# top 30 cities with the largest international passenger flow



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)




----------



## Brett (Oct 26, 2004)

I've only been to four of those airports, i'd better start travelling some more


----------



## ChinaboyUSA (May 10, 2005)

I think the statistic is pretty old, since I didn't see the citation and the date of releasing. I am thinking if you made it by yourself


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

I think the list is correct, but it doesn't refer to the overall airport traffic (transiting), but to the people visiting the cities.

Dubai had 5 milion visitors last year, exactly what the chart shows. If the chart would have been about the overall airport traffic, then Dubai Airport had more then 23 million, but most of them transit.


----------



## George W. Bush (Mar 18, 2005)

I thought Dallas/Fort Worth was the one with the highest passenger number? A figure somewhat over 100 million per year, way more than Chicago, London or New York.


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

^ As explained this is not about the passanger traffic, but about people who actually visit the place. Those who pass transit on a way to another city, doesn't count.


----------



## London_2006 (Feb 9, 2003)

George W. Bush said:


> I thought Dallas/Fort Worth was the one with the highest passenger number? A figure somewhat over 100 million per year, way more than Chicago, London or New York.


These are not individual airports, they are cities as a whole. 

London is by far the busiest airport hub in the world; it has 5 international airports.

If it was based on passenger traffic then London would still have a lead of around 30 million, with Chicago and LA 2nd/3rd.


----------



## Effer (Jun 9, 2005)

The chart is outdated.


----------



## Ionizer (Jun 8, 2005)

I dont understand this... how is possible if Mexico City's main airport has a traffic about 20 million a year?


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Guys, you don't get it. This is based on the number whose final destination or starting point is London, etc. Usually, when Mexico City says they have 20 million passengers in the airport, it's true, but that's also including those tho fly from Toronto to Acupulco but have to change planes in Mexico. At least that's what I understand. Am I right here?

I've been to 18!


----------



## Justme (Sep 11, 2002)

Where is Tokyo?


----------



## malek (Nov 16, 2004)

Could you expand your list more to include more cities?

SOURCES?!?!?!


----------



## Madman (Dec 29, 2003)

Justme said:


> Where is Tokyo?


In Japan mate!


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

Justme said:


> Where is Tokyo?


It's one the list, but surprisingly low...

I'm not sure about what these numbers represent. Some cities are suspiciously low if this chart is meant to show end destination passengers as some claim...


----------



## rantanamo (Sep 12, 2002)

I'd be curious as to the average distance of each of those international flights. Also, how many of those flights out of London are European? I ask that because the distances to other international cities in Europe are shockingly much shorter than the cities in Texas are to each other.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Not on that list is Philly International, I find this peculiar....its a friggin' city within a city. Even though its the 17th busiest it is quite monstrous.


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

Justme said:


> Where is Tokyo?


in 23th


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

malek said:


> Could you expand your list more to include more cities?
> 
> SOURCES?!?!?!


http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb157.html


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

SHiRO said:


> It's one the list, but surprisingly low...
> 
> I'm not sure about what these numbers represent. Some cities are suspiciously low if this chart is meant to show end destination passengers as some claim...


http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb157.html

‘Tokyo is not the dominant regional hub in East Asia (…), but Singapore and Hong Kong are the most important centres of Asian regional traffic (…).’. Later, Rimmer (2000, p. 84) came to similar conclusions.


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

the overseas tourists in hong kong per year is more than that in the whole japan


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

find ! where is tokyo

Table 6: Intra-Pacific Asia flows

Rank
Between
And
Number of passengers

1
Hong Kong
Taipei
2 138 608

2
Bangkok
Hong Kong
1 141 063

3
Bangkok
Singapore
1 024 818

4
Hong Kong
Singapore
827 739

5
Jakarta
Singapore
816 980

6
Kuala Lumpur
Singapore
711 309

7
Hong Kong
Manila
653 307

8
Hong Kong
Shanghai
636 547

9
Seoul
Tokyo
617 900

10
Macau
Taipei
576 682

When comparing tables 5 and 6, it can be noted that the first two intra-Pacific Asian connections (Hong Kong-Taipei and Bangkok-Hong Kong) are part of the top 10 of the largest worldwide connections. Note that the amount of passengers travelling on the 10 largest intra-Pacific Asian connections represents 44% of the total intra-Pacific Asian travellers (see table 2). The connection Hong Kong-Taipei is quite a dominant connection; the passenger flow on this link is almost twice as large as on the second most important intra-Pacific Asia connection. The dominant city in Pacific Asia is clearly Hong Kong. This comes however not as a surprise. Hong Kong, as pointed out by O’Connor (1995, p. 278), is strategically the best placed airport in Pacific Asia. It can exploit its centrality between the northern economies of Korea and Japan, and the fast growing south, as well as the central and southern part of China. As an international hub airport, Hong Kong also remains one of the few Asian cities with non-stop daily services to Europe and the United States of America.


----------



## kamloon (Aug 8, 2004)

Table 5: Top 10 of the largest relations

Rank
Between
And
Number of passengers

1
Hong Kong
Taipei
2 138 608

2
London
New York
1 610 404

3
Melbourne
Sydney
1 563 106

4
Los Angeles
New York
1 534 285

5
Milan
Rome
1 534 156

6
Cape Town
Johannesburg
1 406 897

7
Amsterdam
London
1 242 822

8
Chicago
New York
1 161 181

9
Bangkok
Hong Kong
1 141 063

10
London
Paris
1 064 510


----------



## nick_taylor (Mar 7, 2003)

rantanamo said:


> I'd be curious as to the average distance of each of those international flights. Also, how many of those flights out of London are European? I ask that because the distances to other international cities in Europe are shockingly much shorter than the cities in Texas are to each other.


I estimate the European figure to be around 30mppa....but that includes all of Europe. That would mean London's air hub would be 100mppa - still larger than any other city air hub on the planet. When you factor this in for other cities, such as the 2nd largest air hub on the planet: New York City for locality to Canada and other countries within a 2,000km radius of the city (similar to that of London and Europe), the 90mppa of NYC falls down to 80mppa.

However the majority of journeys from London to Europe aren't short-haul flights, they are either via Eurostar (10mn journeys each year) and Le Shuttle through the Channel Tunnel or cross-channel ferries.

Then again France is a totally different country from Britain, unlike say New York state to Ohio State, with different political, cultural, economic and social patterns. Either way, London remains the world's largest, most connected city on the planet with more flights, more destinations and a larger selection of tickets than any other city air hub in the world.


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

When you consider how many flights to/from London are from nearby countries in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, etc., New York's figures are amazing. It's interesting too to see how many flights there are between NY and London. Anyway, these figures demonstrate that NY, London and Paris are really in a separate league from the rest of the world.


----------



## rocky (Apr 20, 2005)

the geographical position is important.
the UK is an island, while paris is on the continent.


----------



## PrimaVera (Mar 15, 2005)

something is strange here or maybe undated
in Tel Aviv int. number of arrivals and departures is 10 million ayear. 
there are no transit or connection passengers.
but on that site the airport is located between 2-4 million?


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

MikeHunt said:


> When you consider how many flights to/from London are from nearby countries in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, etc., New York's figures are amazing. It's interesting too to see how many flights there are between NY and London. Anyway, these figures demonstrate that NY, London and Paris are really in a separate league from the rest of the world.


Eh?, perhaps you didn't read the rest of the thread, particularly nick taylor's post?


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

SHiRO said:


> Eh?, perhaps you didn't read the rest of the thread, particularly nick taylor's post?


I did read Taylor's post, but I don't agree with it. People take the train from London to Paris, but they also fly. People from London also fly to other parts of France. Ever heard of Easy Jet, Ryan Air, etc.? Moreover, if all of the 50 states were independent countries, NY's numbers would dwarf every other city's.


----------



## Vapour (Jul 31, 2002)

kamloon said:


> Table 5: Top 10 of the largest relations
> 
> Rank
> Between
> ...


I don't know where did you get that list from, but it's *very* outdated and misses the busiest routes; 

Madrid - Barcelona and Tokyo - Osaka are about 4 million a year; Seoul - Jeju something around 5 million; Tokyo - Sapporo and Tokyo - Fukuoka over 8 million.


----------



## nick_taylor (Mar 7, 2003)

MikeHunt said:


> I did read Taylor's post, but I don't agree with it. People take the train from London to Paris, but they also fly. People from London also fly to other parts of France. Ever heard of Easy Jet, Ryan Air, etc.? Moreover, if all of the 50 states were independent countries, NY's numbers would dwarf every other city's.


I don't think you did read my post, because I actually took European travel into account, hence the deducted total for London which is 100mppa, instead of the 130mppa it is. New York in comparison has a total air hub of 90mppa which is still smaller than the subtracted London European flights (even though it is a serious and big chunk). Then again you have to factor in the same again for New York - Canada would for example be exempt, as would large swathes of the Caribbean (New York-Havana is 1,309miles; compared to London-Kiev of 1,323miles or even London-Istanbul at 1,551miles) which could be considered 'neighbours' and the mppa of New York falls down to around 80mppa. A difference compared to the current London (130mppa) and New York (90mppa) air hubs indeed, but still a difference. What is interesting though is that more and more people are looking further abroad; eco-tourism for example is becoming ironically one of the strongest choices for international holiday flights and this is mostly centered around countries along the equator!

Also I will also bring up the fact that is New York State so different from Ohio State? Is the difference as radical as say the UK to France? As radical as different culture, politics, economy, military, social models, etc...? Answer to that question is simply that France is radically different from the UK to a far larger extent than New York state is to Ohio state, even though geography might say otherwise. Geo-politics tells us also that New York and Ohio are states, while the UK and France are countries, meaning one is domestic, the other international. Then again, even if the states of the US were seperate countries, like France is from the UK, the New York air hub is still only 90mppa! London as a comparison would still be at 130mppa as you would be comparing different "countries/states", so you are incorrect in thinking that it would _"dewarf every other city's"_. On top of that it would still be smaller even if you were trying to argue that each and every state in the US was a different country, but argued at the same time that Europe was somehow one country by 10mppa! :laugh:

Either way, London is by the largest air hub in existence on the planet with a whole 40mppa difference between itself and the next largest city air hub (New York). Were quite fortunate enough to have such a well connected city on our doorstep!

I shall also highlight that connectivity between say London and Paris is greater than say New York and Toronto with dedicated HSR lines. North America for instance totally lacks a HSR network other than the Acela (and even then its not like Eurostar, ICE or TGV). More people for instance take Eurostar from London to Paris than the London-Paris air route by a ratio of roughly 1:6. The figure increases further when you factor in Le Shuttle and car journies via ferries.


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

nick-taylor said:


> ...
> Also I will also bring up the fact that is New York State so different from Ohio State? Is the difference as radical as say the UK to France? As radical as different culture, politics, economy, military, social models, etc...?...


Hi, amigo.

I don't have time to respond to your whole post, but the answer to your question of NY v. Ohio is a resounding yes! NYC is more different than Ohio than the UK is to France. Unlike the UK and France, NYC and Ohio have nothing whatsoever in common (except for a common language of course).


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

He said New York state.
How much do you think London has in comon with the French countryside?
Or Paris for that matter...


----------



## ChinaboyUSA (May 10, 2005)

What about Beijing <> Shanghai, Chongqing <> Chengdu, Beijing <> Hong Kong


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

SHiRO said:


> He said New York state.
> How much do you think London has in comon with the French countryside?
> Or Paris for that matter...


I realize what he said, but I'm addressing what was inferred.


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

Whatever... New York is not a bigger airhub than London, no matter how you want to calculate it...


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

SHiRO said:


> Whatever... New York is not a bigger airhub than London, no matter how you want to calculate it...


Whatever you say, Shi...

NY is a much bigger city than London is, and therefore, it makes sense that it would have more international flights.

The fact that in an area the size of the US (i.e., Europe), there are about 25 nations rather than one will yield far more "international" flights. If going from NY to Pennsylvania were international....


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

New York isn't a "much bigger city" than London either.
Citywise they are pretty close, 7.3 million vs 8.1 million and also metrowise 18 million vs 21 million. New York metro takes up more area and is less dense though. Also, England is more populated then any similar sized area around NYC.

btw why are we still discussing this? READ NICK TAYLOR'S POST. NYC is not a bigger airhub than London, NO MATTER HOW YOU COUNT.
Even if you pretend the rest of Europe is not international, London still beats New York!


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

NY is way bigger than London. London does not have 18M people. If you fly into Heathrow, Gatwick or Stanstead, you see open fields all over. That is not the case with NY. If one travels due East onto Long Island, after 70 miles from Manhattan, there are very dense suburbs the whole way. This is not the case with London. I've lived in both cities for several years, and therefore, I am more qualified to know than someone who has not.

Also, in the 500 mile stretch from Boston to Washington, there are about 60,000,000 people, which is the same population as the UK, but in a smaller area.


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

Greenbelt


----------



## MikeHunt (Nov 28, 2004)

I'm well aware of the Greenbelt, but the whole notion of a metro area is one consistent area that is thoroughly populated (like the 90 mile stretch between NY and Philly) -- not city, then fields, then suburbs, then fields, etc.

In fact, Kent is enormous, and the distance from London to the end of Kent is at least as far as NY to Philly. Combining NY and Philly (which are an hour and eight minutes apart via high speed rail) gives a metro are with about 30 million people.

I'm not knocking London. I love it, but anyone who thinks that it's almost as big as NY is delusional.


----------

