CLT-GRU

[gaucho99]

So when are we supposed to start clt-gru? I thought it was in Jan 2011 but I have not heard anything recently and nothing is loaded into the res system yet.

 

[autofixer]

I have heard both March and June...who knows? I think the hold up is the Brazilian government. We are in a trade war and a currency war with them at the present time.

 

[FutureUScapt]

The plan from the beginning was to begin flights in Nov/Dec 2011.

 

[autofixer]

The plan from the beginning was to begin flights in Nov/Dec 2011.

A New Approach to CLT-Sao Paulo
Posted July 19th, 2010 at 12:41 PM by Michael Lowrey

US Airways is applying, subjected to U.S. approval, to start a second Brazil flight, this one to Sao Paulo, Brazil’s largest market, as soon as January 12, 2011. The airline began daily flights to Rio de Janeiro (GIG) this past December.

 

[gaucho99]

Once we start GRU, I would think it would make more sense to fly clt-gru-gig so we could cover both markets with one aircraft and then use the other aircraft to start clt-eze. Or maybe do clt-gig-eze as one flt and use the other for clt-gru.

 

[autofixer]

Once we start GRU, I would think it would make more sense to fly clt-gru-gig so we could cover both markets with one aircraft and then use the other aircraft to start clt-eze. Or maybe do clt-gig-eze as one flt and use the other for clt-gru.

GIG for the most part is jammed full.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

So why not start a PHL- Brazil flight?

 

[IberiaMAL]

So why not start a PHL- Brazil flight?

Because of the lack of aircraft and it would compete with Charlotte.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Because of the lack of aircraft and it would compete with Charlotte.

Why would it compete with CLT? Other than operating from a larger O&D(PHL) why not not run it. Does CLT-CDG/FRA/FCO/MAD compete with PHL? Flying from PHL-Brazil, its better to take AA thru MIA, more direct.

 

[IberiaMAL]

Why would it compete with CLT? Other than operating from a larger O&D(PHL) why not not run it. Does CLT-CDG/FRA/FCO/MAD compete with PHL? Flying from PHL-Brazil, its better to take AA thru MIA, more direct.

It Might be better to connect on AA from PHL via MIA, but that's not the US Airways network.


Because with them other markets, there is enough demand to go around and Charlotte not only can relieve some of the gate restraints of Philadelphia, but also is more customer friendly, lower fee's, and better connection opportunities. I'm not sure, but I also think GIG/GRU ties up more aircraft than European destinations do, but I'm not exactly sure.


Charlotte relies on North Eastern traffic to connect onto GIG already, and Charlotte has more connection opportunities than Philadelphia. In other words, any traffic Philadelphia can connect, Charlotte can connect more. If you have philadelphia competing with Charlotte on capturing traffic from PHL, NYC, BOS, etc., it would rob Charlotte of connections. Philadelphia is out of the way for some connections such as Miami, Houston, Chicago, LA, etc. and Charlotte has more destinations than Philadelphia to connect anyway.


Geographic location. And GIG - and I'm going to assume GRU also - would fare better in Charlotte based on Geographic Location.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I'm not sure, but I also think GIG/GRU ties up more aircraft than European destinations do, but I'm not exactly sure.

If it's scheduled like CLT-GIG it would take 2 planes per route - the outbound and inbound pass each other enroute because the plane sits on the ground in GIG so long.

Jim

 

[BuffaloJoe]

It Might be better to connect on AA from PHL via MIA, but that's not the US Airways network.




Charlotte relies on North Eastern traffic to connect onto GIG already, and Charlotte has more connection opportunities than Philadelphia. In other words, any traffic Philadelphia can connect, Charlotte can connect more. If you have philadelphia competing with Charlotte on capturing traffic from PHL, NYC, BOS, etc., it would rob Charlotte of connections. Philadelphia is out of the way for some connections such as Miami, Houston, Chicago, LA, etc. and Charlotte has more destinations than Philadelphia to connect anyway.

Philadelphia would not need to rely on connections as much as Charlotte does. PHL can support its self. Look at TLV, ATH, ZRH and others. PHL metro area itself is larger in population than Charlotte and Atlanta combined. I am not saying stop CLT-Brazil, but use the PHL flight as a companion flight. As a 2nd flight. CLT-Brazil if not profitable should be transfered to PHL, but as it is now let CLT have that flight, just add PHL as the 2nd flight, no sense making CLT have 2 flights.

 

[FutureUScapt]

A New Approach to CLT-Sao Paulo
Posted July 19th, 2010 at 12:41 PM by Michael Lowrey

US Airways is applying, subjected to U.S. approval, to start a second Brazil flight, this one to Sao Paulo, Brazil’s largest market, as soon as January 12, 2011. The airline began daily flights to Rio de Janeiro (GIG) this past December.

I understand what the application to the DOT, and their subsequent response said; I'm telling you that the plan all along was to begin flights the following winter.

January 12th is the day after UA stops their holiday-only IAD-GIG nonstop flights and thus is the first day that US could begin leasing the slots. By having the lease start as of that date instead of as of Nov XX, 2011, it makes it nearly impossible for an airline like DL to post a counter-argument saying that "well, we would be prepared to use them starting in January" (although no airline has protested UA holding these frequencies dormant for 49 weeks a year for the past two years so that would be a tough argument to make anyhow).

It is my understanding that US is still working on obtaining slot/gate times at GRU from the Brazilian government, which is not exactly a walk in the park.

Why would it compete with CLT? Other than operating from a larger O&D(PHL) why not not run it.

IberiaMAL actually spells it out rather nicely. Simply put, the O&D differential of PHL (still, quite low) versus CLT is not enough to offset the poor geography of PHL when it comes to S.America. PHL is less than ideal for west coast connections and all but out of the question for the all-important MCO traffic.

Also FWIW, PHL-GIG via MIA is in fact less direct than via CLT.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

IberiaMAL actually spells it out rather nicely. Simply put, the O&D differential of PHL (still, quite low) versus CLT is not enough to offset the poor geography of PHL when it comes to S.America. PHL is less than ideal for west coast connections and all but out of the question for the all-important MCO traffic.

Also FWIW, PHL-GIG via MIA is in fact less direct than via CLT.
[/quote}
I mean that if US needs to run a second flight, make it from PHL, not both CLT. If 1 Flight to GIG, 1 Flight to GRU, they should be from CLT. But if they want 2 GIG/GRU flights, 1 should be from PHL.

 

[FutureUScapt]

IberiaMAL actually spells it out rather nicely. Simply put, the O&D differential of PHL (still, quite low) versus CLT is not enough to offset the poor geography of PHL when it comes to S.America. PHL is less than ideal for west coast connections and all but out of the question for the all-important MCO traffic.

Also FWIW, PHL-GIG via MIA is in fact less direct than via CLT.
[/quote}
I mean that if US needs to run a second flight, make it from PHL, not both CLT. If 1 Flight to GIG, 1 Flight to GRU, they should be from CLT. But if they want 2 GIG/GRU flights, 1 should be from PHL.

Ah, gotcha.

I think this is a rather moot point though, as it will be a long time (if ever) before US adds a second flight to either of those destinations. I can at least fathom a situation where US would someday add a second flight to GRU, in which case I would expect it to be from PHL, but I can't even imagine US ever adding a second flight out of GIG.