F27500 wrote:

.. Uhhhh … Colombia? Who got bribed? Gotta be KIDDING me ...

Not all Colombians are dishonest people, and not all dishonest people are Colombians.... There is dishonest people everywhere, as a Colombian I find your comment very offensive. I wish people would stick to talk about aviation

Also, for pre-clearance airports, once you pass through border control, do they hold you in a room where you are not allowed to leave?

US pre-clearance at Caribbean Islands and Canadian airports is one thing but at a Latin American( except in Mexico ) Airport is a bad idea. What next pre-clearance at Heathrow, very bad idea. The "pre-clearance cheerleaders" want to have FIS facilities at all kinds of foreign airports, FIS facilities should only be at airports which have lots of flights to smaller US cities which are not big enough to have customs. These smaller destinations would be in North America, Canada and perhaps in the future Mexican cities like Cancun or Mexico City.

Could you imagine if foreign countries wanted their own border stations at US airports, we would find that unacceptable, probably. Japan border at Honolulu and LAX or every European country at JFK. Customs should be cleared at arrivals.

720B wrote:

F27500 wrote:

.. Uhhhh … Colombia? Who got bribed? Gotta be KIDDING me ...

Not all Colombians are dishonest people, and not all dishonest people are Colombians.... There is dishonest people everywhere, as a Colombian I find your comment very offensive. I wish people would stick to talk about aviation

Of course not .. but enough people there ARE .. . and I am using your drug cartels as my example.

Does anyone know if you can use the mobile passport app at the preclearance airports? I'm flying to/from Dublin this spring and hope to use it at the pre clearance in DUB. I love the mobile passport, it gets me through quicker than global entry and it's free.

rph99 wrote:

Surely Panama is a realistic prediction for the next one.

No, PTY most likely will not get pre clearance. Even CM's CEO is against it. With Pre clearance, CM will not be able to have connections to the US of less than 1 hour as they do now.

F27500 wrote:

720B wrote:

F27500 wrote:

.. Uhhhh … Colombia? Who got bribed? Gotta be KIDDING me ...

Not all Colombians are dishonest people, and not all dishonest people are Colombians.... There is dishonest people everywhere, as a Colombian I find your comment very offensive. I wish people would stick to talk about aviation

Of course not .. but enough people there ARE .. . and I am using your drug cartels as my example.

Well, not all Americans have a middle school equivalent education, but if I were to generalize based on your posts, one would say america has the most bigoted, ignorant people who are incapable of acquiring basic knowledge of the outside world or of respecting other cultures and nationalities. Following your brilliant train of thought, not everybody is like that in the US, but enough people are for me to make such an assumption.

Back to the topic,

Seeing all of these criticisms against pre-clearance, I think I can summarize them into pre-clearance being often understaffed and cumbersome. I actually just read an article on how pre-clearance in AUH is still a mess.

We'll see how it develops at BOG. Hopefully the authorities will take note form past mistakes and carefully staff the area and actually build a new facility for pre-clearance (I don't know where it would fit in the current terminal configuration).

F27500 wrote:

720B wrote:

F27500 wrote:

.. Uhhhh … Colombia? Who got bribed? Gotta be KIDDING me ...

Not all Colombians are dishonest people, and not all dishonest people are Colombians.... There is dishonest people everywhere, as a Colombian I find your comment very offensive. I wish people would stick to talk about aviation

Of course not .. but enough people there ARE .. . and I am using your drug cartels as my example.

Wrong again, which shows your ignorance on the topic. The number of dishonest people is small compared to the number of honest people; which unfortunately has created a bad reputation for the country. As sad as the fact there are some dishonest people, it is sad people stigmatizes a country or ethnic group just because of what they see on the media.

I do apologize to other posters / forum participants for deviating from the topic but I really needed to say this.

MODS, please feel free to delete, as well as comments of F27500 since this has nothing to do with the topic at hand

When I used it travelling through DUB, I found it very convenient and was relieved after 8 hours over the ocean not to have to put up with it in PHL when I landed. That being said, I hadn't realized the logistics involved in the program until I used it, and why it would be a nightmare at a large(r) airport such as LHR:

• The airport must have consistent and plentiful US service to make the infrastructure "worth it".
• All US-bound operations must depart from the same terminal if they want to take advantage of the service. This would require at, say, LHR, all US-bound BA, UA, DL, AA, NZ, and any other flights to be moved to a new terminal, unless LHR wanted to construct more than one facility.
• Once through pre-clearance, you cannot go anywhere but through the jetway. Thus, there must be sufficient dining, shopping, and lounge options past preclearance.
• Similarly, there can really only be one way in and out. There must be easy and clear connections from any arrival gate to preclearance, and any passengers not going to the United States must have just as easy a way to get either to another connecting gate or the baggage claim.

With all this in mind, it is much easier from a logistics point of view to have passengers clear customs and immigration after landing in the US.

Another waste of time having preclearance at BOG or at any airport where the flights are to major cities in US which already have CBP. Only works for Canadian cities which have flights to smaller US cities which are not normally staffed with CBP. Abu Dhabi especially is baffling. The only city where it may make sense outside Canada and Caribbean would be Cancun and may be Mexico City.

RCS763AV wrote:

Seeing all of these criticisms against pre-clearance, I think I can summarize them into pre-clearance being often understaffed and cumbersome. I actually just read an article on how pre-clearance in AUH is still a mess.

We'll see how it develops at BOG. Hopefully the authorities will take note form past mistakes and carefully staff the area and actually build a new facility for pre-clearance (I don't know where it would fit in the current terminal configuration).

I was wondering the same thing: There is not much more space left, if any, on the current terminal...may be expand the building to the east?

I like the idea. It can't be worst that those long times in Miami or Houston. Last time I transited via Houston (Jan 2018) had a 3 hour layover, and despite the flight being on time I missed my connection to Toronto. I think it should work, and hopefully does

hohd wrote:

Another waste of time having preclearance at BOG or at any airport where the flights are to major cities in US which already have CBP. Only works for Canadian cities which have flights to smaller US cities which are not normally staffed with CBP. Abu Dhabi especially is baffling. The only city where it may make sense outside Canada and Caribbean would be Cancun and may be Mexico City.

I think a lot of passengers appreciate not having to clear customs after arrival, especially after 15 hours flying something like AUH-IAD. I agree it is smart for airports like YYZ from a logistical standpoint to add places like DCA and LGA. But that is not the only reason to have them.

In general US airlines support pre-clearance as it makes their hubs more attractive, particularly for connecting passengers.

The ability to sell shorter and possibly wider set of connections at U.S. hub end benefits the airlines and customers when flights arrive essentially as domestic journeys.
Also the ability to not rely on international gates and facilities on U.S ends reduces operational complexity and lessens ops burden on in most cases cost of the flight on the U.S. end.

Also to add to the conversation, customer surveys have shown that passengers rate journeys with pre-clearance higher than similar journeys with customs on the U.S. end. The fact that people must endure what is often a time consuming, less than pleasant and often stressful experience at the end of their journeys when they are tired, leaves them with a more negative perception of their entire journey.

And from the U.S. government end, pre-clearance helps by leaving problematic passengers overseas and also reduces pressure on facilities on the U.S. end, especially at large and busy gateways.

720B wrote:

F27500 wrote:

720B wrote:

Not all Colombians are dishonest people, and not all dishonest people are Colombians.... There is dishonest people everywhere, as a Colombian I find your comment very offensive. I wish people would stick to talk about aviation

Of course not .. but enough people there ARE .. . and I am using your drug cartels as my example.

Wrong again, which shows your ignorance on the topic. The number of dishonest people is small compared to the number of honest people; which unfortunately has created a bad reputation for the country. As sad as the fact there are some dishonest people, it is sad people stigmatizes a country or ethnic group just because of what they see on the media.

I do apologize to other posters / forum participants for deviating from the topic but I really needed to say this.

MODS, please feel free to delete, as well as comments of F27500 since this has nothing to do with the topic at hand

No, sorry. Recent history shows that this is not a country that should be trusted with pre-clearance of any kind.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... mbian.html

F27500 wrote:

720B wrote:

F27500 wrote:

Of course not .. but enough people there ARE .. . and I am using your drug cartels as my example.

Wrong again, which shows your ignorance on the topic. The number of dishonest people is small compared to the number of honest people; which unfortunately has created a bad reputation for the country. As sad as the fact there are some dishonest people, it is sad people stigmatizes a country or ethnic group just because of what they see on the media.

I do apologize to other posters / forum participants for deviating from the topic but I really needed to say this.

MODS, please feel free to delete, as well as comments of F27500 since this has nothing to do with the topic at hand

No, sorry. Recent history shows that this is not a country that should be trusted with pre-clearance of any kind.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... mbian.html

What are you on about? Apart from showing your ignorance of the Colombia of today, nobody is "trusting anyboby with pre-clearance". Those CBP agents at BOG will be just as much US citizens as the ones at JFK or DFW, they will be sent out from the US to work at BOG. Has been mentioned several times in the thread, and shouldn't be a difficult concept to grasp.

Seems to me that if BOG is getting preclearance, MEX and CUN should be next in line with GDL/MTY/SJD not far behind. If you had preclearance in Mexico, a large number of smaller airports could do away with their own CBP facilities, as often the only international flights are to Mexico.

usdcaguy wrote:

Seems to me that if BOG is getting preclearance, MEX and CUN should be next in line with GDL/MTY/SJD not far behind. If you had preclearance in Mexico, a large number of smaller airports could do away with their own CBP facilities, as often the only international flights are to Mexico.

Sure alot of wild guesses there.

Only Mexican airport approved for negotiations with DHS per the 2015-2016 agreement was MEX, but with the cancellation of the new airport project that idea is probably dead also.

LAXintl wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Seems to me that if BOG is getting preclearance, MEX and CUN should be next in line with GDL/MTY/SJD not far behind. If you had preclearance in Mexico, a large number of smaller airports could do away with their own CBP facilities, as often the only international flights are to Mexico.

Sure alot of wild guesses there.

Only Mexican airport approved for negotiations with DHS per the 2015-2016 agreement was MEX, but with the cancellation of the new airport project that idea is probably dead also.

If memory serves, most major airports in the region (sans CCS for obvious reasons) were on the shortlist, such as EZE, BOG, GRU, etc. For some odd reason, SCL was not.

Kilgen wrote:

rph99 wrote:

Surely Panama is a realistic prediction for the next one.

No, PTY most likely will not get pre clearance. Even CM's CEO is against it. With Pre clearance, CM will not be able to have connections to the US of less than 1 hour as they do now.

Rumour is that in 1990 when PTY was fixed after some damage December 20, 1989, U.S. offered to Panama, but the government then wasn't interested.
Today, U.S. pre-clearance @ PTY would likely make CM hub less attractive.

As of connecting traffic thru BOG when it gets U.S. pre-clearance, one could only guess, but surely +90 minutes connecting time may be a must.

BWIAirport wrote:

hohd wrote:

Another waste of time having preclearance at BOG or at any airport where the flights are to major cities in US which already have CBP. Only works for Canadian cities which have flights to smaller US cities which are not normally staffed with CBP. Abu Dhabi especially is baffling. The only city where it may make sense outside Canada and Caribbean would be Cancun and may be Mexico City.

I think a lot of passengers appreciate not having to clear customs after arrival, especially after 15 hours flying something like AUH-IAD. I agree it is smart for airports like YYZ from a logistical standpoint to add places like DCA and LGA. But that is not the only reason to have them.

It's funny you mention that particular route because it's the one that gave me a distaste for preclearance. I used to fly that route pretty frequently and I used to hate showing up early to do it. Clearing customs at IAD is normally pretty quick in my experience, though other airports can definitely be worse. I even missed a connection through AUH once because the flight out of BKK landed a bit late and I got there about 50 minutes before departure, but still too late.

It works much better in Canada but doing it at AUH sucks. BOG would help take some pressure off of CBP at MIA and JFK specifically, and that's always a good thing.

jfk777 wrote:

Could you imagine if foreign countries wanted their own border stations at US airports, we would find that unacceptable, probably. Japan border at Honolulu and LAX or every European country at JFK. Customs should be cleared at arrivals.

I see absolutely no problem with Japanese border preclearance at HNL, or GUM, nor would I have a problem with Schengen-area preclearance at my home airport of PHL, nor any other major TATL hub, although some airports would not work very well with that setup (JFK being particularly bad).

Since the EU has no mechanism for funding or staffing a border facility outside of its member nations' territories, that is not a likely thing to happen soon. But honestly, trading preclearance at Narita for preclearance at Honolulu should have happened years ago, and would be a major benefit to travelers.

PHLCVGAMTK wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Could you imagine if foreign countries wanted their own border stations at US airports, we would find that unacceptable, probably. Japan border at Honolulu and LAX or every European country at JFK. Customs should be cleared at arrivals.

I see absolutely no problem with Japanese border preclearance at HNL, or GUM, nor would I have a problem with Schengen-area preclearance at my home airport of PHL, nor any other major TATL hub, although some airports would not work very well with that setup (JFK being particularly bad).

Since the EU has no mechanism for funding or staffing a border facility outside of its member nations' territories, that is not a likely thing to happen soon. But honestly, trading preclearance at Narita for preclearance at Honolulu should have happened years ago, and would be a major benefit to travelers.

On top of that, I'm pretty sure the treaties that allow preclearance also allow the countries the option to set up their own immigration facilities. Just that nobody has taken them up on the offer. For the case of Japan from HNL, it honestly wouldn't make much sense given how efficient Japanese immigration is in Japan since you'll be through before your bag is on the belt anyway. The issue why US preclearance is so attractive is that US doesn't offer sterile transfer so everyone will have to enter the US. When I fly to LHR, I rarely enter the UK so having a UK border would be pointless.

RCS763AV wrote:

F27500 wrote:

720B wrote:

I actually just read an article on how pre-clearance in AUH is still a mess.

.

Do you have a link for that? I'd be interested in having a read. I'm familiar with the how preclearance works in DUB, but don't know much about AUH. DUB have made a lot of tech and IT improvements in preclearance which has massively improved the passenger experience and reduced queues. Prior to this it was hard to see the benefit to people, but now I think there's a big one.

720B wrote:

I like the idea. It can't be worst that those long times in Miami or Houston. Last time I transited via Houston (Jan 2018) had a 3 hour layover, and despite the flight being on time I missed my connection to Toronto. I think it should work, and hopefully does

A CUN pre-clearance would be good, providing it has enough capacity!

18 months back, I flew CUN-IAH-AKL-MEL. Had a 4 hour layover in Houston, with the long wait time meant that I just made my flight to Auckland. This also meant that my bags didn't make it home to MEL with me, they had an extra 24 hours layover in IAH......

A MEL or SYD preclearance might be a good idea (having to navigate CPB lines after getting off a 14 hour flight isn't the best experience, especially when the kiosk gives you the red cross!), but I'd say the airport operators mightn't be a fan due to the space required & it means folk on US-bound flights have less time for shopping, etc....

jfk777 wrote:

US pre-clearance at Caribbean Islands and Canadian airports is one thing but at a Latin American( except in Mexico )
Could you imagine if foreign countries wanted their own border stations at US airports, we would find that unacceptable, probably. Japan border at Honolulu and LAX or every European country at JFK. Customs should be cleared at arrivals.

The Cayman Islands (UK Border Force) has pre-clearance out of MIA.

Does it create more hardship for CBP agents at pre-clearance? family has to move to that country and sometimes more expensive than living stateside, are salaries comparable or adjusted to living conditions?

OK, please someone, name all those stations served by YYZ pre-clearance that don't have CBP at the destination airport!

jfk777 wrote:

FIS facilities should only be at airports which have lots of flights to smaller US cities which are not big enough to have customs.

By law preclearance is not a substitute for local FIS facilities. If an airport can not process international flights on its own then preclearance is not an option.

There is a pre clearance facility in Abu Dhabi as well.