Cargo
capable of serving any commodity driven downturns, and that means rapid investment. There are fi rm plans going forward for years that will only bring more transportation requirements,” he remarks. But how long will it take these economies to develop suffi cient critical mass to establish themselves as cargo markets?
North American alternatives In the case of Krasnoyarsk, the hub ambitions extend to North America as well as the Asia–Europe axis.
Back in 2007 ABC, which runs a B747 freighter network between Europe and Asia-Pacifi c over its Russian hubs in Moscow and Krasnoyarsk, was looking to launch fl ights from its Siberian hub to Canada and on to Houston on a transpolar routing. This would link traffi c out of China to the airline’s North American departures. The downturn in 2008 put those ambitions on the back burner, but they have not been shelved offi cially. The transpolar routing would undermine the status of Anchorage on the Asia–US route, but the Alaskan authorities appear unfazed. Marc Luiken, deputy commissioner of aviation for the Department of Transportation and Public Utilities of the State of Alaska, says that a transpolar routing might work on some niche sectors, but he does not see a signifi cant
www.routesonline.com
competitive threat from Siberia. “Our location can’t be beaten for fuel-payload ratio,” he declares.
The fuel-payload ratio is linked to the refueling at Anchorage and Fairbanks, which also provide seafood exports to top up fl ights going west. Airlines welcome the additional cargo, but it is not a real magnet for them. “We stop in Anchorage anyway for fuel. It helps to pick up some seafood, but we wouldn’t stop just to pick up the seafood,” says Shawn McWhorter, president for the Americas of Nippon Cargo Airlines. A stronger point in Anchorage’s favour than its seafood exports are the exemption authority for Alaska’s international gateways, which the US Department of Transportation reinstated in August, and the Stevens amendment. This allows non-US airlines to carry international cargo between US points as part of an interline itinerary, provided the interline connection occurs in Alaska and the cargo moved on the domestic leg is carried on behalf of a US airline under a codeshare or block-space agreement. The exemption authority allows fl exible on-line transfers, change of gauge, the combination of US and international traffi c, and the free transfer of cargo between any airlines permitted to land in Alaska, if the origin an destination points of the freight are outside the US. These transfer options, which were implemented by the US
authorities on a unilateral basis, apply only to Anchorage and Fairbanks. However, so far, they have generated only limited interest. Transloading activities at Anchorage are largely confi ned to FedEx, UPS and Polar Air Cargo, which carry transpacifi c traffi c for DHL Express under a 10-year block-space agreement. Japan Airlines and Thai Airways have some limited transfer activities at the airport, but most Asian carriers have shown little inclination to take advantage of these opportunities. “We don’t see a strategic hub for us in Alaska,” Nippon Cargo Airlines McWhorter says.
That said, Strategic Aviation Solutions International’s Wraight argues that forwarders can play a key role in developing air cargo gateways, pointing to multi-national logistics giant Panalpina. The forwarder was the driver behind the development of Silk Way traffi c at Baku and the involvement of Cargolux at the airport, he says. However, so far, none of the top multi-national forwarders has embraced any of the aspiring hubs in Central Asia or Siberia. Panalpina has developed Urumqi as a transfer point for rail traffi c out of China to dedicated freighter fl ights to Europe, but no other agent or carrier has gone for this point – or not yet, anyway.
RN
49
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84