Why No US Airlines to/from Manila?

[CardiacKid 2,309]

Good analysis - There are a lot of calculations that go into making a profitable run. vs what passengers are willing to spend.    I havn't done the numbers but I believe thats why the  777 is such a popular aircraft.     here is a link to a story  the worlds longest flights:

 

http://travel.usnews.com/features/Worlds_Longest_Flights/

 

Also here is a link to story about Singapore airlines cancelling its Worlds longest flight  NJ to singapore and LaX  Singapore because the

 

 

Gas guzzling A340 couldn't  make a profit on those routes:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2222956/Worlds-longest-commercial-non-stop-flights--Singapore-U-S--cancelled.html

We've taken the HK-JFK route twice on Cathay. The flight really doesn't seem any longer than the HK-LAX route due to the emphasis Cathay places on passenger service. I took Northwest once from Manila to Detroit and that flight seemed it would never end. Their 747 was old and shabby and the average age of the flight attendants was about 40. Unfortunately, their waist measurements matched their age. That was the last time I used a U.S. carrier to go to the Philippines. 

[SkyMan 23,709]

well your correct there but the reason is they Fire all the women who reach the old age of 35 in many countries ,,, called no job protection 

Yeah, you can't do that in the US.  We shoot ourselves in the foot at every turn.

[bounder 1,157]

indeed it is. There are classical string quartets at every corner, in the Phlippines.

 

composed mostly and unusually, by girls.

 

Really, I thought it was the Viagra and Cialis salesmen. 

[Buko Beach 5,085]

The reason more US based carriers do not fly direct to MNL is money. Currently the Philippines do not have an "open skies" policy when it comes to foreign carriers, but that could change. As a result any foreign carrier that wants to rent gate space and land at an RP based airport has to pay hefty fees that local carriers (PAL, CP, ect) do not have to pay. The extra tax-fee makes flying those routes unprofitable for foreign carriers and most pulled out of the Philippines when the extra tax/fee was implemented years ago.

 

On March 5th 2013 the EU lifted a ban on Philippine based carriers. This clears the way for MNL flights to the EU which would most likely be flown by PAL should they choose to do so. 

 

PAL has filed plans to fly direct from MNL-Moscow and MNL-Hungry by late 2013. They also have plans to start MNL-Darwin flights within the next few months and fly direct MNL-Kuwait starting April 2013.

 

PAL currently has four B777-300ER that allow it to fly non-stop long haul routes to Vancouver, Toronto and Australia. PAL is scheduled to receive 2 more B777-300ER planes in 2013 and wants to put them to use on a rumored MNL-New York and MNL-ORD direct routes. Currently all Philippine based carriers are under Category 2 FAA designation. With the EU lifting the ban on Philippine based carriers it's a sign the FAA can't be far behind. Failing an FAA upgrade PAL is working on a wet-lease agreement with a Cayman Islands based carrier in an end-around move to fly direct into some east coast USA routes.

 

PAL's dreamliner orders are currently delayed (along with every other carrier) and PAL might switch them to additional B777 orders. Nothing firm on this yet.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_carriers_banned_in_the_European_Union

[samatm 2,994]

The reason more US based carriers do not fly direct to MNL is money. Currently the Philippines do not have an "open skies" policy when it comes to foreign carriers, but that could change. As a result any foreign carrier that wants to rent gate space and land at an RP based airport has to pay hefty fees that local carriers (PAL, CP, ect) do not have to pay. The extra tax-fee makes flying those routes unprofitable for foreign carriers and most pulled out of the Philippines when the extra tax/fee was implemented years ago.

 

On March 5th 2013 the EU lifted a ban on Philippine based carriers. This clears the way for MNL flights to the EU which would most likely be flown by PAL should they choose to do so. 

 

So on March 9 the RP  repealled that CCT tax and VAT on foreign carriers - see post # 23.   Looks like Manila is serious about getting in the Tourism game.    

[udonthani 2,027]

So on March 9 the RP  repealled that CCT tax and VAT on foreign carriers - see post # 23.   Looks like Manila is serious about getting in the Tourism game.    

trouble with that analysis is that plenty of people - i.e. normal tourists who are looking for somewhere clean and safe to take the kids - would not go to the Philippines even if you paid them.

[Mandingo 3,625]

 

 

PAL has filed plans to fly direct from MNL-Moscow and MNL-Hungry by late 2013.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_carriers_banned_in_the_European_Union

 

 

I don't know how excited I am to have a bunch of Russians start pouring into the Philippines. Last time I was in Pattaya there were Russians everywhere and if you think Koreans are bad then you ain't saw anything yet.

 

 

The reason more US based carriers do not fly direct to MNL is money. Currently the Philippines do not have an "open skies" policy when it comes to foreign carriers, but that could change. As a result any foreign carrier that wants to rent gate space and land at an RP based airport has to pay hefty fees that local carriers (PAL, CP, ect) do not have to pay. The extra tax-fee makes flying those routes unprofitable for foreign carriers and most pulled out of the Philippines when the extra tax/fee was implemented years ago.

 

On March 5th 2013 the EU lifted a ban on Philippine based carriers. This clears the way for MNL flights to the EU which would most likely be flown by PAL should they choose to do so. 

 

PAL has filed plans to fly direct from MNL-Moscow and MNL-Hungry by late 2013. They also have plans to start MNL-Darwin flights within the next few months and fly direct MNL-Kuwait starting April 2013.

 

PAL currently has four B777-300ER that allow it to fly non-stop long haul routes to Vancouver, Toronto and Australia. PAL is scheduled to receive 2 more B777-300ER planes in 2013 and wants to put them to use on a rumored MNL-New York and MNL-ORD direct routes. Currently all Philippine based carriers are under Category 2 FAA designation. With the EU lifting the ban on Philippine based carriers it's a sign the FAA can't be far behind. Failing an FAA upgrade PAL is working on a wet-lease agreement with a Cayman Islands based carrier in an end-around move to fly direct into some east coast USA routes.

 

PAL's dreamliner orders are currently delayed (along with every other carrier) and PAL might switch them to additional B777 orders. Nothing firm on this yet.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_carriers_banned_in_the_European_Union

 

I don't know how excited I am to have a bunch of Russians start pouring into the Philippines. Last time I was in Pattaya there were Russians everywhere and if you think Koreans are bad then you ain't saw anything yet.

[SkyMan 23,709]

 

PAL is scheduled to receive 2 more B777-300ER planes in 2013 and wants to put them to use on a rumored MNL-New York and MNL-ORD direct routes.

I'd actually look a tad more favorably at going through Manila if I could then go direct to Chicago assuming a reasonable price and if I could get the Cebu-Manila leg on the same itinerary for an int'; baggage allowance.  I know of a relatively cheap bus service from Chiacgo to the places I might want to go.

[BossHog 38,527]

 

I don't know how excited I am to have a bunch of Russians start pouring into the Philippines

 

too late. they're here like rust on a muffler and it ain't pretty.

 

been dealing with them all this week.

 

One hates to generalize, but the ones I've met in the past few years have been crass, entitled, and abrasive.

 

and sunburned. haha

[miles-high 3,917]

 

PAL currently has four B777-300ER that allow it to fly non-stop long haul routes to Vancouver, Toronto and Australia. PAL is scheduled to receive 2 more B777-300ER planes in 2013 and wants to put them to use on a rumored MNL-New York and MNL-ORD direct routes.

 

Perhaps you are mistaken for B777-200LR… -300ER has shorter range than -200LR, see

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/longer_range/index.html

and MNL-JFK is 8,520 nm (great circle) therefore -300ER will definitely not make it there...

 

[sperry 557]

PAL has filed plans to fly direct from MNL-Moscow and MNL-Hungry by late 2013.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_carriers_banned_in_the_European_Union

 

 

I don't know how excited I am to have a bunch of Russians start pouring into the Philippines. Last time I was in Pattaya there were Russians everywhere and if you think Koreans are bad then you ain't saw anything yet.

 

 

 

I don't know how excited I am to have a bunch of Russians start pouring into the Philippines. Last time I was in Pattaya there were Russians everywhere and if you think Koreans are bad then you ain't saw anything yet.

 

Unfortunately those are the truest words that anybody ever wrote on the whole forum.  Its gonna be a disaster.

[broden 57,115]

Unfortunately those are the truest words that anybody ever wrote on the whole forum.  Its gonna be a disaster.

yeah but driving wise they'll fit right in

[SkyMan 23,709]

 

and MNL-JFK is 8,520 nm (great circle) therefore -300ER will definitely not make it there...

Well, you just have to get over the pole and then it's all downhill.

[Buko Beach 5,085]

Perhaps you are mistaken for B777-200LR… -300ER has shorter range than -200LR, see

 

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/longer_range/index.html

 

and MNL-JFK is 8,520 nm (great circle) therefore -300ER will definitely not make it there...

 

 

 

 

Nope, not mistaken. PAL currently has four (4) B777-300ER jets in it's fleet with 2 additional B777-300ER on tap to be delivered sometime in 2013. I looked at the link you provided and you're correct the 200 does have a longer range. Maybe PAL can get ahold of the 200 instead of the signed Dreamliner orders, that would make alot more sense. But when it comes to the Philippines not much makes sense so I dunno. PAL bought the 300's so that's their problem. You're a pilot and you know your tin. I'm only a passenger and a sleepy snoring gwapo one at that. 

 

Also, when PAL flies direct MNL-YYZ (Toronto) the flight takes off from MNL and roughly skirts Toyko, then Russia and then passes over the Bering Sea, Anchorage, Yukon and across the northern edges of a few western provinces and into Toronto. PAL lists the flight as 8228 actual flight miles but on the boeing website the 777-300 listed range is 7930miles. Strange. On the return PAL flies Toronto (YYZ) then lands in Vancouver (YVR) to refuel and takes on more passengers and cargo before taking off for Manila. The distance from Toronto to JFK is an additional 360 flight miles.

 

Anyways I'm just posting what I heard about PAL. So far everything I have heard in the past happened.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlines

[sperry 557]

Nope, not mistaken. PAL currently has four (4) B777-300ER jets in it's fleet with 2 additional B777-300ER on tap to be delivered sometime in 2013. I looked at the link you provided and you're correct the 200 does have a longer range. Maybe PAL can get ahold of the 200 instead of the signed Dreamliner orders, that would make alot more sense. But when it comes to the Philippines not much makes sense so I dunno. PAL bought the 300's so that's their problem. You're a pilot and you know your tin. I'm only a passenger and a sleepy snoring gwapo one at that. 

 

Also, when PAL flies direct MNL-YYZ (Toronto) the flight takes off from MNL and roughly skirts Toyko, then Russia and then passes over the Bering Sea, Anchorage, Yukon and across the northern edges of a few western provinces and into Toronto. PAL lists the flight as 8228 actual flight miles but on the boeing website the 777-300 listed range is 7930miles. Strange. On the return PAL flies Toronto (YYZ) then lands in Vancouver (YVR) to refuel and takes on more passengers and cargo before taking off for Manila. The distance from Toronto to JFK is an additional 360 flight miles.

 

Anyways I'm just posting what I heard about PAL. So far everything I have heard in the past happened.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlines

maybe be its miles and nautical miles