 11:50 PM, wxman said:

That video mentions nothing of the airlines you mentioned. Insider info?

 

No inside information.  I just posted the wrong link.

 

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

 

[Houston19514]

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?

[H-Town Man]

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

 

[Houston19514]

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 December 4, 2019 by Houston19514

[H-Town Man]

I rue the day Continental got swallowed. Probably stings even more than Compaq getting swallowed.

 

[samagon]

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 December 4, 2019 by samagon

[Houston19514]

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 December 4, 2019 by Houston19514

[wilcal]

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 December 4, 2019 by wilcal

[Houston19514]

/\  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 December 4, 2019 by Houston19514

[wilcal]

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. 

[samagon]

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. 

[Houston19514]

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 December 4, 2019 by Houston19514

[Houston19514]

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.

[wilcal]

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. 

[samagon]

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.

[wilcal]

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.

[Houston19514]

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.

[wilcal]

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. 

[KinkaidAlum]

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.

[Houston19514]

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.

[wxman]

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.

[jackie21love]

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

[HoustonBoy]

https://twitter.com/iah/status/1206762635875758080

[KinkaidAlum]

That's a beautiful livery. Hoping for good things for ET. 

[astros148]

United is buulding a 350 million dollar bag room and plan on adding 150 flights in 2 years. Iah to mumbai and iah to lagos is all but guaranteed.

[asubrt]

22 minutes ago, astros148 said:

United is buulding a 350 million dollar bag room and plan on adding 150 flights in 2 years. Iah to mumbai and iah to lagos is all but guaranteed.

 

Hate to be that guy, but... source?? This seems extremely hard to believe given United's complete disregard for IAH in the past few years. Every other hub has gotten multiple new international routes and domestic routes, while we've gotten... Spokane and Ontario?? Don't get me wrong, I would be ecstatic if this happened and hopefully you have some awesome insider info, but I'll believe it when I see it.

[wilcal]

31 minutes ago, astros148 said:

United is buulding a 350 million dollar bag room and plan on adding 150 flights in 2 years. Iah to mumbai and iah to lagos is all but guaranteed.

 

Do you mean 150 flights/week or per day? 150/day would be an insane increase. 150/week is still an increase, but not a ton.

 

3 minutes ago, asubrt said:

 

Hate to be that guy, but... source?? This seems extremely hard to believe given United's complete disregard for IAH in the past few years. Every other hub has gotten multiple new international routes and domestic routes, while we've gotten... Spokane and Ontario?? Don't get me wrong, I would be ecstatic if this happened and hopefully you have some awesome insider info, but I'll believe it when I see it.

 

I think part of it is additional planes coming online. Looking at summer now for MAX to come back. 

 

These new CRJ's with lots of biz are for EWR and ORD. 

 

I think there's a 0% chance UA launches Mumbai, but Air India certainly might.

 

There's a much better chance of Lagos coming back. 

[Houston19514]

United Building New Baggage Facilities