Is it still just one US stop in a row....?

OtisAir

OtisAir

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
642
Location
Lansdale
Display Name
OtisAir
Home Airfield
KPTW
When I was doing my undergrad work with ERAU, I remember (I think) being told that non-US based air carriers could not land in the US more than once (in a row) without exitting the country and landing elsewhere first.

Perhaps more easily understood, A European carrier couldn't fly from Paris to New York To Chicago To Los Angeles To Mexico City. They would have to (perhaps) do Paris to New York to Toronto to Chicago to Alberta to Los Angeles to Mexico City.

Is that (still) true?

I know a fella (owns a NICE T34 Mentor) that just picked up a job with Virgin after being high up in the food chain with an american based carrier (got laid off) and just curious if he'll be doing the out-of-country-shuffle or not.

Thanks
 
OtisAir said:
When I was doing my undergrad work with ERAU, I remember (I think) being told that non-US based air carriers could not land in the US more than once (in a row) without exitting the country and landing elsewhere first.

Perhaps more easily understood, A European carrier couldn't fly from Paris to New York To Chicago To Los Angeles To Mexico City. They would have to (perhaps) do Paris to New York to Toronto to Chicago to Alberta to Los Angeles to Mexico City.

Is that (still) true?
Click to expand...

I think you remember it incorrectly. The issue is cabotage; air transportation within the borders of a nation is typically limited to domestic carriers. Air France could fly from Paris to New York and disembark passengers. They could then fly on to Chicago and disembark passengers that boarded in Paris. They could then fly on to Los Angeles and disembark passengers that boarded in Paris. In each case they'd be providing air transportation between Paris and US cities. They could not board passengers in New York or Chicago and disembark them in Chicago or Los Angeles.
 
Last edited:
As Tim said, a carrier could in theory make multiple stops in the same foreign country under Third/Fourth freedom rights (if agreed to in bilateral negotiations), but only to drop off passengers they carried in from elsewhere and pick up passengers not deplaning until they leave the country. However, since this isn't particularly cost-effective due to the increasing number empty seats as the flight progresses (folks from LA can fly cheaper by flying a full Air France flight to NY and then a full Jet Blue flight to LA), nobody cares to do it, but it could be negotiated.
 
Doesn't Qantas operate a JFK to LAX flight? Perhaps its the same situation as Mr McNicoll describes with Air France.
 
Last edited:
I'm starting to recollect now... Steve's correct, thanks
 
jasc15 said:
Doesn't Qantas operate a JFK to LAX flight? Perhaps its the same situation as Mr McNicoll describes with Air France.
Click to expand...

From the Wikipedia Article, Quanta flies a Sydney-JFK-LAX flight, but can only sell tickets from JFK-LAX provided that it contains a connecting flight using Quantas from LAX back to Australia somewhere, but not for Americans wanting to fly between JFK and LAX.
 
Saw something about this in the news a month or two ago - it was about charters and specifically for Canadian sports teams. The arguments were over whether a Canadian team (say an NHL team) that flew a charter into the US had to use a different, US based charter, when they traveled to their next US game.

I remember reading about this, but it didn't really sink in at the time so I don't know whatever came of it.
 
The rules are a bit different for charter and corporate flights than for regular airline travel.
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
"Charter" flights are governed by the same rules.
Click to expand...
Article 5 of the Chicago Convention seems to say otherwise.
Each contracting State agrees that all aircraft of the other contracting States, being aircraft not engaged in scheduled international air services shall have the right, subject to the observance of the terms of this Convention, to make flights into or in transit non-stop across its territory and to make stops for non-traffic purposes without the necessity of obtaining prior permission, and subject to the right of the State flown over to require landing.
Click to expand...
Only scheduled services are restricted by Article 6 to operating "with the special permission or other authorization of that State, and in accordance with the terms of such permission or authorization."
 
Ron Levy said:
Article 5 of the Chicago Convention seems to say otherwise.
Only scheduled services are restricted by Article 6 to operating "with the special permission or other authorization of that State, and in accordance with the terms of such permission or authorization."
Click to expand...



You need to go back and reread. You cannot "charter" say a DC-9 operated under a US Certificate and fly into Canada and pick up passengers (or Cargo) then deliver them to another destination in Canada.
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
You need to go back and reread. You cannot "charter" say a DC-9 operated under a US Certificate and fly into Canada and pick up passengers (or Cargo) then deliver them to another destination in Canada.
Click to expand...
Who said you could? I just said the rules were different. Unlike a scheduled operation, you do not need specific US permission to operate that hockey charter from Montreal to Chicago to Detroit to Montreal. You would need such permission to operate that as a scheduled service.
 
Like everything it's subject to negotiation. There are bilateral treaties that allow cabotage between certain countries, particularly in Europe. In fact, I don't know for sure but the Schengen Agreement may have formalized it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top