| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:20 pm Post subject: KAL ranks #1 in cargo freight. Hub of Asia! |
 |
|
When Korean Air began running cargo flights to the United States in 1971, company executives knocked on the hotel-room doors of American businessmen importing wigs, then a major export item from South Korea, begging them to try an airline they had hardly heard of.
Three decades later, Korean Air is now the largest carrier of airfreight on international routes. Riding on South Korea's booming technology industry, the airline now carries semiconductors, flat-panel TV screens and cellphones to 38 destinations in 25 countries.
"We owe our success to the government's policy of encouraging exports," Cho Yang Ho, chairman of Korean Air, said in June, when data from the International Air Transport Association confirmed it as the No. 1 international freight carrier. FedEx carries a much larger overall volume of cargo, but much of that is within the United States.
Next up for Korean Air is tapping into the massive Chinese market and its soaring exports.
Lacking airfreight facilities at home, many Chinese exporters are sending their air cargo through Incheon, the international airport west of Seoul from which Korean Air runs an extensive cargo network to North America and Europe.
"Compared with other major airports in the region, Incheon offers lower handling fees for airlines," said Chang Kun Ho, a transport analyst at Goodmorning Shinhan Securities in Seoul.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/14/business/transcol15.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nrvs
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Location: standing upright on a curve
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://aviation-safety.net/statistics/geographical/worst_geo_loc.php
| Quote: |
Worst geographical regions
1 USA 619 9766 124
2 Russia 164 5259 19
3 Colombia 152 2647 30
4 Brazil 138 2080 57
5 Canada 131 1603 2
etc.
|
(Korea didn't make the list)
The point is that whenever someone brings up new bus routes not being published in english quickly enough, or the fact you can't buy TimTams in Jeonju everyone on here has a great time going
"Oh yeah- hub of asia- the cub of asia more like!"
but when you actually understand what that phrase means...oh why bother. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Butterfly
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: Kuwait
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Swiss James wrote: |
The point is that whenever someone brings up new bus routes not being published in english quickly enough, or the fact you can't buy TimTams in Jeonju everyone on here has a great time going
"Oh yeah- hub of asia- the cub of asia more like!"
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Swiss James wrote: |
but when you actually understand what that phrase means...oh why bother. |
I didn't mean to rain on your parade. Well, I guess I did. old habits die hard, yadda yadda yadda.
Yes, you're right, Koreans are making great progress on what has up to now seemed to be a boastful and ridiculous statement. Pretty amazing when you think about it.
But proud of Korean Air Cargo? SJ you have to give at least a few days of adjustment to allow this to sink in. It's pretty stunning news.
Perhaps I'll get over my KAL prejudice (never had anything against Asiana, btw) eventually in the same way that I outgrew the ones I held about other Korean products. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Swiss James wrote: |
1 USA 619 9766 124
2 Russia 164 5259 19
3 Colombia 152 2647 30
4 Brazil 138 2080 57
5 Canada 131 1603 2
etc. |
The Atlantic ocean appears on the same list. The last time I noticed it wasn't a country.
| Quote: |
| Korea didn't make the list |
That's because the survey was only concerned with where the accidents took place. For example, if a Korean air jumbo jet crashed in the UK the list would attribute that crash to the UK. It didn't measure per capita accident ratios, and it didn't even measure the performance of individual airlines. Thus, it stands to reason that those countries with a high volume of air traffic in their airspace have a stronger chance of appearing in the list. I would guess that the US being the size it is economically, and geographically, it would feature quite high on that list. If we start measuring airline crashes per capita and airline then a few African countries, and even Korea would appear quite high on any such list.
In a list which measured accidents on a per capita basis Korea Air finished ninth in a list of sixty global airlines. Even most of the African countries performed better. If you wish to defend Korea, it would be advisable to steer clear of any discussions about safety.
http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/
Last edited by Gwangjuboy on Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| ...If we start measuring airline crashes per capita and airline then a few African countries, and even Korea would appear quite high on any such list. |
this kind of thing is hard to get statistics for- do you include military aircraft? How about US nationals travelling on foreign airlines? Do you factor in the average number of hours flown (domestic, international) per capita?
Here is another stat
Mortality due to powered aircraft accident (per capita)
[Bahrain top, Korea not listed]
It's not the point I'm trying to make, although of course it does bring up another example of the endless negativism on this board...
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| Korea would appear quite high on any such list |
-
yeah I'm kind of quoting you out of context there, but did you actually find any figures to back that up or was it just a case of
"Well my hagwon doesn't even have a fire exit so I guess Korean planes must crash a lot"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| Swiss James wrote: |
1 USA 619 9766 124
2 Russia 164 5259 19
3 Colombia 152 2647 30
4 Brazil 138 2080 57
5 Canada 131 1603 2
etc. |
The Atlantic ocean appears on the same list. The last time I noticed it wasn't a country.
|
and by the way, congratulations for cutting off the
"Worst geographical regions " bit of my quote, and then smirking because the Atlantic isn't a country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Swiss James wrote: |
| It's not the point I'm trying to make, although of course it does bring up another example of the endless negativism on this board... |
Korea has a dreadful safety record. It might be negative, but it's a fact,
| Quote: |
| yeah I'm kind of quoting you out of context there, but did you actually find any figures to back that up or was it just a case of |
In a list which measured accidents on a per capita basis Korea Air finished ninth in a list of sixty global airlines. Even most of the African countries performed better. If you wish to defend Korea, it would be advisable to steer clear of any discussions about safety.
http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/
| Quote: |
| "Well my hagwon doesn't even have a fire exit so I guess Korean planes must crash a lot"? |
I don't work in a hagwon.
| Quote: |
and by the way, congratulations for cutting off the
"Worst geographical regions " bit of my quote, and then smirking because the Atlantic isn't a country. |
It wasn't intentional. However, I am surprised that you refered to such a list in the first place; it was inappropriate considering the discussion at hand. A Korean Air plane once crashed in Stanstead airport, thus elevating the UK in that list. Of course, nobody was making an argument based on where plane crashes take place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
thanks for the link, that was the kind of thing I was trying to find.
I'll hold my hands up here- I reckon those stats are better than per capita, they're per flight which, since most of KAL's air traffic is cargo (i.e. one fatal crash would mean 2-4 deaths)- does show a poor safety record. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
periwinkle
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KAL passed its IOSA safety audit earlier this year, and passed with flying colors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| periwinkle wrote: |
| KAL passed its IOSA safety audit earlier this year, and passed with flying colors. |
Hmm- then I guess what we really need, are the statistics for how many crashes they plan to have in the future. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
billybrobby
Joined: 09 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Korea is right behind Japan in the alphabetic crash fatality listing |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
casinoman
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think what increases the per capita figures are the fatalities that occured from non-technical or pilot error. (ie. the bombing of a Korean airliner in 1988 and the Russians shooting down one in '83-well I guess that was 'pilot error' cause he strayed into Soviet airspace. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
