China’s President Xi Jinping has called on for the introduction of more flights from the country to Serbia. Speaking in Belgrade yesterday, Mr Xi said, “China welcomes plans for Serbia to introduce direct flights between Belgrade and Shanghai. We encourage airlines from both sides to launch more flights between the two countries, as well as direct flights between Belgrade and Guangzhou”. Air Serbia has already announced plans to launch services to Shanghai in November or December this year, although tickets for the service itself won’t be put on sale until the carrier’s third Airbus A330-200 arrives at its hub in Belgrade. Delivery is currently expected in late July or early August.
Belgrade is linked to China by Hainan Airlines’ two weekly rotation from Beijing, as well as Air Serbia with a weekly service to Tianjin. Both passenger and cargo demand between the two countries is expected to grow in the coming months. Arrivals from China into Serbia jumped 190% in the first quarter of the year to 19.447. Furthermore, a free trade agreement, which was signed between the two last year, will go into effect on July 1, which is anticipated to further increase cargo volume.
Serbia’s President, Aleksandar Vučić, said last week, “We have flights to Tianjin, which is basically Beijing. Soon we will have a service to Shanghai and a third destination [in China] to Guangzhou. Negotiations are underway for flights to Miami and services to Seoul are also being considered, which would be important for our country”. The former CEO of Etihad Airways, who was instrumental in the airline’s partial takeover of Jat Airways back in 2013 and its subsequent rebranding into Air Serbia, James Hogan, noted, “Later this year, Air Serbia will increase its operations into the Chinese market, tapping into the post-Covid resurgence of outbound tourism from one of the world’s strongest economies. The importance of these new routes from Belgrade to Shanghai and Guangzhou cannot be underestimated as 130 million Chinese are expected to travel overseas in 2024, 50% more than last year”. He added, “Air Serbia will also launch flights to Miami in the coming months, the airline’s third US destination after New York and Chicago. The addition of these new cities to Air Serbia’s growing international demonstrates how the airline continues to mature”.
It would be nice to see more flights by Chinese carriers. I flew with Hainan in April BEG-PEK-PVG-PEK-BEG and the inflight experience was excellent.
ReplyDeleteHow was the load?
DeleteIt was full, at least in economy. Don't now about business. But was lucky to have exit row seat in both directions.
DeleteI would also like more Chinese carriers. They offer much better service than JU.
DeleteTrue, not to mention that Air Serbia has two different hard products on widebodies, in business.
DeleteHopefully this summer will be the last season of different cabins on their A330. YU-ARB and YU-ARC are expected to take on the new configurations once YU-ARD and YU-ARE enter the fleet.
Deletehttps://www.exyuaviation.com/2024/03/air-serbia-outlines-a330-rollout.html?m=1
its really strange that a Chinese partner didn't enter into a partnership with JU. Or a chinese operator for the airport. would have been much more beneficial for Serbia than Vinci, and push JU to reach much greater standard also.
DeleteHainan and JU will codeshare.
Deletehttps://www.exyuaviation.com/2023/04/air-serbia-and-hainan-airlines-to.html?m=1
JU also codehares with Air China.
Deletei meant partnership like a Chinese airline buying into JU. like Etihad did, and the same that government wanted Qatar to buy into JU.
DeleteJU wouldn't be a competitor to a Chinese airline, in fact would help counter the Chinese competitors and the Chinese get another revenue stream since JU and Serbia have proven they're a good investment.
Recently Xiamen Airlines had a post about Serbian cuisine on their Weibo account. So who knows…
ReplyDeleteThat would be a cool addition
DeleteWhere do they fly from?
Delete^ From Xiamen lol
DeleteHaving a SkyTeam connection to the Far East would be fantastic.
DeleteDidn't realize they were in Sky Team. Where do they fly in Europe? I can't seem to find it
DeleteAmsterdam and Paris from what I can see, but maybe I missed something.
DeleteXiamen-CDG 2 pw, Xiamen-AMS 3 pw are their only European flights.
DeleteZijin has headquarters in Xiamen.
DeleteA few years ago, I think in 2022, Xiamen Airlines operated some charters to Belgrade with B787. I think it was for Zijin as you mention.
DeleteInterestingly China Southern just scheduled Guangzhou-Budapest.
ReplyDeleteBUD has a lot of flights to China.
DeleteVery popular with Chinese tourists and there are a lot of Chinese people living there.
DeleteWhere the hell did James Hogan come from all of a sudden?!!?
ReplyDeleteHahaha my thoughts too :D
Delete+1
DeleteNabacuje se za budućeg CEO-a Air Serbie ;-)
DeleteNe dan Boze
DeleteI would not be surprised...
DeleteThat's the part of the article that I didn't understand either.
DeleteI have heard that Hogan runs an aviation consultancy company now, one that I thought only worked to turn around airlines in distress. Is he and his team working with Air Serbia now? Even if so, why let Hogan issue statements in his name?
No, he was asked by the press to make a comment about Air Serbia as someone who played an important part in its creation. No need to create conspiracies which seem to be most imaginative among those wishing to see the end of Air Serbia.
DeleteCan someone explain to me why Hainan Airlines is constantly filing schedule for 3 weekly flights to Belgrade but only operated 2 weekly. Are they not being given a permit? Or are they always changing their minds?
ReplyDeleteIt's odd. They have done the same this summer too.
DeleteChongching - Auto, Chengdu are two which come to mind and both in the 20m population range
DeleteBeyond Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, any other city with potential for nonstop flights?
ReplyDeleteI would assume there is potential for Hong Kong
DeleteI don't think there would be much point to Hong Kong since Guangzhou is being launched.
DeleteHK might be a tad bit controversial given all these agreements with mainland China
DeleteChongqng
DeleteWill the free trade agreement have a big impact on cargo?
ReplyDeleteWill definitely increase trade as tariffs are being removed
DeleteSo Seoul is next in Asia after Shanghai and Guangzhou by the looks of it.
ReplyDeleteI don't see based on what they chose Seoul. Where is the demand?
DeleteI am sure BEG, TGD, SKP, TIA, SJJ, SPU, DBV, ZAG, LJU, SKG, SOF, KRK and some new regional routes that JU will launch until them will be enough to make two weekly flights to Incheon profitable.
Deletethen*
DeleteIs there any timeline when these ICN flights may be launched?
DeleteConsidering they are already mentioning, could be next year
DeleteToronto fans will be fuming :D
DeleteVery little demand for Seoul. They just had to come up with replacement for Toronto. It was a top 2 destination but lost to Chicago and then dissapeared. Air Serbia does not mention it at all.
DeleteAnon 9:37 Same can be said for Toronto. I am wondering if aviation journalists and conference moderators will bring up question about Toronto to Air Serbia leadership?
DeleteI think Singapore would be a lot more interesting then Seoul
DeleteThey were already asked and stated their opinion about it.
DeleteCanada unfortunately limits foreign airlines in favour of Canadian carriers. JU wouldn't be delaying YYZ without reason considering YYZ relaunch has been mentioned on and off for a good 20 years (since 2002 if I'm not mistaken). Interest is there, who knows whats not being said.
DeleteMost reasonable would be Incheon, Singapore or Bangkok but it will hardly happen. With some reasonable slots they could go for Kuala Lumpur in the future as there's massive interest in Bosnia and Macedonia as well.
DeleteSIN would be a great route for JU but abit too far for them, same reason why LAX is something they're not looking into. BKK was mentioned as a route that could fill but at trash yield. India would be a better option imo.
DeletePoliticians mentioned Seoul, Tokyo, Delhi and Cape Town
DeleteYes but now it is obvious out of those it will be Seoul. They never mentioned Cape Town.
DeleteDelhi or Mumbai would be logical. More and more Indians work in Serbia every month
DeleteTjey did mention south africa thou, there is a serbian diaspora there and would make sense to mayby try at least after this expansion..
Delete@10:20 Air Serbia is not just delaying Toronto, they are no longer mentioning it not even in the long run. They talk about ICN and possibly TYO but not YYZ at all.
DeleteIf by limits you mean twice weekly frequency, then you should be honest about same limitations from China for Tianjin and Shanghai. How is that NOT a problem but twice weekly for Toronto is? In reality TSN is only once weekly, and the other two will also start at just once weekly:
"nove direktne linije ka Kini, sa planom da to bude jedan let nedeljno za Šangaj i jedan let nedeljno za Gvandžo", rekao je Vesić za TV Prva. "
https://www.b92.net/biz/srbija/vesti/20593/vesic-stizu-dva-aviona-nove-linije-er-srbije-za-kinu-video/vest
Well, Canadian diaspora is a lot larger then South African
DeleteSerbia does not have the same limitations with China as with Canada, which is more than obvious with new Chinese routes set to launch in the winter. Currently JU has 250% more rights to China compared to Canada.
DeleteJU can easily launch Chinese routes in the winter season with little need for advanced sales, that isn't the case with YYZ.
Demand for PVG in 2019 was roughly 55% higher than to YYZ (62.500 for PVG vs 40.800 for YYZ). Currently PVG is the largest underserved long haul destination from BEG.
JU has been issued 3 pw CAN (50% higher than the bilateral with Canada) and 2 pw PVG.
https://www.exyuaviation.com/2023/07/air-serbia-issued-guangzhou-flight.html?m=1
Obviously talks with YYZ haven't gone well if JU is looking at other routes over YYZ despite YYZ being the 2nd largest underserved market from BEG. JU is expanding long haul, problem is obviously with YYZ and not JU.
All those facts were known before - except talks not going well with GTAA. Thank you for the update.
DeleteSo in less than a year we will have 3 new long haul routes from BEG - PVG, CAN and MIA.
ReplyDeleteYes, big expansion for a relaticely small airline
Delete*relatively
Deleterelatively small on the long-haul market, 80 routes is not small at all.
DeleteThey should first use the arrival of 2 new 330-200 aircraft to unify the wide body fleet before adding more flights. ARB and especially ARC cabins are in very poor condition and travelers have been avoiding them more and more.
DeleteSolid LF numbers on Air Serbia long haul services proves travellers have not been avoiding them.
DeleteHong Kong would be the most interesting one.
ReplyDeleteWith Guangzhou launching, I don't think it will happen. Guangzhou is just 130km from Hong Kong.
DeleteThere are airlines that serve both airports, however with decent frequencies to both airports. For JU it would make more sense to focus on one destination with greater frequency.
DeleteJU really needs to increase Tianjin. 1 weekly makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteThey said the 1 weekly is currently for P2P demand. But I don't know what happened with the transfers
DeleteThe route is almost exclusively O&D.
DeleteBut I am sure there would be some transfer demand, if they tried.
DeleteThere is obviously not enough transfer demand for an extra flight.
DeleteCan't wait to see the third JU A330
ReplyDeleteNot long now
DeleteWhat will be the frequencies to Shanghai. I think it can be sustained purely on P2P.
ReplyDeleteI believe they got rights for 2 weekly flights.
DeleteWhat?
ReplyDeleteI keep asking, no replies. When, should, could Air Serbia return to the Australian market? I flew JAT DC 10 on Feb 1991, probably one of the last few months before terminating.
ReplyDeleteProbably never.
DeleteReplies were given many times to this, you just chose to ignore it. Aviation in 1991 and 2024 isn't the same, stepping out of that mindset and using a little logic would give you your answer.
Delete@11.12 - it must be so bad that Turkish just launched daily flights to Melbourne and will start flights to Sydney shortly. You do realise that Qatar and FlyDubai flights to BEG have many many Serbian Australians. It was the same with Etihad before they stopped flying to BEG. And by the way JAT only stopped flying to Australia because of UN sanctions in May 1992 and not because it was unprofitable (same as YYZ). They even wanted to launch more flights but Australia stopped them. That’s why they launched KUL-SIN triangle and BKK in 1989 as feeders for onward connections with MH, SQ and TG.
DeleteFirstly, JU isn't TK with a fleet count of 360+ aircraft with another 300 on order, neither is BEG anywhere near a hub size of IST.
DeleteAlthough TK have just launched MEL, flights are via SIN despite having aircraft capable of a direct flight. Still, SIN is a route they serve twice daily with SIN being home to their star alliance partner SQ. JU currently has no partner in SIN or anywhere past the Middle East.
Secondly, a flight of that distance requires extremely high yield to make it worth while. For comparison, a BEG-MEL-BEG rotation would keep an aircraft out of base for roughly 48 hours without factoring in JU waves and ground time between flights. That same aircraft could do 4-5 TATL trips with better yield. Lets not forget that 3 sets of crew would be out of base for a good 2 weeks impacting not only JU ops in BEG but flight profitability. That is why European carriers have almost completely removed themselves from the Australian market and are focusing on using partner airlines in South East Asia for the Australian market, which serve the market cheaper, more efficiently and at higher frequency.
Thirdly, for the Middle East carriers it is a 10-14 hour flight to Australia from their respective hubs, easily done non stop and with 1 set of crew. Both DXB and DOH allow seamless connectivity to over 70 European, Middle Eastern and African destinations on new aircraft with industry leading products and services and a brand that people pay premium to fly on. The narrow bodies the Middle Eastern carriers use to BEG are also filled with O&D pax and connections to Asia and Africa and not exclusively Australin transfers.
Fourthly, when JAT served Australia last, EK was still in its infancy, QR and EY didn't exist and China wasn't an option for travellers. Capacity and options between Australia and Europe was no where near todays level, while ticket prices where alot higher. Airline alliances didn't exist at that time either. It was normal for European carriers to serve Australia, where JAT was amongst major European carriers such as LH, KLM, AZ and OA flying to Australia. LH pulled out in favour of routing via SIN on SQ, KLM via KUL on MH. If things didn't go the way they did, JAT would of eventually pulled out of Australia by the mid 2000's as well just like everyone else did.
Anon 16:01 +100
Delete@16.01. Yields to Australia are actually quite good now. Qatar cannot increase capacity because of their bilateral, Etihad has largely pulled out and now flying single daily 787s. That's why you are seeing Qantas relaunching FCO, CDG and likely FRA - all direct from Australia overflying both Asian and Middle East hubs. Turkish will likely go non-stop to IST soon enough.
Delete@16.01 - and you could only serve BEG-MIA-BEG twice (not 4-5 transatlantic rotations as you claim) in a 48 hour period and I am sure yields to Sydney would be much better than MIA because MIA has so many European airlines already flying there. You would only cater for the Russians and we know JU cannot increase services to SVO because of US and EU pressure.
Delete* The economics of a 10-14 hour flight on aircraft not operating at max range is not the same as a 22-24 hour flight on an aircraft needing 2 sectors at close to max range. Why do you think JU is focusing on East Coast US even though the A330 can technically do BEG-LAX non stop? The A330 can only be competitive to a certain distance and the A330 simply is not competitive compared to the B777's, B787's and A380's doing multiple daily flights between the Middle East and Australia.
Delete* ME carriers use larger aircraft, more seats to devide costs. Premium cabins are significantly greater in capacity compared to what JU have on their A330's. Premium cabins are extremely important on long haul routes, especially ultra long haul. SQ even don't have economy class on their A350ULR's which shows the importance of premium cabins on such long flights.
* QF aircraft operating to Europe are configured premium heavy. Again premium cabin demand is important. Their European flights operate out of PER, a QF hub and crew base. 2 sets of crew is needed with a duty of under a week including rest at base.
* MIA isn't the only TATL route possible from BEG.
* JU has recently increased both SVO and LED.
JU and BEG are nowhere near the level of sustaining profitable ULR routes. JU on shorter TATL routes use aircraft configurations with the lowest capacity of premium seats. TAP for example on their A321LR's has close to 3 x the premium capacity compared to JU on the A330.
QF, EK, QR, TK have all heavily invested in their onboard product, hubs, services, lounges, fleet, staff, brand. EK have spent half a billion dollars investing in their wine selection alone, not to mention the rest. JU on the other hand has massive inconsistencies in their onboard cabins, catering is decent but far from the level of their well established competitors, IFE offer with the cheapest package available on the market, no WIFI, crowded lounge barely operation during the entirety of their waves, useless loyalty program and the list goes on. JU isn't necessarily bad, it requires years of proper investment to enhance the level required for ULR. They're competitive on the TATL market as they offer a direct service to the Balkans, it's a shorter flight on the A330 where people do pay extra for the convenience of the direct flight to shorten travel times etc, but throw in a transit stop and that advantage is lost. Same for Australia, our passengers gain nothing with JU entering the market other than crew speaking Serbian, and even then QR, FZ and EK do have alot of staff that speak our language. No time saved due to the need of a transit stop, inferior product and service, highly costly for the company in short.
My point is this fixation with MIA is clouding proper JU planning - which they were very capable of doing up until 1992. No one has suggested anything but MIA as being viable in North America according to JU (leaving aside JFK and ORD - which will remain). But Miami is over-served and seasonal. No one from Western Europe will fly eastwards to BEG to catch a connecting flight to MIA unless it is dirt cheap. Which leaves what: Central European and Russian connections to MIA. Then there is TK, which also still serves Russia and probably more easily via the southern route into Russia. So we have no LAX, no IAD, no YYZ according to JU network planners. So now they get the new single weekly Guangzhou and twice weekly Shanghai and old weekly Tianjin. The planning boffins will probably leave the 2 additional a330s on the tarmac in PVG and CAN for 24 hours like they now do in TSN. The A330-200 from BEG to SIN and onto SYD would be in its sweet spot and would be more profitable than the 777-300ER and a380. You obviously cannot compare this against newer gen 787 and a350s in fuel efficiency but come with a higher acquisition cost - which JU will not get for a long time. EK and QR only use 777 and a380 because of slot constraints and capacity. EK actually started its Dubai to Sydney route via Singapore with the a330-200. What about BOM and DEL? Another market abandoned?
DeleteThere is no fixation on MIA. MIA has been active for quite some years attracting new airlines and have likely given JU a really good deal to launch flights. JU isn't the first and wont be the last airline to launch flights to MIA due to their campaign. Plus, JU has AA as their partner in the US that was quick to massively increase cooperation with JU the moment JU announced ORD, so it is safe to expect the same to happen once MIA is announced. MIA would nicely compliment their US network offering tens of destinations via 3 US hubs. Airline transfer traffic isn't only centered around their hubs.
DeleteJU route planning has to be one of the best aspects of JU and they have done a fantastic job, so I wouldn't criticise them. The amount of new routes the last 2 years has been incredible. They definitely know what they're doing.
LAX is not being looked at at the moment, with Marek mentioning last year in an interview that their focus is the east coast of North America. That doesn't mean that they're not interested in LAX, just not yet.
Regarding YYZ, as mentioned above, JU was weighing between YYZ and ORD and they went with ORD. Why JU hasn't launched YYZ is more of question to them rather than to JU, which has been active in expanding long haul the past 2 years.
As for their China ops, the aircraft only stays on ground in TSN when operated 1 pw to minimise having crew out of base for an extended amount of time (1 week). If 1 week is a problem for 1 set of crew, imagine 2 weeks for 3 sets of crew on an Australian rotation. We haven't seen what JU intends to do with the new Chinese routes just yet so commenting frequencies etc is useless at this point.
Further long haul expansion will come in time. Marek mentioned that the plan was for up to 8 A330's. Im not sure why the hysteria.
Lastly, if B787 and A350 isn't worth the purchase, why are airlines ordering them in mass numbers? Every major global airline must be clueless I guess.
MIA is way too far south to be a useful connecting hub for JU even with AA feed. If they are truly wanting to fly to an AA hub, they should fly to DFW. AA uses MIA as a hub for the Caribbean and Latin America. Is that the connecting traffic that JU wants? That would be very low yield. Your planning around crew rests is so old school. Most airlines now only allow rest breaks of about 24 hours even to Aus. EK, QR and EY crews return the next day. I am not sure where you are getting 2 weeks for an Australian rotation? The crew could be back in 96 hours after leaving BEG assuming a daily flight schedule with a SIN stop (which would not be possible with 4 A330-200). Flying an a350-900 to Sydney non-stop daily (if JU could afford them) could have the crew back in BEG after 48 hours. The flight time is 16 hours BEG-SYD and 18 hours SYD-BEG. Having a plane in TSN for 24 hours to rest the crew is just silly. They could just deadhead them back home via PEK on Hainan.
DeleteSorry my maths was off as I assumed crew would deadhead back home. Crew could theoretically be back 72 hours after BEG-SYD non-stop rotation. Crew could be back within 6-7 days if they flew daily BEG-SIN-SYD rotations. In any case, not two weeks. In JAT BEG-DXB-SIN-MEL-SYD days pre-1992, it used to be close to 3 weeks I think.
DeleteYou're comments show that you are really far off reality. Alot of if's, contradictions and nothing about reality.
Delete"If JU could afford A350's."
Well obviously they can't. Currrent profit is barely enough to afford brand new ATR's, let alone A350's. A320 fleet is in desperate need of renewal with a cost of over a billion euros to complete (if buying new). A330 fleet isn't unified in product and minimal spending has been made on the product. Investing in glass tumblers for business class was too much of a problem (which they finally changed late last year) and you're talking about investing in ULR and direct flights to Australia. 2 varieties of widebody aircraft on an extremely small fleet isn't efficient, is costly and an operational headache. Not to mention your comment pointed at them using the A330 to Australia as the B787's and A350's are too expensive and not efficient compared to A330's, so which is it?
"Old school crew planning"
Well no, JU would need daily flights to shorten crew layovers, and we can see that isn't the reality. JFK is the only long haul route barely getting daily flights, and that for only 2 and a half months a year. You have to have days off prior to the flight, layover at the transit stop until the next aircraft arrives, layover at the final destination until the next aircraft arrives, again layover at the transit stop and then again days off at base. JAT's previous Australia ops had them out of base for 20-25 days back when they last served Australia btw.
"most airlines allow 24 hour layovers"
Long haul yes, Australia from Belgrade is ULR and not LR. ULR layovers require a minimum of 48 hours. Regulations on this is extremely strict due to numerous crashes involving crew fatigue.
"flying non stop to Sydney"
Again, JU doesn't have ac capable to do it. This would require hundreds of millions of euros in investment and JU doesn't have that cash. JU would also need to drastically improve product and yield while drastically investing in marketing to make that work. Again, not realistic.
"Deadheading crew via PEK"
So who operates the aircraft back? Airlines dead head crew back to base when there is no replacement aircraft to operate back. Besides, crew don't dead head back immediately after completing their duty, it's done after at least minimum rest. JU keeping their ac on ground in TSN isn't silly, either layover the crew for 1 week or keep the aircraft on ground for 24 hours. 1 is less costly, guess which one.
"MIA too far south to be useful connecting hub"
Thats for the passengers to decide. AA partnership allows JU to transfer in via 1 hub and out the other. For example, flying to DFW via JFK but return via ORD. MIA would just complement that offering to their passengers with a third option, if they want, effectively serving these routes double daily. Obviously routes such as SEA, BOS, IAD etc wont be convenient via MIA, but definitely routes such as DFW, AUS, IAH, MCO would work. Connectivity options from these cities would increase with more options making JU US ops more competitive. This is without mentioning the BEG side of operations.
@9.10. Why are you so angry? You clearly don't know much about airline economics. An A330-200 is cheaper not because it is more fuel efficient than an A350 or 787 but because it is cheaper to acquire through leases or outright, ie capex is cheaper. So overall, the airline is better off operating them even though it is less fuel efficient because the cash outlay in lease payments is cheaper. They would have actually been better served getting A330-300s which have better economics if they are not planning US West Coast flights and these would have been better for JFK, ORD and PVG.
DeleteSecondly, no credible airline in the world leaves its main asset on the ground for 24 hours to rest its crew. That's just nuts. You need to sweat the asset. Planes don't make money while they are on the ground. They should not be launching any flights to multiple Chinese destinations. They should pick one and run it 3 or 4 times a week to prevent this absurdity that you seem to think is smart. Shanghai makes sense. CAN and TSN don't. PEK is already served by Hainan. So PVG should be the main destination and they should do some sort of tie-up with China Eastern to serve the rest.
Thirdly, Miami will be a dud if it is ever launched. The smarter money would have been on LAX. AA has a hub there too or did you not know that? Happy to be proven wrong. MIA is a leisure destination not a business hub unlike JFK and ORD. If they want to fly to a US East Coast AA hub, they should look at Philadelphia or Charlotte, both business destinations not leisure destinations.
Sydney is about thinking creatively given BEG's eastern position in Europe and given the lack of capacity since EY shrunk and QR was constrained by the Australian government. Have you looked at the airfares to Australia? Any airline operating to Australia right now is making a killing. Operating the A350 is just a hypothetical for JU but also the reality that will be there once TK launches non-stop Europe to Australia East Coast flights in 2026 because TK is smart and will seize the opportunity.
Urumqi needs to be considered, 25M PAX airport with no flights outside of Asia
ReplyDeleteIt was published here some time ago which cities in China have most P2P traffic from/to Belgrade. If someone can find it, please share :)
ReplyDelete1. Shanghai
Delete2. Guangzhou
3. Hangzhou
4. Chengdu
5. Xiamen
6. Nanjing
7. Chongqing
8. Qingdao
9. Xian
10. Wuhan
Thank you!
DeleteRecently flew QR BEG-DOH and it was packed with Chinese passengers.
ReplyDeleteBefore Covid, Aeroflot was packed with Chinese 3 times per day
DeleteYes, a few years ago this site gave some statistics and Aeroflot had massive number of Chinese transfers on Belgrade route.
Delete^Especially on the Shanghai-Belgrade route.
Deletein reply to anonymous 11.12 regarding return of Air Serbia to Australian market, what the hell has 1991 got to do with 2024 and that I should draw my own conclusions. What a stupid reply.
ReplyDeleteThere is at least ten fold increase in travel since then. When I went in 90 to watch World Cup, that was a big thing. Thesedays every Tom Dick and Harry is travelling, so demand is much higher, supply here in Australia is limited, as far as I know. So yes, in my complete ignorance of the airline business, I would fill an A330 at least once weekly for Belgrade/Zagreb!!!