When I landed at Tokyo’s Haneda Airport today, I had one of my easiest, fastest and smoothest international arrival experiences. But I wondered where all those airlines that last year fought and won a fierce battle over the right to fly to Haneda actually were.
It appears the industry overestimated Haneda’s appeal to travelers, and it also might have miscalculated how many passengers remain in Tokyo, as opposed to those who connect to other destinations.
It’s true that the March earthquake and tsunami had a negative impact on travel to Japan in general, but traffic to and from the much bigger Narita Airport has largely recovered.
Haneda’s smaller size and proximity to central Tokyo provide a significant advantage. However, as I first wrote two years ago, most medium- and long-haul flights arrive and depart between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. — not exactly the most preferred time by the majority of travelers. In addition, onward flight connections from Haneda are extremely limited.
That didn’t seem to bother most airlines last year, when the rights to fly from various foreign cities to Haneda were being awarded by the Japanese and other governments. U.S. carriers in particular made rather bold proposals. In the end, the Department of Transportation gave American Airlines the right to fly from New York, Delta from Detroit and Los Angeles, and Hawaiian Airlines from Honolulu.
American’s flights are nowhere to be found in its winder schedule, though they are planned for next summer. The same goes for Delta’s Detroit flights. It does operate the LA flight throughout the year, as does Hawaiian on the Honolulu route. Air Canada has postponed indefinitely its plan for flights from Vancouver, even though it started selling tickets late last year.
The Japanese carriers have trimmed their plans, too. All Nippon Airways has kept only LA in North America, while Japan Airlines serves San Francisco. European and other long-haul routes are also very few.
British Airways is the only foreign carrier outside Asia and the United States that currently flies to Haneda — and not every day. The Asian carriers include Air China, Asiana, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines, AirAsia, China Eastern, Eva Airways, Korean Air, Malaysia Airlines, Shanghai Airlines, Singapore Airlines and Thai Airways.
Flights loads to and from Haneda are not what those carriers expected — my Singapore Airlines flight was less than half-full in Economy and about two-thirds full in Business Class, where I had two lie-flat seats to myself, though even one would have been just fine.
Related stories:
When ‘open skies’ aren’t really open
U.S. flights likely to Tokyo Haneda
Continue reading about Carriers lose appetite for Tokyo Haneda
I’ve always been puzzled by the grand “international” designation of numerous small airports throughout the United States, just because they boast the odd flight to and from Canada.
While Canada is, indeed, a foreign country, this week’s incident with a Virgin Atlantic plane at Bradley Airport in Hartford, Conn., provides sufficient justification for my bewilderment.
The image on the left is the official logo of the airport at issue, with the word “international” displayed very prominently. Yet, when the Virgin flight from London to Newark, N.J., was diverted to Hartford because of bad weather further south, about 300 passengers were forcibly confined to the aircraft for four hours without water or food. Some of them got sick and fainted, and chaos reined on board, according to press accounts.
Why? Because there was no one from the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) division — immigration and customs officers, in plainer English — to process the travelers.
It’s unclear why it was decided that the plane should land at Bradley, instead of Boston, for example, which has a fully operational CBP facility. I wouldn’t be surprised if whoever made the decision didn’t even think about the lack of immigration and customs in Hartford.
Or perhaps they assumed that having “international” in the airport’s official name actually meant that it could handle international arrivals. Alas, flights from Canada don’t require such processing, because all CBP procedures are done at the respective Canadian airport, and those flights are treated as domestic arrivals once they land in the United States.
So it’s time the U.S. government rethought its “international airport” designation policies and made sure those designations match an airport’s true capabilities.
Continue reading about U.S. should change ‘international airport’ designation policy
How many busloads of passengers does it take to fill a Boeing 747? Ask the Frankfurt Airport.
With all the innovations and conveniences brought to modern airports, it’s inexplicable to me why airports in some of the most developed countries on the planet remind one of the Third World. Many travelers often complain about London’s Heathrow, but I find Frankfurt no less frustrating.
I realize there are not enough gates with jet bridges, and some airlines prefer “remote” gates because their use is cheaper, but I can’t remember flying through Frankfurt and not being taken to or from a plane by bus at least once. As of this week, I’ve had 111 takeoffs and landings at that airport.
As much as I hate the buses, by now I’m used to the prospect of having to put up with them, especially for flights to certain destinations. Most of the time, such flights are flown on narrow-body aircraft, such as Boeing 737 and Airbus 320, which can be filled with just two busloads.
This week, however, I experienced boarding a United Airlines Boeing 747 by bus. I was sure the flight wouldn’t leave on time, and I was right. I can hardly wait for the expansion of Terminal 1 to be completed.
What’s even harder for me to understand is why there aren’t enough gates with jetways at the much newer Munich Airport. I was also disappointed by the transfer experience there this week. With 52 takeoffs and landings, this was the first time I had to change terminals. I arrived at Terminal 1 — courtesy of another bus — and it took me about 45 minutes to reach Terminal 2. The signage was very poor, and the shuttle bus between the terminals runs only once every 20 minutes.
U.S. airports may have their problems, but when was the last time you were taken to the plane by bus?
It doesn’t happen very often that I fly a new route on United Airlines, especially out of Washington — it seems I’ve flown a huge number of them. But my 467th United flight this week was on the relatively new nonstop service to Moscow.
That flight is flown on a Boeing 767, which means that it’s reconfigured with the new truly flat business-class seats. Even better, upgrading to business on that flight is usually fairly easy, and I was on a pretty high M fare, so I never had any doubt my upgrade would clear.
By the time that happened a week before the flight, I had two choices in terms of window seating: a forward-facing seat in the row before the last or a rear-facing seat in the first row of the business cabin. About six months ago, I would have chosen the first option, but after flying backward from San Francisco to Sydney in December, the direction doesn’t bother me anymore. Each couple of seats feels very much like a private compartment, and you don’t really see anything outside that compartment while seated, so you forget there are other passengers facing in a different direction. I chose the first row because it’s away from the galley and the coach cabin, which makes it quieter and less trafficked.
It was a standard United flight in terms of the service — pretty good, but nothing spectacular. My glass of water never remained empty for too long. A couple of flight attendants asked if I worked for United, because I looked familiar — that tells you how often I’m on those planes.
My routine on long-haul flights begins with changing into my plane pajamas, which are given to first-class passengers on some non-U.S. carriers — this time, I’d taken a set from Lufthansa, but I usually rotate them with sets from SWISS or Singapore Airlines. I used to change after takeoff, but by the time the seat-belt sign is off, the service has already begun, and I’d rather not be in the flight attendants’ way.
During takeoff, I read newspapers — usually the Financial Times, where I used to write, and the International Herald Tribune on flights originating outside the United States. Then I turned on my entertainment system and start a film — “Valentine’s Day” was the first one I watched. It didn’t do well at the box office when it was released in February, despite the all-star cast and the director Gary Marshall, who also did “Pretty Woman.” I thought it was good enough for a plane ride.
After dinner — not-so-tasty chicken breast and cheesecake — and Chardonnay, it was bedtime. The flight left as 5 p.m., so it was too early to sleep. I tried really hard but not very successfully. At least I had a long and nice rest in a flat bed. Later, I watched another film — the very good documentary, “Celine: Through the Eyes of the World.”
Breakfast was disappointing, as it usually is in United business — just a croissant and fruit — and way behind competition, but United has never excelled at its soft product. Only first class gets eggs for breakfast.
This was my seventh time in Moscow, but the first at Domodedovo Airport — I found it much nicer than Sheremetevo. It was my 202th airport overall, according to my profile on FlightMemory.
Continue reading about Flying new United route — rare occurrence
The observation that everybody is a TV critic was made a long time ago, but in the last few years I’ve also noticed that most people think they know how to travel — both how to book a trip and how to handle all aspects of the journey.
At the same time, we keep hearing and reading horror stories about mistreated and overcharged passengers, ruined vacations, missed weddings or funerals. Those tales often end with the affected travelers’ solemn pledge never to fly the airline that wronged them again. But are the airlines the only ones to blame or should travelers share at least part of the responsibility?
Having flown almost 2 million miles and visited more than 80 countries, I’ve seen it all –- airline agents who offer completely different answers to the same questions, and others who simply make up rules to avoid dealing with an issue; flight attendants whose dislike for their job is evident in everything they do on board; rude and demanding passengers who fail to recognize when an airline employee actually does them a favor… MORE
Continue reading about Time for travel school — you are invited
