Thomsonfly UK to fly USA domestic?


#1

flightaware.com/live/flight/TOM951unless they got lost


#2

Don’t forget to add a space before and after the URL: flightaware.com/live/flight/TOM951

Although not has common as it used to be, it’s still not rare for a foreign airline to operate flights between USA cities. The airline may be able to carry passengers between the domestic cities provided the they are eventually continuing on or coming from a foreign point.

Many cargo flights operated by Japan, Cargolux, China, etc., operate between USA cities. They don’t have the right to carry cargo between the USA cities.

Back in the days when aircraft didn’t have such long ranges, there were many foreign airlines that operated between the west coast and HNL. Qantas, Air New Zealand, Korean, Japan, and others all had flights originiting in LAX or SFO that stopped off in HNL before continuing on to their home countries. In many cases the passengers were allowed to stopover in HNL.

A few months ago I saw a British Airways flight that flew between ORD and IAH as part of a flight to/from LHR.

Based on TOM951’a history, I would say the flight is a positioning flight.


#3

Don’t forget ANC as a stop too.
I don’t remember the details but under the open skies agreement with the UK Thompson may be able to fly domestic US with no restrictions now.

John


#4

Nope. The open skies agreement doesn’t allow for foreign airlines to fly domestically. At least not now. Who knows what happens if a socialist gets elected next week.


#5

OK, I thought they had been talking about it.
Socialist? I think a true open skies agreement would be more Capitalist than Socialist.


#6

You’re probably right. In any case, I think it would be a bad idea myself.


#7

“Open skies” only applies to international routes John. Cabotage prevents foreign airlines from carrying passengers between US cities, or ports actually as the law was originally formulated to apply to vessels carrying passengers and/or cargo. Cabotage provisions restrict the carriage of goods or passengers between United States ports to U.S. built and flagged vessels, although as applied to the aviation industry the “US built” restriction has been eased.

E.g., imagine China Airlines flies from NY to Beijing with a stop in LAX enroute. You can’t buy a ticket from NYC to LAX as that would be against cabotage. The law is so prohibitive that you couldn’t purchase a ticket on Air Canada from JFK to CYYZ connecting to a flight to SFO. Even though each leg is legal, taken together they are against cabotage.

It’s the reason that most Alaska cruises leave from Vancouver, BC rather than Seattle. The (primarily) foreign flagged vessels need to start their voyages from a “foreign” port in order to be legal.


#8

I understand cabotage, we have to be careful even as a private airplane.
I thought that unrestricted fifth freedom had been discussed with the EU although I was pretty sure it had not been agreed on. Just couldn’t remember for sure.


#9

Way OT, but Canadian vessels can run trips between two US points on the Great Lakes.


#10

Canadian railroads can and do service entirely domestic routes within the USA.

Think you are talking about the 8th freedom.

FREEDOMS OF THE AIR

First Freedom of the Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State or States to fly across its territory without landing (also known as a First Freedom Right).

Second Freedom of the Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State or States to land in its territory for non-traffic purposes (also known as a Second Freedom Right).

Third Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State to put down, in the territory of the first State, traffic coming from the home State of the carrier (also known as a Third Freedom Right).

Fourth Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State to take on, in the territory of the first State, traffic destined for the home State of the carrier (also known as a Fourth Freedom Right).

Fifth Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State to put down and to take on, in the territory of the first State, traffic coming from or destined to a third State (also known as a Fifth Freedom Right).

ICAO characterizes all “freedoms” beyond the Fifth as “so-called” because only the first five “freedoms” have been officially recognized as such by international treaty.

Sixth Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, of transporting, via the home State of the carrier, traffic moving between two other States (also known as a Sixth Freedom Right). The so-called Sixth Freedom of the Air, unlike the first five freedoms, is not incorporated as such into any widely recognized air service agreements such as the “Five Freedoms Agreement”.

Seventh Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, granted by one State to another State, of transporting traffic between the territory of the granting State and any third State with no requirement to include on such operation any point in the territory of the recipient State, i.e the service need not connect to or be an extension of any service to/from the home State of the carrier.

Eighth Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege, in respect of scheduled international air services, of transporting cabotage traffic between two points in the territory of the granting State on a service which originates or terminates in the home country of the foreign carrier or (in connection with the so-called Seventh Freedom of the Air) outside the territory of the granting State (also known as a Eighth Freedom Right or “consecutive cabotage”).

Ninth Freedom of The Air - the right or privilege of transporting cabotage traffic of the granting State on a service performed entirely within the territory of the granting State (also known as a Ninth Freedom Right or “stand alone” cabotage).

Source: ICAO


#11

Yup, you’re right. My other hand was busy so I couldn’t count that high.


#12

TMI. We won’t ask what it was doing. http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/CheckM8/wankersmile.gif


#13

I was just recently discussing cabotage with my DIL as she was dealing with some scheduling problems with some of her employer’s aircraft for the same reason, unplanned cabotage.

Well yeah, but I was referring to FOREIGN vessels. :laughing:

Actually, it’s not a blanket agreement for all carriage on the Great Lakes, it only applies to some of the ore boats and a few minor passenger routes. Takes an act of Congress, literally, to allow for “foreign” carriage between two US ports.

Cite?


#14

Canadian National
Canadian Pacific
USA railroads are also allowed to operate in Canada.


#15

RR industry I really have no biz meddling in, but it sure looks like CN and CP based on the provided Wiki references only show FREIGHT rail services and not passenger services…

I went to the individual RR websites and a cursory review didn’t reveal a schedule to verify… But it was a cursory review only so I could have easily missed something.

I don’t think that these freedom acts apply to freight, does it???

Sure would be nice to see a more credible source then something that is easily changed by the general public…


#16

CN’s US operations are wholly owned and operated by Grand Trunk Corporation, a US corporation and the remaining shell of the old Grant Trunk Railroad.

CP’s US operations are generally split between two US holding companies, Soo Lines and the Delaware and Hudson RR.

While NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) has allowed for “foreign” railroads to own US lines, the US operations are confined to US owned rolling stock for use between US cities. So, under the letter of the cabotage laws, no Canadian RR provides carriage between US cities, although their wholly owned US subsidiaries can and do.


#17

The Chicago Convention also applies to cargo.

Railroad timetables are very difficult to come by. Timetables for freight railroads are also unlike airline timetables in that they usually don’t show departure and arrival times. Many trains are not scheduled so having a schedule wouldn’t be useful.

That said, here’s some schedules for CSX. (Note: These appear to be unofficial). Notice that many, if not all, of the schedules have a disclaimer: “TIMES ARE EXAMPLES ONLY ASSIGNMENTS SUBJECT TO CHANGE”.

In any case, Canadian railroads are allowed to operate domestically within the USA and vice versa. I’m not sure whether Mexican railroads are allowed to operate domestic services within the USA.

For additional information on railroads check out Trains Magazine, Railfan and Railroad Magazine, Railroad.net or the Association of American Railroads.


#18

This is what I was thinking…

Thus me checking to see if I could get a Canadian owned train company to take me from “anytown” US of A to “anytown” US of A within the great US of A. on a scheduled service

This stuff is new to me, just learning from this thread alone.


#19

However, my searching of the web and reading of railroad magazines seems to indicate the letter has been tossed out. :slight_smile:

Edit: By saying “tossed out,” I mean that it’s not uncommon to see a train operated by a fully-owned American subsidiary of a Canadian railroad, especially CN, operating with CN locomotives and a lot of CN cars in trail.


#20

But as you don’t have X-Ray vision you can’t see that the CN liveried cars contain products from CA heading south to NOLA for transhipment overseas, not products being transported between two US cities.

Same as the vast influx of Mexican trucks are able to take shipments from Mexico to the US and vice versa, but they’re not supposed to take shipments between US cities.