Capacity between the United States and China is heavily restricted, due to the bilateral agreement in place. Fortunately capacity between the two countries will be increasing in the coming weeks. This is a positive development, though we’re still a far cry from the pre-pandemic service we saw between the countries.
In this post:
US & China modify bilateral agreement to 50 weekly flights
China doesn’t participate in the Open Skies agreement, which allows airlines to more or less add unlimited service between countries that are part of the agreement, pending available landing slots (for example, both the United States and European Union participate in Open Skies, which is why US airlines can add as many routes to Europe as they want).
Instead, air service to China is based on bilateral agreements between countries. During the pandemic, China greatly restricted foreign carrier service to the country, and many countries retaliated by similarly restricting Chinese airlines from flying to their countries.
This wasn’t a big issue when China was in full lockdown mode, but with China having lifted restrictions, air service to the country is still quite limited.
Under the current agreement between the United States and China, airlines from each country can collectively operate 35 weekly roundtrip flights between the two countries. That already represents an increase, as previously the limit was 24 weekly flights, and prior to that 18 weekly flights, and prior to that 12 weekly flights, and prior to that eight weekly flights.
That limit is about to be increased even further — as of March 31, 2024, the cap on flights between the United States and China will increase to 50 weekly roundtrip flights for airlines from each country, just in time for the summer travel season.
It’s important to note that 50 weekly flights between the countries is still only a small fraction of pre-pandemic service. Prior to the pandemic, the US and China bilateral agreement allowed for 150 weekly flights for airlines from each country, so we’re now approaching one-third of pre-pandemic capacity.
Increased service is good for consumers
Obviously increased service between the United States and China is good for those looking to travel between the two countries, since it should open up more frequencies, leading to lower fares. But even if you have no interest in traveling to China, this could still positively impact you.
In the past few years, we’ve seen a massive increase in airfare between the United States and virtually all of Asia. That’s largely because of the situation between the United States and China:
- Most people traveling to and from China have been connecting through other countries for long haul travel, taking up seats and raising fares through Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Singapore, etc.
- Pre-pandemic, Chinese airlines did a lot of capacity dumping, so many people connected in China when traveling between the United States and other points in Asia, leading to much lower airfare
Increased service between the United States and China should lead to lower fares and more award availability in other markets. However, we still have a long way to go here. We’re now going from ~23% of pre-pandemic capacity to ~33% of pre-pandemic capacity.
While capacity is still only a fraction of what it was pre-pandemic, it’s worth noting that demand between the United States and China is also far from recovered. There’s a lot less demand for travel in both directions. Even without restrictions, Chinese nationals aren’t traveling as much internationally as they did pre-pandemic, and Americans aren’t traveling to China as much as they did pre-pandemic.
Bottom line
In the coming weeks, we’ll see weekly flight allotments between the United States and China increase. With this, airlines from each country will collectively be able to operate 50 weekly flights, up from the current 35 weekly flights, but still a far cry from the 150 flights that were allowed pre-pandemic.
With this change, capacity will be at roughly one-third of pre-pandemic levels. It’s a step in the right direction, but don’t expect airfare between the United States and Asia to decrease meaningfully until we get closer to those numbers again. Then again, demand between the two countries also isn’t what it once was.
What do you make of air service between the United States and China increasing?
It's All About The Current PASSPORT BROS MOVEMENT! Both CHINA And UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Frown Upon American Men Trying To Leave And Defect From USA And Try to Travel To China To Meet And Marry The Local Chinese Women. Also PHILIPPINES, CAMBODIA, VIETNAM, THAILAND, etc. Are Expensive To Travel To. Also Not Only Southeast Asia, But WEST AFRICA! GHANA Also Frowns Upon The Growing Passport Bros Movement. It's All In A VEHEMENT MERCENARY VILLAINOUS...
It's All About The Current PASSPORT BROS MOVEMENT! Both CHINA And UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Frown Upon American Men Trying To Leave And Defect From USA And Try to Travel To China To Meet And Marry The Local Chinese Women. Also PHILIPPINES, CAMBODIA, VIETNAM, THAILAND, etc. Are Expensive To Travel To. Also Not Only Southeast Asia, But WEST AFRICA! GHANA Also Frowns Upon The Growing Passport Bros Movement. It's All In A VEHEMENT MERCENARY VILLAINOUS EFFORT AND QUEST ON THE AIRLINES, THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND THE GOVERNMENTS OF ALL OF THE WEST AFRICAN AND SOUTHEAST ASIAN COUNTRIES TO KEEP AMERICAN MEN SEEKING FOREIGN LOVE, HOME AND PREVENT THEM FROM LEAVING AMERICA! THIS SEEMS TO BE WORKING OUT VERY SUCESSFULLY IN FAVOR OF THE AIRLINES AND THE EMBASSIES, I.E. CHINA, GHANA, etc. AND THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. QUITE SIMPLE, MAKE IT HARD FOR THEM TO TRAVEL ABROAD FOR SEARCH OF FOREIGN LOVE AND MARRIAGE?? RAISE THEM AIRFARES TO THE PRICE LEVEL OF A BRAND NEW LAMBORGHINI, FERRARI, LAND ROVER, A CONDO IN BEVERLY HILLS AND ENCINO! THE PASSPORT BROS ARE GONNA FEEL THE PAIN AND SUFFERING BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO TRAVEL ABROAD AND THESE RIDICULOUSLY UNAFFORDABLE OVERSEAS AIRLINE PRICES!
That's My .01.
The Chinese folks are still in their infancy with the fascination of travel over the past 2 decades and pre-pandemic had surpassed Japan and other Asian countries in the number of tourists going to every part of the globe. In fact, travelling to and from Asia I personally observed the premium seats being occupied by mainland Chineses folks. They have money.
So, this will benefit travellers originating from China. BTW, I was using Chinese...
The Chinese folks are still in their infancy with the fascination of travel over the past 2 decades and pre-pandemic had surpassed Japan and other Asian countries in the number of tourists going to every part of the globe. In fact, travelling to and from Asia I personally observed the premium seats being occupied by mainland Chineses folks. They have money.
So, this will benefit travellers originating from China. BTW, I was using Chinese carriers and transitting via China to other destinations in Asia because Business Class costs were cheaper than TYO, SEL, BKK etc.
I hope that the resumption of non-stop flights to/from China will ease the demand for travel out of HKG, BKK, SIN and even TPE as fares are still "crazy" and award availability are extremely limited or overpriced in redemption costs.
Didn't Timmy's Favourite Airline just lodge a dormancy waiver request a few days ago regarding China and Cuba flights? Seems demand is not yet sufficient to support 7-14x weekly flights to PVG today.
Will any of the US3 announce plans to increase China service, or is it too late to adjust the schedule in that way?
With this addition, how quickly do you think flights will be announced/added. Looking to travel to China this summer and thinking I need to hold off on purchasing tickets until these new flights are rolled out.
Every little bit helps, but I continue to miss the pre-pandemic cheap fares from SFO. Oh for the days when flights to Asia were drastically cheaper than flights to Europe.
-“Are there seriously any passenger travelling between US and China via Singapore with huge backtracking?”
Yes. In 2020, we have observed US-EU-Minsk-China repatriation routes and China-SIN (with 14-day layover for US Policy)-US, and other routes way complicated than that.
-“Taiwan makes sense”
Note Chinese gov does not allow direct travel to Taiwan with Chinese passport (the right document should be Taiwan Travel Permit for Mainland Residents issued by China, and they have...
-“Are there seriously any passenger travelling between US and China via Singapore with huge backtracking?”
Yes. In 2020, we have observed US-EU-Minsk-China repatriation routes and China-SIN (with 14-day layover for US Policy)-US, and other routes way complicated than that.
-“Taiwan makes sense”
Note Chinese gov does not allow direct travel to Taiwan with Chinese passport (the right document should be Taiwan Travel Permit for Mainland Residents issued by China, and they have not issued new ones starting mid 2019) for whatever reasons, with the exception of transfer starting CKG, KMG, and KHN. So, that’s not a viable plan leaving China.
Yeah, I also think connection in Taipei only works for those travelling between China and US with Non-Chinese passports.
Chinese nationals are able to connect through Taipei - Ive had quite a few colleagues connect through Taipei on their way back to China to visit family (they just can’t visit / leave the airport).
“Most people traveling to and from China have been connecting through other countries for long haul travel, taking up seats and raising fares through Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Singapore, etc.”
Are there seriously any passenger travelling between US and China via Singapore with huge backtracking? Taiwan makes sense (mainland China flights with Taiwanese carrier are also not the level of pre-pandemic, though.) instead.
You're confused.
Ben's referring to (past) traffic to non-China locations that used to use flight connections in China because it was so much cheaper.
With that capacity gone, everybody else's flights to those non-China locations are more expensive.
That makes sense. In pre-COVID days, Chinese airlines sold flights from Japan to Europe/SE Asia via Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou etc with quite attractive price. Especially Air China was popular as their tickets could be used for ANA status run.
It should be noted that there are very few places where traveling from N.America via SIN isn't a backtrack.
Even the likes of CGK and KUL are still technically geographically shorter via HKG or NRT, than they are via SIN.
So backtracking is a thing that people from the Americas accept, when going via SIN; and yes, SQ will happily offer you USA-PRC via SIN, and at decently competitive prices.
I think it's highly unlikely that US airlines will fully use the increased capacity allowed under the new bilateral agreement, given the restriction to fly over Russian airspace. With that restriction, Chinese airlines' appetite to fly to US East Coast or Midwest is also very limited, and their capacity to fly to US West Coast cities from major Chinese cities is constrained by the regulation of Chinese aviation authority that allows only one Chinese airline...
I think it's highly unlikely that US airlines will fully use the increased capacity allowed under the new bilateral agreement, given the restriction to fly over Russian airspace. With that restriction, Chinese airlines' appetite to fly to US East Coast or Midwest is also very limited, and their capacity to fly to US West Coast cities from major Chinese cities is constrained by the regulation of Chinese aviation authority that allows only one Chinese airline to fly a given route between the two countries.
Right now, the frequency between US west coast cities (SFO and LAX) and China major cities (PEK, PVG, and CAN) has not reach daily yet. There are still a lot of rooms for Chinese airlines to add flights to these routes even there are some restrictions on one Chinese airline operating one route to avoid competition.
I thought Chinese airlines aren't restricted from overflying Russian airspace. Air India, for example, uses Russian airspace on its SFO bound flights (as do all the Gulf carriers).
They aren't restricted ordinarily, but the US made it a condition for increasing flights.
There are such requirements from US government which resulted from the lobbying of US carriers: they compete with Chinese carriers but not with Middle East or Indian carriers from West Coast. As a result only the original 8 weekly flights operated by Chinese carriers are allowed to use Russian airspace.
There is no "participate in the Open Skies agreement" provision, nor is there a single "Open Skies Agreement" to participate in.
"Open Skies" is the term used for a specific framework for a bilateral agreement, and the US has over 100 separate bilateral agreements based on these principles (and two multilateral agreements - one with the EU and one called MALIAT that includes New Zealand, Singapore and some other Pacific states).