top | item 36717981

(no title)

wayne | 2 years ago

The article touches a little on flight costs, but as someone who'd love to visit sometime and never has, it annoys me how flights to Guam work. Given its location most airlines don't fly direct from the mainland, so many flights to Guam are from Asia. But, you can't buy a ticket from the US with a layover in Japan from JAL or with a layover in Korea from Korean Air because any flight with a US origin to a US destination can only be sold by a US carrier. That eliminates all Asian competition and the US airlines get a monopoly even though they barely fly there and many of these flights are codeshares being operated by Asian airlines!

discuss

order

r24y|2 years ago

Flight costs are a pain, and the flight durations are nothing to sneeze at either. I live out in Guam (my wife is stationed here with the Navy) and the two most common ways to get back to the mainland are via Tokyo (Narita) and Honolulu.

I would definitely encourage visiting if you have the means! I find there are two types of people here: those who feel limited by the island and its infrastructure (no Target, no Starbucks, etc.) and those who enjoy its incredible outdoor environment. Some of the best snorkeling and scuba diving in the world is right here, and as for hiking: we've been hiking very frequently for the two years since we arrived and haven't gotten bored yet. Depending on where you go on the island, the terrain and plant life looks very different.

i_am_proteus|2 years ago

No Target, but there's a very good Kmart! Plus, anyone with a military connection has access to the exchanges, which are effectively tax-free Targets.

Most of the domestic tourists I saw around Guam (I was stationed there for a stretch) were divers. I don't know that I'd recommend it for the average non-diving traveler over cheaper-to-get-to alternatives unless it's someone who's specifically looking for the remote character of Guam (and in that case, there are less developed islands that can be gotten to more cheaply).

seanmcdirmid|2 years ago

I thought about retiring in Guam someday since Medicare would actually work there. But I can’t imagine it is much nicer than Bali or some parts of Thailand I’m also thinking about (if my health is good 20 years later), and it’s definitely more expensive than.

CobaltFire|2 years ago

My family and I loved our time there (Navy as well).

We almost retired there, but my son's health condition(s) precludes that.

Space-A is how we flew back during our tour there, and if you know the tricks it work great. If you don't it's a nightmare.

WeylandYutani|2 years ago

I get the feeling that Hawaii takes all the US tourism for tropical islands. In a hypothetical scenario where Hawaii didn't exist maybe Guam would be more popular?

But maybe it's better this way.

Aerbil313|2 years ago

> those who feel limited by the island and its infrastructure (no Target, no Starbucks, etc.)

I hate those people. I live in a city of 1.5 million (there's everything here), and it's a constant background radiation talking point for a significant number of my highschool friends: how unfortunate they are that they don't live in the nearby city of 15 million. IME this constant moping has everything to do with the amount of social media one consumes daily.

smcin|2 years ago

Yes, under current airline treaties it's actually more complicated and takes longer to fly mainland US to Guam, than mainland US to the Philippines. Even though Guam is only a short 1500ml from the Philippines, and:

Philippine Airlines flights from west-coast US (SF, LA) refuel in Guam, since a 2006 "technical stop" agreement [0] (not allowed to pick up passengers on Guam, but can refuel and pick up supplies); at least during the winter headwinds, Nov-Mar [1]. Passengers can't even get out of the plane, you get to sit on the tarmac and watch the fuel tankers out the window for 45min in the predawn. I wanted to at least get out and see the inside of the terminal but absolutely not. ("Guam: the ultimate skiplagged challenge")

So you won't see this arrangement show up on any ticket engines, and they're not allowed say "Philippine Airlines flies to Guam". Are there any good articles on how current airline treaties affect routes and pricing in the Pacific?

[0]: "Guam replaces Honolulu as stop for PAL flights" https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2006/01/06/315333/guam-re...

[1]: "The one-hour technical stops are required during certain times of the year, particularly during the winter months of November to March, when headwinds are strong enough to affect aircraft flying westward across the Pacific." (to avoid exceeding MTOW)

[2]: discussed on https://www.pprune.org/south-asia-far-east/374507-pal-techni...

I'm sure Gordon Lightfoot (RIP) could have sung about treaties...

arcticbull|2 years ago

This is because of 'cabotage' rules, where foreign carriers aren't allowed to sell tickets between two domestic destinations, and except for EU carriers flying within EU countries, this is standard practice all over the world.

Qantas has historically had a similar stop in LAX en route to JFK, although new aircraft will allow them to start making the trip non-stop, in an initiative called 'project sunrise.' [1] I believe they are currently routing that flight with a stop in Auckland as QF3, although they are running AKL-JFK as a 5th freedom with pick-up rights in AKL.

I don't think it's true that it's faster to get to Philippines than Guam from the mainland - you just have to transit in Honolulu. SFO-HNL-GUM on United is 14h15, whereas the non-stop SFO-MNL is 14h35. Philippines only offers limited non-stop options to Manila - just LAX, SFO and JFK - so much of the time you'd be connecting either way, and that eliminates any advantages. After all, Honolulu is pretty much on the way to Guam based on the great circle arc. [2]

[1] https://www.qantas.com/au/en/about-us/our-company/fleet/new-...

[2] http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=SFO-HNL-GUM,+SFO-MNL

throwaway742|2 years ago

What if you had a medical emergency while on the tarmac in Guam?

TulliusCicero|2 years ago

I wish we'd get rid of this rule entirely. Just seems like naked protectionism, no?

If a non-US carrier abides by local regulations, I don't see an issue with letting them run domestic flights.

maxcan|2 years ago

In the past you could have made an argument about foreign airlines not being held to FAA standards.

But today, FAA knows exactly which jurisdictions regulate airlines to a comparable standard and which don’t. Denying cabotage and other higher rights to those airlines is 100%, as you say, naked protectionism.

fransje26|2 years ago

It's better than that. Those are IATA rules, and IATA has been functioning as a cartel more or less since it has been founded..

josephcsible|2 years ago

You make it sound like that's a US-specific rule, but there's an equivalent rule in basically every country (with some exceptions, the main one being between EU member states).

zoky|2 years ago

Given that many foreign airlines are at least in part government owned, this could be problematic. Do we really want Air China to come in and drastically undercut US based carriers in order to drive them out of business?

whalesalad|2 years ago

United goes direct from Honolulu

coredog64|2 years ago

You can also take the scenic route from HI to RMI to FSM. I can’t think of any reason to hang out in Majuro, but two of the FSM stops are great sightseeing destinations. On Pohnpei you can visit Nan Madol. If you’re into diving, there’s a huge number of Japanese warships sunk near Chuuk.

interrupt21h|2 years ago

This. Used for American Samoa...just make damn sure to make your connection. If it's anything like American Samoa, there are only a few flights a week. The smart move is to arrive a day early in Hawaii and spend the night

triceratops|2 years ago

Can't you buy 2 separate tickets?

rtpg|2 years ago

you can but you're going to pay more in general. There are a lot of pricing rules around layovers that make it cheaper than buying tickets separately (basically to give the airlines flexibility to utilize all their planes).

yongjik|2 years ago

That's going to be at least twice as expensive as one ticket with a layover.

messe|2 years ago

The issue then is if you have checked luggage.

jlmorton|2 years ago

> because any flight with a US origin to a US destination can only be sold by a US carrier.

That's not exactly true. It just requires the USA and the other country to have negotiated a Fifth Freedom agreement.

There are lots of foreign-owned airlines flying from the US with layovers and stopovers in other countries. For instance, I recently flew JFK->FRA->SIN on Singapore Airlines. And United even operates their Island Hopper route, Honolulu-Majuro-Kwajalein Atoll-Kosrae-Pohnpei-Truk-Guam, among many others.

fnordpiglet|2 years ago

I think you misunderstood. They said US->US destination has to be operated by a us carrier. JFK->FRA->SIN doesn’t have a US designation and United is a US carrier.

mushufasa|2 years ago

There used to be direct flights on Continental before they were acquired/merged by United

hiidrew|2 years ago

Sounds similar to the article's mention of the Jones Act and the issues it causes.

throwawaaarrgh|2 years ago

Dude. Just buy two separate round trip tickets.

alistairSH|2 years ago

And pray neither is delayed, causing you to miss the next leg.