Soon, the crowd talked about the right to get off at the destination and the right to get off at the destination.

As it may seem obvious, the content and scope of the mandates of these two treaties are not difficult to understand. For countries, what really needs to be considered is which countries they need to ask for this mandate, which countries they are prepared to open it to, and which countries are ideal partners for them.

Compared with the right to overfly and the right to technical stopover, countries obviously invest more energy and attention in the right to disembark passengers at the destination and the right to passengers at the destination, after all, in which country to get on and off passengers, or to load and unload goods, directly affects the economic aspect, from the perspective of security, but also affects the security of the country. Therefore, the countries that issue their authorizations must be trusted partners. If a country is a concentration camp for terrorists, or if the country is strongly hostile to its own country, it is difficult for that country to agree to open the right to drop off and to board at the destination.

For some small countries, it is natural to want to establish ties with the powerful countries, asking them for the right to drop off at the destination and the right to board at the destination. Whether they can be transported to the guests is secondary, the key is the goods, if they can be transported from the powerful country in a steady stream of materials, it can greatly improve their current situation, the benefits are obvious. For the powerful countries, the need for this is much smaller.

At present, the total number of flights is limited, and there are still a few passenger planes, most of the time they are cargo planes. For these powers, they naturally prefer their partners who are open and licensed to be as strong as they are, or at least able to bring them considerable benefits in some way. Regardless of the fact that many of these European countries believe in God, they are not philanthropists and do not show mercy to any country.

Fortunately, in their eyes, Huaguo is a worthy partner to deal with.

With little effort, Gu Shuhan and Bai Yu smoothly exchanged the right to drop off and pick up passengers at the destination with countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Canada and other countries, which means that in the next few years, the exchanges between China and these countries will become more frequent than before, and the sense of distance due to geographical location will also be pulled in one flight after another. Economically, with one more common interest, their partnership will be closer than ever.

Gu Shuhan and the envoys from various countries had smiles on their faces, as if they had really become the closest partners and community of interests. For the envoys of these countries, they may not have clearly thought of the two definitions of the right to get off at the destination and the right to get on the passenger at the destination before they arrived, but the establishment of air routes with more countries must be one of their goals here.

Now, this can be said to be a win-win goal, and everyone is happy. For the envoys of some countries, their mission may have ended, only Gu Shuhan pursed his lips and was still waiting. Because she knew that her battle had just begun.

Article 5, the right of intermediate point and the right to extend distance, is not yet a navigation right that has been paid too much attention by the state, but for Gu Shuhan, it is inevitable.

If China and Britain establish a relationship and allow each other's flights to disembark on their own land, they will be deemed to have given each other the right to drop off passengers at their destination and the right to pick up passengers at their destination. If, on this basis, China signs an agreement with France and obtains the right to the intermediate point and the right to extend from France, then on the way to the United Kingdom, the Chinese flight can land in France, pick up and drop off passengers and load and unload goods in France, and then fly to the United Kingdom (intermediate point right); Or after flying to the UK, the Chinese flight can also land in France to pick up and drop off passengers and load and unload cargo (extension right).

In short, if the right of the guest on the ground and the right of the guest on the destination are only a matter for two countries, then the right of the intermediate point and the right of extension involve a third country. Due to the fact that the number of flights in various countries is very small, and most of them are mainly freight, most countries do not pay much attention to the right of intermediate point and the right of extension. A peer-to-peer connection with another country is enough to meet their daily needs.

But China is different, firstly, the number of flights in China is much larger than that of other European countries, and secondly, it is a cost-effective and time-saving thing to run a flight and pull two batches of guests or two batches of goods.

After the fifth right of navigation, there is the sixth right of navigation, the right of bridge. The definition of the right to bridge is similar to that of the fifth right of navigation, which also involves more than three countries, and uses their own country as a bridge, or a place for passengers to transit. Unlike the fifth air right, the country of origin has nothing to do with the country of destination.

The flight from China to South Korea made a stopover in Japan on the way, and for Japan, it obtained the right to bridge the flight. Transit passengers transiting in Japan have virtually brought many business opportunities and boosted consumption to Japanese airports and nearby areas.

Gu Shuhan knows that in the future, winning over passengers will also become the top priority of all countries.

In later generations, many airports will provide 72-hour transit visa-free in order to promote the consumption of transit passengers.

Think about it, as long as someone is in the airport, there must be consumption, right? Even if you don't buy items that don't seem like a good deal, you still have to have a meal at the airport once in a while, right? If you happen to encounter a flight delay or something, the airline also has to stay in a hotel, although this money does not need to be paid by passengers, it is the airline to buy some, but for the airport, this is the income. Even if the flight is not delayed, the hotel is not used, the passenger thinks that the airport food and water are expensive, and there is no extra cost if you don't eat or drink water at the airport, but if you arrive in a brand new country and are allowed to travel to this city in this country for three days, then, if you have enough time, you will always want to travel in this city in this country for two days, right?

As a result, consumption has been driven. Those countries that apply for bridge rights are not stupid, on the contrary, they are wise enough to know what is best for them. In the future, many competitive airports will no longer be satisfied with just playing the role of origin or destination airport, and strive to win more transit passengers, which is also their goal.

At present, although the total number of flights in China is not large, the global demand for passenger flights is also limited. In this era, those who can afford to sit on a plane are either government officials or dignitaries, and if these people can be brought to China for consumption, it is also a good way for China to drive the economy.

When Gu Shuhan was fighting for the fifth and sixth air rights, his attitude on the surface was dispensable, as if he was taking into account the existence of these two air rights, so he fought for them by the way, and did not arouse the vigilance of other countries.

At present, the endurance of the aircraft is limited, and the distance is long, and it is difficult to fly over three countries in a row. In addition, at present, the envoys of various countries do not understand the role of the fifth and sixth air rights and do not pay enough attention to them, so many cooperative countries have opened the fifth and sixth air rights to China, but have not asked China for this air right. For this situation, Gu Shuhan naturally couldn't ask for it.

The seventh right of navigation, the right of carriage of a third country. If a flight from Montreal, Canada to New York, USA is operated entirely by a Chinese airline, it is called a full third country transportation right.

Like the fifth and sixth air rights, at present, countries have not paid enough attention to this air right. Their own flight volume is so limited, they can't even meet the domestic market, where do they have the energy to care about other countries, what kind of third-country transportation? Except for a few countries that have some concerns about this and have not opened up the right of transport to China to fully third-country countries, no less than a number of countries that have established cooperative relations and exchanged air traffic rights have expressed their welcome for Chinese airlines to enter their countries. In their view, it is really a good thing to have Chinese aircraft to help carry their passengers and cargo, to promote economic growth for them, and to improve the development of transportation. In terms of China's current flight volume, it is more than enough to fly to a foreign country and transport it to a completely third country.

I just don't know what kind of mood these countries will feel when they react and find out that most of their market in the aviation industry is occupied by China. It seems to be a win-win situation, but both sides of the cooperation will inevitably consider more for their own interests, as for the other party, on the surface there is no loss, as for whether there is suffering inside, it is not in their scope of consideration, they are just partners, not each other's parents.

Except for the United States, the rest of the countries have opened the seventh air right to China, although Gu Shuhan regrets that the first aviation power in memory refused to mention himself, but he also knows that it is not easy to win the seventh air right of so many countries now.

In the previous life, Huaguo was late in various organizations, and at that time, all countries had almost figured out the rules of the game, and Huaguo wanted to pick up cheap? It's a dream!

The eighth air traffic right is called the domestic transportation right, which is an extension from the domestic route to the route of other countries, for example, the flight of China from China to Dresden, Germany, and then to Frankfurt, Germany, is called the domestic transportation right. In contrast, although the ninth air right is also a domestic transportation right, the starting point can be from city A in Germany to city B in Germany without originating in China.

The difference between the right of domestic transport and the right of a full third country is that the latter will necessarily involve different cities in different countries, for example, the right of a complete third country is from city A of country A to city B of country B, and the right of domestic transport is from city A of country A to city B of country A.

Although I don't know why Gu Shuhan wants to divide the traffic rights so carefully, after looking left and right, I don't see what damage these air traffic rights will cause to my country, and many countries have agreed to Gu Shuhan's request for air traffic rights.

Little do they know that in the near future they will regret it. Only the United States, which has not opened its seventh, eighth, and ninth air rights to China, is better, but it is only relative to countries that have completely delegated power to China.