It has been an absolutely wild few days in the Middle East, as the United States and Israel launched an attack on Iran, which took out some top Iranian officials. In response, Iran launched drone attacks on nearby countries, including targeting airports, hotels, and more.
To see fires at multiple hotels in Dubai, plus major damage at Dubai Airport, makes for some shocking imagery. Along those lines, that brings me to what I’d consider to be an interesting question to keep an eye out for as time goes on…
In this post:
Could this be a turning point for some Gulf carriers?
Let me start by acknowledging that of course there are massive geopolitical implications to what we’ve seen in the past few days, and that goes way beyond the airline industry. However, this blog is about travel, so that’s what I’d like to focus on, while acknowledging that there are many ways this can all evolve.
Airlines like Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, etc., have all become extremely “mainstream” over the years, with so many travelers choosing to fly with the airlines when moving between other regions. So whether it’s Australians looking to travel to the UK, or Europeans looking to vacation in Southeast Asia, airlines like Emirates have become huge competitors in those markets, going head-to-head against “local” carriers.
Destinations like Dubai, and airlines like Emirates, have enjoyed such a high level of success thanks to the incredible safety within the country for visitors (both real and perceived). While the Middle East is a region that has seen its fair share of conflict over time, places like the UAE thrive on staying out of the drama, despite their geographic proximity.
So to see Dubai Airport sustain damage, and to see a fire at a hotel like the Burj Al Arab that’s due to an attack by an Iranian drone, certainly isn’t great for tourism in the country. Now, let me say that personally I’d still feel comfortable traveling to Dubai, etc. Even as we see some pretty rough images, the actual number of fatalities seems to be very limited, and that’s where I try to be rational.
The UAE offers incredible safety in so many areas for visitors, and here in the United States we have our own dangers that we try to overlook (like gun violence). So as I see it (at least as of now), places like the UAE may have more of an issue with optics than anything else.
Will these attacks change consumer behavior going forward?
In the short term, we’ve seen the major Gulf carriers all pause operations for an extended period of time, which is pretty unprecedented, at least since the start of the pandemic. Currently the plan is for Emirates flights to and from Dubai to stay grounded until at least Tuesday afternoon, so we’re talking a three day suspension of service (minimum).
But once operations do resume, I can’t help but wonder whether it’ll once again just be business as usual, or will the Gulf carriers return to a slightly new normal? Like I said, historically people have gone out of their way to fly with Gulf carriers thanks to the great service and competitive pricing.
And while I think all Gulf hubs are still incredibly safe, I can’t help but think that this situation will change optics of places like Dubai for some amount of time. I’m by no means suggesting that a majority of Emirates’ potential customers will just book away on principle.
However, I wouldn’t be surprised if a not-insignificant number of travelers might say “you know, I’ll just fly nonstop on a European or Southeast Asian carrier, rather than connecting through the Middle East.” For that matter, a traveler can also arrive at that conclusion on an entirely rational basis, without directly considering safety — if they book a Gulf carrier, they might be concerned about how reliably they can get to their destination, and if we might see more airspace closures.
Then again, I also believe nothing is actually permanent. For example, look at all of the doom and gloom predictions we saw after the start of the coronavirus pandemic, yet the airline industry bounced back quite nicely.
So we’ll see how it all plays out. I would guess that we might see a short term dip in demand for Gulf carriers for travelers to and from some regions, while I’m sure in the long run, things will normalize.
Bottom line
It has been quite the several days in the Middle East, as Iran was attacked, and then responded by sending drones basically anywhere it could. While many Gulf carriers are still grounded, I can’t help but wonder about the longer term recovery.
Places like Dubai have thrived on the image of being incredibly safe. And while I think nothing has really changed, these attacks — and images of the airport and hotels being damaged — aren’t at all good. I have to imagine this could be a rough period for Gulf carriers, especially as some people may avoid future bookings just out of an abundance of caution over potential operational issues.
How do you see the Gulf carrier recovery playing out with all of this?
Pretty tasteless to describe damage to airports as ‘shocking’, but a bombed school with hundreds of children dead or injured doesn’t even get a mention?
Depraved doesn’t even cover it the optics of it…
Right now, with the airports closed and people largely staying away from major targets, the risk of being killed due to this conflict is extremely low in the Gulf Middle Eastern countries (outside of Iran). Iranian drones are mainly targeting the major attractions in Dubai, so logically one should stay away from those and any other potential targets for as long as the Iranians keep launching attacks (and likely for as long as the US...
Right now, with the airports closed and people largely staying away from major targets, the risk of being killed due to this conflict is extremely low in the Gulf Middle Eastern countries (outside of Iran). Iranian drones are mainly targeting the major attractions in Dubai, so logically one should stay away from those and any other potential targets for as long as the Iranians keep launching attacks (and likely for as long as the US and Israel keep having military offensives in Iran). If you do that, your risk of harm is very low.
I would still feel comfortable traveling through Dubai, Doha, and other Middle Eastern airports. Heck, I was supposed to on Saturday night, but of course my flight got cancelled. I think the perception of the UAE/Qatar no longer being safe and being lumped into the rest of the Middle East will occur from quite a few western consumers for the time being. But I expect it to be short term (if the US/Israel military campaign in Iran is also short term). I don't expect this to change consumer behavior for people from certain countries, given that they are used to such conflicts and know the risk to themselves is very low (since airlines eer on the side of caution). Those passengers also have limited options to fly the itineraries they are taking via other airlines that aren't Gulf carriers). For example, I was trying to fly to Pakistan this past weekend to see a sick relative. It is honestly very difficult now to get there with the major Gulf carriers shut down from the US, at least on a single itinerary (you don't want to know the itineraries I had to rebook family members on in Economy). I think this situation will apply to many of Emirates passengers, which used to make up a bulk of their customers. The big Middle Eastern airlines became more mainstream in western media the past few years, so their passenger demographics have changed slightly. But they still have a customer base that will need to fly with them. They may not be as profitable for the time being though. At this point, I don't think we'll see too big of a permanent hit for those airlines if the military operation dies down in the next few days (which isn't a given).
Ben, Why are airlines still flying planes through Iranian airspace? As I write this, BA, Air France, SwissAir, Singapore, etc all have planes in the sky over Iran. Don’t they remember what happened to that poor Malaysian plane that was shot down in error over Ukraine? Shouldn’t they find a route around Iran?
Just checked FlightRadar24, no one is officially flying over Iranian airspace, now or for the foreseeable future, so maybe you were seeing an error. (On sites like FlightAware, sometimes they should expected route, even if the plane is not literally there. Like, back during MH370, they thought 'oh, see it's over Cambodia...' it wasn't.)
Flightradar shows these planes definitely above or below Iranian airspace, not over their airspace. Mostly above, right on the northern border with Turkmenistan.
below Iranian airspace?
So planes are going subterranean now?
@vandhk, not for the flights I am tracking. FlightAware is showing them with Iranian border but over/near Mashhad.
This is a rapidly evolving situation with a very uncertain outcome. Until this conflict resolves I, for one, would not fly through the Middle East. And it is easy to say that the situation will normalize at some near-term point. But when will that be? The longer the war continues, the greater the short-term impact and the more longer it will take to return to any similar pre-conflict activity. Post 9/11, the financial crisis and...
This is a rapidly evolving situation with a very uncertain outcome. Until this conflict resolves I, for one, would not fly through the Middle East. And it is easy to say that the situation will normalize at some near-term point. But when will that be? The longer the war continues, the greater the short-term impact and the more longer it will take to return to any similar pre-conflict activity. Post 9/11, the financial crisis and the pandemic there was a perception that cross border travel would never be the same. The world adapted and moved on but the short and medium term dislocation was very dramatic and, for some, devastating. Right now, we simply don’t know where we are in the cycle.
They're keeping a lot of flights on track even though they know they'll cancel them (flights tomorrow morning are still on time even tho they said there's nothing happening until 14:00, etc). Annoyingly done, probably to avoid EU compensation laws or something similar about rebooking on next available option. No other reason things would still be on time even tho they said nothing is happening until tomorrow PM.
What a sad person would think that a Gulf airline is beneficial . Like an obese person eating a tub of ice cream .
This is a hypothetical based on the idea that this war will be over quickly. Which given the structure of the Iranian regime, they can hold out for a long time. Furthermore the Israeli leadership and Trump have absolutely 0 intention of making this quick. Ultimately I think it'll be a long time before any kind of "new normal" begins in the middle east.
In this scenario the biggest beneficiary has to be Turkish...
This is a hypothetical based on the idea that this war will be over quickly. Which given the structure of the Iranian regime, they can hold out for a long time. Furthermore the Israeli leadership and Trump have absolutely 0 intention of making this quick. Ultimately I think it'll be a long time before any kind of "new normal" begins in the middle east.
In this scenario the biggest beneficiary has to be Turkish Airlines, it is essentially the only airline that is still able to use it's location as a connector between Europe and Asia
Saudia has also been operating during this conflict (along with other Saudi airlines). They will also benefit from this (as long as they don't have to shut down too), but likely not as much as Turkish Airlines.
Hate to be cynical, but selfishly would I mind if all of a sudden people's fears of avoiding the region (even for quick layovers) led to meaningful increase in award availability at Etihad/Qatar/Emirates/Turkish etc?
The day that you start seeing Qatar/Etihad J availability back on AAdvantage, you know we've seen a meaningful impact.
Yippie... 70K points in J on QR from JFK-DOH-MLE... *gets stuck in Doha indefinitely because missiles flying overhead* (not the "meaningful impact" you were hoping for...)
Sure, thats possible. Booking flights for next year I'd have zero reservation about stopping over in DOH/AUH, just like I'm willing to layover in Taipei despite uncertainty. If most others feel differently, maybe I'll have that opportunity.
I still have itineraries on my schedule through each, and not gonna pay $600pp to cancel and attempt partial refunds, so unless and until they cancel on me for a full-refund, or offer a re-routing, I, too, will keep what I have, but I probably won't buy new itineraries for a little while, unless, as you suggest, there's a epic-deal with points, which are usually fully-refundable.
i’m afraid (hope i’m totally wrong) a couple more weeks of this and it might mean nail in the coffin of the 388
Although the operation logic of middle east carriers heavily benefits from state support so you never know
The real question is just how long this situation will drag on. The United States and Israel have made it clear that this is no short, quick, operation. Even if Iran stopped attacking its neighbors, there is no guarantee that they won't resume the attacks. In the meantime, travelers are going to bypass the Middle East, either because they have to (corporate travelers), or because they are fearful of indiscriminate attacks, delays, being stranded, etc....
The real question is just how long this situation will drag on. The United States and Israel have made it clear that this is no short, quick, operation. Even if Iran stopped attacking its neighbors, there is no guarantee that they won't resume the attacks. In the meantime, travelers are going to bypass the Middle East, either because they have to (corporate travelers), or because they are fearful of indiscriminate attacks, delays, being stranded, etc. Fortunately, the traveling public has a short memory. A significant fare sale will be them back. It always has.
Consumers have a short memoery. The first time they see a good deal, they'll be on a connecting flight through Teheran if that saved them a buck.
And, you better believe, as soon as the dust settles, folks like Tim Dunn are salivating on a new Delta-Mahan Air joint-venture... welcome to SkyTeam's newest member... LOL.
If Reza Pahlavi comes to power in Iran, we may see all major US brands there as well as a Disneyland Tehran in the pipeline
"Garsh!!" -- Goofy, when he forgets that pork is haram.
Only a real dummy would travel to the middle east right now. Iran has gone nuts and is attacking everyone now. Scary!!
I'm by no means defending Irans actions...but didn't the US and Israel bomb them first?
Sure @bowie, let's play "who started first". How far back do you want to go?
ak_22, let's at least start with the early 7th century... like, 610. Or, maybe, mid-1st century. Eh, better go back 3,500-4000 years, just to be sure.
Even then, western countries, to "protect" interests of oil companies overthrew democratically elected PM. Do you want to go further than that to how most if not all of the world's problems have a root in the British empire?
Would this help the likes of Singapore and Cathay and would be reminiscent of the pre ME3 days around the early 2000s?
All European and S. and E. Asian carriers may have a narrow path between Turkey-Caucuses-Stans (which, recall, Afghanistan and Pakistan also just started a new war). ATC in Azerbaijan gonna be BUSY... (which, reminds me, how's that conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh going?)
Nagorno-Karabak conflict is over - Azerbaijan won comprehensively in 2023.
Albert, finally, 'peace for our time!'
Pakistan and Afghanistan are technically at war now, but I don't expect that to impact commercial aviation too much. Afghanistan's military capabilities are mainly limited to ground offensives (guerilla warfare), so flights at cruising altitude shouldn't see any harm from fighting. The Pakistani Air Force is likely able to fly overhead into Afghanistan for any military action, so missiles don't necessarily need to be launched from the ground in Pakistan. If they do, they can...
Pakistan and Afghanistan are technically at war now, but I don't expect that to impact commercial aviation too much. Afghanistan's military capabilities are mainly limited to ground offensives (guerilla warfare), so flights at cruising altitude shouldn't see any harm from fighting. The Pakistani Air Force is likely able to fly overhead into Afghanistan for any military action, so missiles don't necessarily need to be launched from the ground in Pakistan. If they do, they can do it from Southern Pakistan, which has less ultra-long haul flights traveling overhead (though, again, I don't think it will be needed). I don't think Pakistan will want to close down their airspace and lose out on income when it isn't necessary.
Could and up being good news for Turkish: somewhat similar geography but not threatened at the moment.
Just popped up on Al Jazeera:
Emirates says limited flights to begin this evening
If true, that's impressive. Like, either they've planned a major flight plan re-routing via the south, like over Saudi/Egypt, etc., and the extra time/fuel that requires; or, they're pulling a Papa-Bear Bill O'Reilly, sayin' "F-it, do it live!"
Corporate travel is another angle too - we've certainly been directed that our travel to ME is suspended and EU- India/APAC must be rerouted to avoid the ME for now. I imagine that type of policy will stay in place for a good while and I am sure most corporates will have similar policy especially on routes like India where we can easily take alternatives
But as you say, not forever !
All or much of Middle East airspace could be closed longer than US airspace was closed after 9/11 so this is a big deal in terms of the financial health of carriers in the region and people's ability to rely on those airlines.
That said, it is very likely that the situation will be dealt with and the Middle East could become more stable than it has been in a very long time.
There will...
All or much of Middle East airspace could be closed longer than US airspace was closed after 9/11 so this is a big deal in terms of the financial health of carriers in the region and people's ability to rely on those airlines.
That said, it is very likely that the situation will be dealt with and the Middle East could become more stable than it has been in a very long time.
There will be some short term impact but not likely anything for the long term as long as the situation does not spiral beyond the Middle East.
Congrats to Delta for avoiding much of the fallout here. Like, American and United each had literal flights to DOH and DXB have to turn back over the Atlantic. Sure, DL still flies to TLV, but, like, fairly limited for good ole DAL, huh?
Dubai, Doha, and Abu Dhabi handle around 500,000 passengers a day. I feel for those who were merely connecting through the region, now indefinitely stranded. This could've happened to any/many of us who frequent these blogs and transit through the region on QR, EK, EY, etc. This is quite different than last June with the 'shot across the bow' in near Doha. Actually hitting DXB, the Fairmont in Dubai, apartments in Bahrain, bases in Kuwait,...
Dubai, Doha, and Abu Dhabi handle around 500,000 passengers a day. I feel for those who were merely connecting through the region, now indefinitely stranded. This could've happened to any/many of us who frequent these blogs and transit through the region on QR, EK, EY, etc. This is quite different than last June with the 'shot across the bow' in near Doha. Actually hitting DXB, the Fairmont in Dubai, apartments in Bahrain, bases in Kuwait, and sites in KSA. This is different.
Other than the novelty of flying some of these ME carriers I never understood the reasoning for choosing them to Asia from Europe or the Americas with so many non-stop opportunities. The only region that they make any sense is on flights to Australia from Europe and Africa. With that, I think airlines like SQ, CX and Thai have a unique opportunity now to wake people up from this stupor. That is until Taiwan becomes the next flashpoint.
They fly to many destinations with no flights from Europe or North America. Also take into consideration pricing and timing. Davao and Cebu on Qatar, for example
High percentage of traffic is from North America to Indian subcontinent, with many US and Indian and surrounding countries served. And while Air India has few nonstop routes (Delhi and Mumbai only), it has been seen as inferior in quality for most part.
Luke gets it. Lots of US-South Asia traffic via ME. Sad irony is that this conflict enveloping the ME may actually help revive Air India's standing after last year's tragedy of AI171.
Sure, I get the Indian subcontinent. But the reality is that AI is starting to show signs of improvement. More so, there have always been non-stop options avoiding DXB (etc) from the U.S. and Europe. Personally, I would choose LH to Bangalore non-stop (one random example) rather than a connection in Doha. Perhaps not as sexy but certainly more efficient. I imagine some people will start to wake up to this. It won't obliterate the...
Sure, I get the Indian subcontinent. But the reality is that AI is starting to show signs of improvement. More so, there have always been non-stop options avoiding DXB (etc) from the U.S. and Europe. Personally, I would choose LH to Bangalore non-stop (one random example) rather than a connection in Doha. Perhaps not as sexy but certainly more efficient. I imagine some people will start to wake up to this. It won't obliterate the ME three but it may certainly have a certain impact on the future fleet...especially with EK where the A380 might start to become a weakness.
Antwerp, the 'wake-up call' here is that UAE, Qatar, etc. need an 'iron-dome' and shelters, because at any point, Iran or a proxy can do what they've been doing to Israel for decades to these Gulf-oil megalopolises. The other thing is that this airspace (and shipping routes) are far to valuable to leave like sitting ducks. Now that the Band-Aid is ripped off, kinda gotta finish it.
@Antwerp - while there are flights from Europe and North America to South Asia and South East Asia, they are limited to major city pairs. If you are flying to one secondary city to/from a major city, then the ME3 often have attractive one-stop options on both price and time. If your flying between two secondary cities (Like Dublin to Karachi or Pune), then the ME3 is a no-brainer. It's like flying Aer Lingus between Cleveland and Prague through Dublin.
Luxury. Price. Schedule. Routes. There are many reasons to take QR, EK, EY, etc., from the US-Asia/Africa. Of course, after all this, it's making some of us reconsider, obviously. If you're based in Europe or South or East Asia, clearly, these days, take a nonstop or connect elsewhere. Prices have gotta be insane though do to all the rebookings. And price of oil likely to increase due to the expanding conflict. Maybe we should all...
Luxury. Price. Schedule. Routes. There are many reasons to take QR, EK, EY, etc., from the US-Asia/Africa. Of course, after all this, it's making some of us reconsider, obviously. If you're based in Europe or South or East Asia, clearly, these days, take a nonstop or connect elsewhere. Prices have gotta be insane though do to all the rebookings. And price of oil likely to increase due to the expanding conflict. Maybe we should all take a chill pill on overseas travel for a little while, no?
From here in Ireland, there’s next to no nonstop flights to East Asia, so the ME carriers made a lot of sense relative to the big European carriers.
Similarly from UK airports outside London.
Going BA means changing in London.
MAN, BHX, EDI, GLA, NCL, STN all (usually) have flights by the ME3.