Cathay Pacific future fleet/route plans

J343 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 2:02 am

zakuivcustom wrote:
J343 wrote:
If KE can serve ATL-ICN with DL, then I dont see a reason why CX can't do the same. If I am not mistaken, KE's past relationship with DL hasn't been the very best compared to AA-CX. Frankly, apart from DFW, I can't think of any other US cities CX can start services to, perhaps MIA which had been discussed several times. HNL which could potentially be a KA route. LAS is another one that comes into mind.

Totally different market. KE had been flying to ATL for years, albeit not always non-stop (I saw SEL-ORD-ATL circa 1999). The Korean population in Atlanta area is big.

Otherwise, HNL is the largest unserved market out of HKG:
https://www.anna.aero/2019/03/06/100-ro ... p-service/

But if you calculate the PDEW it's still only about 73 PDEW. Not quite large enough to fill a plane.

Thanks for the information. I never realised KE has been serving ATL for a while. Comparing KE and CX, KE has a much larger presence in the US and CX comes second (correct me if I am wrong, JAL could be bigger for all I know). SAN is also another destination I think CX could start with the A359; perhaps 3x/ week.

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:11 am

J343 wrote:
Thanks for the information. I never realised KE has been serving ATL for a while. Comparing KE and CX, KE has a much larger presence in the US and CX comes second (correct me if I am wrong, JAL could be bigger for all I know). SAN is also another destination I think CX could start with the A359; perhaps 3x/ week.

Let see...as of this week:

KE:
SFO: 2x 77W
LAX: 2x 388
JFK: 2x 388
ATL: 1x 748
SEA: 1x 77W
ORD: 1x 77W
IAD: 1x 77W
DFW: 5/wk 77W
BOS: 5/wk 789
Plus:
HNL: 1x 748 (ICN-HNL), 1x 333 (ICN-NRT-HNL)

NH:
LAX: 2x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
ORD: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
JFK: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
SFO: 1x 77W
IAH: 1x 77W
IAD: 1x 77W
SJC: 1x 788
SEA: 1x 788
Plus:
HNL: 2x 789 (NRT), 1x 789 (HND)

JL:
JFK: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
LAX: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 789 (KIX)
SFO: 1x 77W (HND)
ORD: 1x 77W
DFW: 1x 789
BOS: 1x 789
SEA: 1x 788
SAN: 1x 788
Plus:
HNL: 2x 789, 2x 763 (NRT), 1x 789 (KIX), 1x 789 (NGO)
KOA: 1x 763

CX:
SFO: 2x 77W, 1x 359/35K
LAX: 3x 77W
JFK: 3x 77W (plus 1 more 77W from YVR)
ORD: 1x 77W
BOS: 1x 77W
EWR: 1x 359
SEA: 4/wk 359 (going daily in summer)
IAD: 4/wk 359

BR:
SFO: 3x 77W
LAX: 19/wk 77W
JFK: 1x 77W
SEA: 1x 77W
IAH: 1x 77W
ORD: 4/wk 77W

If my math is correct, KE is #1 in seats, then if you're counting mainland US only, CX barely edged out NH. If you count Hawaii also, JL has the most frequency.

Ultimately, KE presence is not really THAT much larger. They fly to two more cities compare to CX (DFW and ATL). DFW is serve by AA for CX, though. ICN-BOS is also brand new (only 1 week old).

planemanofnz · Fri Apr 19, 2019 10:04 am

Scanorama wrote:
The problem with Wellington is its runway restriction which can only be overcome by launching a 5th freedom flight from a nearby city that also has open sky agreement with Hong Kong (like SQ did with CBR and now MEL).

WLG could also be done in a triangular, with CHC. Take-off is the main issue for WLG. This may help CHC to become year-round?

For 5th freedoms, Australia is out. The only other viable alternative would be Fiji - I don't think they have the rights for NAN - WLG?

Cheers,

C.

zeke · Fri Apr 19, 2019 2:51 pm

Scanorama wrote:
The problem with Wellington is its runway restriction which can only be overcome by launching a 5th freedom flight from a nearby city that also has open sky agreement with Hong Kong (like SQ did with CBR and now MEL). In that case, they could put the A333 (cheaper start up capital).

I have looked at WLG before with the A350 it would not be a problem. The other possible way WLG could be via CNS on the A330.

WLG is on the list of ports it’s permitted to fly to, this is public information

https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/201 ... 122063.pdf

mdavies06 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 2:52 pm

In the 2016 chart towards the bottom of the thread below, you will see what was a list of candidate cities in Europe. IMO GVA, BHX and BER makes most sense considering potential business and leisure demand, and competition from other airlines.
viewtopic.php?t=1409193

Additionally, I also think CX probably will consider ARN and VIE for their touristic demand, and lack of direct competition at least to HKG (in 2016 SK and OS were flying to HKG from these cities).

For North America, recall that when CX launched BOS a few years ago they teased a few posts in social media about other cities. Those from my faint memory were BOS, SEA, DFW and (MIA / IAD), so going by it they looked at DFW and MIA. In my personal view however LAS and PHL are more likely as they mean less competition (MIA is likely not within non-stop range as well).

x1234 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:00 pm

The only markets left in the Americas with decent yield are DFW, YYC, IAH, ATL & MIA. I think DFW only has enough traffic for 1 HKG-DFW flight plus AA already flies DFW-NRT/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG. *A already flies IAH-NRT/PEK. SkyTeam already flies ATL-NRT/ICN/PVG. If Canadian demand is high they could launch HKG-YVR-MIA or HKG-YYC-MIA.

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:11 pm

mdavies06 wrote:
In the 2016 chart towards the bottom of the thread below, you will see what is a list of candidate cities in Europe. IMO GVA, BHX and BER makes most sense considering potential business and leisure demand, and competition from other airlines.
viewtopic.php?t=1409193

Additionally, I also think CX probably will consider ARN and VIE for their touristic demand, and lack of competition (in 2016 SK and OS were flying to HKG from these cities).

For ARN - CX dropped CPH right after SK shifted the ARN-HKG route to CPH-HKG. The demand to Scandinavia is just not quite there IMHO (Plus it's an easy connection from HEL).

VIE and GVA makes sense, and CX can probably increase the codeshare at both airport through OS and LX (Since CX codeshare with LH group as-is). BER will happen in 2048 when the new BER airport finally open :duck:

(But seriously, I would argue that TXL being so crowded as one of the reason why CX doesn't fly to Berlin yet).

A wildcard for me in Europe would be LIS. It's mostly tourism traffic, but CX had been able to make BCN and MAD work quite well.

As for BHX, for me it's similar to how PHL just doesn't get love compare to NYC, BOS, and WAS :cry2:

.

EDIT:

x1234 wrote:
The only markets left in the Americas with decent yield are DFW, YYC, IAH, ATL & MIA. I think DFW only has enough traffic for 1 HKG-DFW flight plus AA already flies DFW-NRT/ICN/PEK/PVG/HKG. *A already flies IAH-NRT/PEK. SkyTeam already flies ATL-NRT/ICN/PVG. If Canadian demand is high they could launch HKG-YVR-MIA or HKG-YYC-MIA.

And CX benefit from having one-stop to MIA how? There are already a gajillion one-stop options right now.

Plus, given Canada and their relative protectionism in aviation industry, I doubt they'll just give out those 5th freedom rights. YVR-JFK 5th freedom only exist due to it being a legacy route.

P.S. You forgot about BR's IAH-TPE for *A. The route is very popular for those Vietnamese/Filipino VFR traffic AFAIK.

x1234 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:19 pm

Also CX serving MEX with the 779 doesn't make sense when its a easy connection via NRT-MEX (2x daily on AM or NH), ICN-MEX-MTY-ICN (4x weekly on AM), PVG-MEX-TIJ-PVG (3x weekly on AM), PEK-TIJ-MEX (3x weekly on HU) or CAN-YVR-MEX (2x weekly on CZ).

J343 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:25 pm

mdavies06 wrote:
In the 2016 chart towards the bottom of the thread below, you will see what was a list of candidate cities in Europe. IMO GVA, BHX and BER makes most sense considering potential business and leisure demand, and competition from other airlines.
viewtopic.php?t=1409193

Additionally, I also think CX probably will consider ARN and VIE for their touristic demand, and lack of direct competition at least to HKG (in 2016 SK and OS were flying to HKG from these cities).

For North America, recall that when CX launched BOS a few years ago they teased a few posts in social media about other cities. Those from my faint memory were BOS, SEA, DFW and (MIA / IAD), so going by it they looked at DFW and MIA. In my personal view however LAS and PHL are more likely as they mean less competition (MIA is likely not within non-stop range as well).

As I stated in my earlier post, I think DFW or MIA would make sense. Given that CX codeshares with JJ to GRU from LHR and JFK, they could feed from MIA to S.America. DFW, already has services to major oneworld hubs (LHR,SYD,NRT, HKG and DOH) I am sure there will be enough demand whether its O&D or connecting passengers. I'm not an aviation expert but correct me if I am wrong.

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:25 pm

x1234 wrote:
Also CX serving MEX with the 779 doesn't make sense when its a easy connection via NRT-MEX (2x daily on AM or NH), ICN-MEX-MTY-ICN (4x weekly on AM), PVG-MEX-TIJ-PVG (3x weekly on AM), PEK-TIJ-MEX (3x weekly on HU) or CAN-YVR-MEX (2x weekly on CZ).

If the yield (i.e. business traffic) is there, why not?

I mean, according to your logic, CX should not serve any market in US. All the "large" ports (LAX, SFO, SEA, NYC, ORD, or even BOS/WAS) are easy connection via NRT or ICN anyway.

BTW, you're highly overrating the tolerance for HKers in general have in connection. With the abundance of non-stops out of HKG, HKers in general just don't book connecting flights unless they really have to, or if it's ME3 with their fares being half of CX's nonstops going to Europe. Otherwise, they'll take a non-stop.

x1234 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:39 pm

The only city left in the Americas is MIAMI! Can the A359 fly MIA-HKG west-bound!? Maybe they need to buy the A359ULR like SQ for HKG-MIA!

Speedalive · Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:52 pm

I wonder if CX would be interested in a small order of the QF Project Sunrise aircraft to launch longer routes (eg: MIA, MEX, or deeper into South America) if there actually is a market, but not a large enough one to fill a 779.

With the regional replacement, it could go either A or B. The derated 359 or 339 would be an easy fit, but I think the 78X could be a strong contender as well because it’s almost made for regional and it would have a common pilot pool with the 779. A combination like SQ would work too.

For new destinations, in Europe I could see BHX, but it would likely require a reduction in LHR because of how close they are and the leakage that exists from BHX to LHR. BER and GVA could work too. LIS is an interesting idea. I wonder how much traffic exists between LIS and Macau and if that would play a role in the success of HKG-LIS.

For NA, I fully expect it to remain more or less the same, but with additional frequencies added. If MIA is going to happen, it’s going to be nonstop. Being from YYC, I’d love to see CX come, but the market really isn’t large enough and is adequately served by YYC-NRT-HKG with AC/NH or YYC-YVR-HKG. If anyone is going to try out that market direct, it would likely be WS.

I agree that within regional Asia, we’re going to see lots of shuffling of routes/slots between CX/KA/UO, and unfortunately, I think CX is going to remain more or less stagnant until the new runway opens.

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:06 pm

Speedalive wrote:
For new destinations, in Europe I could see BHX, but it would likely require a reduction in LHR because of how close they are and the leakage that exists from BHX to LHR. BER and GVA could work too. LIS is an interesting idea. I wonder how much traffic exists between LIS and Macau and if that would play a role in the success of HKG-LIS.

Reduction in LHR just b/c of BHX? If BHX demand is THAT big, CX would fly there already. Plus the demand to/from London is huge (large enough that CX fly an additional flight to LGW).

Speedalive wrote:
LIS is an interesting idea. I wonder how much traffic exists between LIS and Macau and if that would play a role in the success of HKG-LIS.

There are some traffic b/t Macau and LIS, but you also have to remember that Macau is tiny (~622k people total). TP tried flying MFM-LIS before (way back in 1999 or so...don't remember the exact year), and dropped that in a few months as the flight was flying at very low load factor IIRC.

Another thing I forgot about LIS when I mentioned it, though, is that LIS is pretty much full. So my guess is any long-haul to LIS would have to wait for whatever expansion (or new airport?) there.

Speedalive wrote:
For NA, I fully expect it to remain more or less the same, but with additional frequencies added. If MIA is going to happen, it’s going to be nonstop. Being from YYC, I’d love to see CX come, but the market really isn’t large enough and is adequately served by YYC-NRT-HKG with AC/NH or YYC-YVR-HKG. If anyone is going to try out that market direct, it would likely be WS.

NRT-YYC is seasonal, so I would say it's mostly HKG-YVR-YYC. CX codeshare with both AC and WS on YVR-YYC anyway.

User001 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:29 pm

For new destinations, in Europe I could see BHX, but it would likely require a reduction in LHR because of how close they are and the leakage that exists from BHX to LHR

Hell would freeze over before CX give up valuable slots at LHR in favour of adding a BHX flight. Likely to add more into Manchester or Gatwick over BHX. As said, they did put 4 extra flight into MAN on GDS for winter just gone before taking those flights out again, but instead opting for an A350-1000 on the flight, so, it gives an idea of the direction they are likely to take with the UK market.

UAEflyer · Fri Apr 19, 2019 5:14 pm

They were rumours that CX will split HKG-DXB-BAH, they where considering IKA before the last US sanctions on Iran.

Speedalive · Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:31 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
Reduction in LHR just b/c of BHX? If BHX demand is THAT big, CX would fly there already. Plus the demand to/from London is huge (large enough that CX fly an additional flight to LGW).

User001 wrote:
Hell would freeze over before CX give up valuable slots at LHR in favour of adding a BHX flight.

Meant to write LON as in London in general. Only reason I say that is because I figured that LON-HKG couldn't support another frequency. So my thinking was that if there's a sizable group of people who are from BHX that make the drive to LHR/LGW to fly on CX to HKG, a BHX launch would take away from the loads on their LHR/LGW flights. Although if the LON-HKG demand is enough that there's room to add another flight as you're saying, I retract my statement completely.

jfk777 · Fri Apr 19, 2019 9:05 pm

x1234 wrote:
The only city left in the Americas is MIAMI! Can the A359 fly MIA-HKG west-bound!? Maybe they need to buy the A359ULR like SQ for HKG-MIA!

Cathay has many 16 hour flights from JFK, Boston, Toronto, and Dulles plus ORD to Hong Kong, MIA should be doable with 90 minutes more flying time. Even if it went east like the Newark to SIN flights, HKG is further north than Singapore. Miami could probably be done as an all eastbound flight by Cathay. IF an A350-900 or a 777-9 can't do it then show us the airplane which can ? Doubtful that CX would buy 777-8 for just Miami but if it got say 10 for ultra long haul missions then CX would be pioneering new flights as it has done before, HKG to Vancouver with 747-200.

Cathay777300ER · Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:04 am

I've been hearing rumours about Edinburgh. They sounded insane at the beginning but a few employees and sites have been reporting them. It makes some sense especially as they added Dublin. That is if there is space in Edinburgh. Edinburgh airport is also more convenient for the belt then Glasgow so could be looking for Scotland region in this sense.

3AWM · Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:00 am

User001 wrote:
For new destinations, in Europe I could see BHX, but it would likely require a reduction in LHR because of how close they are and the leakage that exists from BHX to LHR

Hell would freeze over before CX give up valuable slots at LHR in favour of adding a BHX flight.

Agreed. Never gonna happen. No existing frequencies at LON or MAN are going to be given up to start a new route at BHX.

However Cathay have demonstrated with the LGW route that they aren't afraid to offer alternatives to LHR, and that route has done very well.

Slots at LHR are difficult and expensive to acquire and there isn't any scope to upgauge existing services so it seems logical that CX would look to other areas where traffic is leaking from in order to service growing demand.

Cathay also only has (roughly) 50% of the market at LHR so just because passengers go there to get a direct flight it doesn't guarantee they will be flying CX.

BHX-HKG was Anna Aero's unserved route of the week in December and this article says a lot of the points in favour of that as a route https://www.anna.aero/2018/12/04/birmin ... -the-week/

I also think EDI is a strong case although the market is a lot smaller as there is combined demand with GLA, tourism and financial services.

That said BHX should be able to bring a lot more cargo. The West Midlands is the only region in the UK to run a surplus with China, accounting for 25% of UK exports to China. This one advantage of this is enabling sale of cargo capacity in both directions. Cargo is a strong consideration for CX and I seem to remember strong demand for the exports of agri goods from DUB being cited as a major factor in starting that route.

Aside from that CX is a true hub operator and as such I would say it's main competitor in the UK is not BA but Emirates. As stated in the article 45% of BHX originating passengers to HKG do the flight with Emirates (despite it not being the best route). In addition to the direct flights they are also competing on other SE Asia destinations and the kangaroo route. Anywhere that Emirates is big in the UK has a good chance of working for CX.

a7ala · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:55 am

zeke wrote:
Scanorama wrote:
The problem with Wellington is its runway restriction which can only be overcome by launching a 5th freedom flight from a nearby city that also has open sky agreement with Hong Kong (like SQ did with CBR and now MEL). In that case, they could put the A333 (cheaper start up capital).

I have looked at WLG before with the A350 it would not be a problem. The other possible way WLG could be via CNS on the A330.

WLG is on the list of ports it’s permitted to fly to, this is public information

https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/201 ... 122063.pdf

Is that the case for an a350 taking off from a wet runway as well?

A388 · Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:51 pm

Miami wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
MIA? Keep dreaming.

How exactly is it a dream when CX themselves said they want to fly to MIA. They just cannot figure out the aircraft situation.

You make it sound like CX doesn't know what to do. Of course they know what to do. They know how their aircraft operate and how cost effective they fly. They know how to analyze routes they want to fly. Miami probably doesn't have sufficient traffic for a passenger flight which probably is the reason no Asian airline wants to commit to Miami yet. I hope they will come though, I'm just wondering when.

A388

zakuivcustom · Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:02 pm

A388 wrote:
Miami wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
MIA? Keep dreaming.

How exactly is it a dream when CX themselves said they want to fly to MIA. They just cannot figure out the aircraft situation.

You make it sound like CX doesn't know what to do. Of course they know what to do. They know how their aircraft operate and how cost effective they fly. They know how to analyze routes they want to fly. Miami probably doesn't have sufficient traffic for a passenger flight which probably is the reason no Asian airline wants to commit to Miami yet. I hope they will come though, I'm just wondering when.

A388

Geography never help MIA. From anywhere in East Asia, it's a long, long flight = much higher cost = need a lot more premium to make the route work.

Plus what exactly is the demand to/from MIA anyway? Caribbean/South America transit traffic (that AA can drive via DFW, LAX, and JFK)? Local O&D? (Which is tiny...no VFR traffic and no massive business traffic). Carrying those Chinese looking to buy properties in Florida (How many of those are there anyway)? Leisure? (What's the yield on that again? Plus LAS and HNL or even MCO would come first).

Oh...did I mentioned that it's a long, long flight?

Miami · Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:25 pm

A388 wrote:
Miami wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
MIA? Keep dreaming.

How exactly is it a dream when CX themselves said they want to fly to MIA. They just cannot figure out the aircraft situation.

You make it sound like CX doesn't know what to do. Of course they know what to do. They know how their aircraft operate and how cost effective they fly. They know how to analyze routes they want to fly. Miami probably doesn't have sufficient traffic for a passenger flight which probably is the reason no Asian airline wants to commit to Miami yet. I hope they will come though, I'm just wondering when.

A388

First of all, CX was the one to say they need the right aircraft for such a flight. Therefore they cannot figure it out. They did say something about a potential A350-8000 but that's that.

Second, MIA is largest US market without a nonstop flight to Asia. So to say there probably isn't enough sufficient traffic is ridiculous.

Miami · Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:29 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
Plus LAS and HNL or even MCO would come first).

LAS already has flights to Asia and so does HNL. Unless you're saying they'll get CX first. But MCO over MIA? That's the beyond ridiculous.

EddieDude · Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:56 pm

There were rumors in early 2015 that CX would launch HKG-XXX-MEX with 77Ws (no F) but that never happened. I think CX really wants to fly to MEX and it would make sense to connect MEX with HKG (NRT, ICN, PEK and PVG already have Mexico flights), but the problem is distance + MEX' altitude. Fifth freedom rights would have to be secured. Other than NRT and YVR, I cannot think of many places for the stopover to make sense, and even those seem super iffy, considering the MEX-YVR and MEX-NRT markets are very well served today.

jbpdx · Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:21 pm

EddieDude wrote:
There were rumors in early 2015 that CX would launch HKG-XXX-MEX with 77Ws (no F) but that never happened. I think CX really wants to fly to MEX and it would make sense to connect MEX with HKG (NRT, ICN, PEK and PVG already have Mexico flights), but the problem is distance + MEX' altitude. Fifth freedom rights would have to be secured. Other than NRT and YVR, I cannot think of many places for the stopover to make sense, and even those seem super iffy, considering the MEX-YVR and MEX-NRT markets are very well served today.

MEX-PDX-HKG is 7,664 nm and MEX-HKG is 7,650 nm, and Cathay Pacific Cargo already flies three 747s a week from PDX-HKG. But I don’t want to get the Portland haters started.

EddieDude · Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:40 pm

That'd be nice, but I believe that U.S. stopovers are quite undesirable for international flights to/from MEX due to the complex process of deboarding, immigration (with visa for some), baggage claim, customs, security and reboarding. Plus, how much demand is there for MEX-PDX. I don't think there are nonstops right now.

amadorE175 · Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:47 pm

zeke wrote:

I have looked at WLG before with the A350 it would not be a problem. The other possible way WLG could be via CNS on the A330.

WLG is on the list of ports it’s permitted to fly to, this is public information

https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/201 ... 122063.pdf

Someone else upthread mentioned SAN as a possible destination. Zeke, would A359 be able to do SAN-HKG considering SAN's runway and the terrain?

LAX772LR · Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:25 pm

A388 wrote:
Miami wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
MIA? Keep dreaming.

How exactly is it a dream when CX themselves said they want to fly to MIA. They just cannot figure out the aircraft situation.

You make it sound like CX doesn't know what to do. Of course they know what to do. They know how their aircraft operate and how cost effective they fly. They know how to analyze routes they want to fly. Miami probably doesn't have sufficient traffic for a passenger flight which probably is the reason no Asian airline wants to commit to Miami yet. I hope they will come though, I'm just wondering when.

That doesn't make sense. Airlines frequently have a desire to enter markets, but not a specific aircraft available at the time that would produce favorable economics; it's no difference for CX here.

SQ for example, maintained since 2013 that it wanted to serve N.America nonstop, but that the A345 wasn't worth the cost of operating/maintaining a shrinking oddball fleet, and that the 77L wasn't much better. So they waited half a decade and found a solution in the A359ULR.

CX is basically doing the same thing with MIA, and being atypically vocal about it.

Miami wrote:
Second, MIA is largest US market without a nonstop flight to Asia.

Which of course isn't true, seeing as MIA has multiple airlines operating multiple nonstops to Asia, just via the Atlantic.

Miami wrote:
But MCO over MIA? That's the beyond ridiculous.

Why? Seeing as MCO does have a bigger draw than MIA to several east Asian countries.

The yield of course, is low... but then again, so's MIA's.

Hell, AA could've bumped their 772ERs to 656K MTOW and opped MIA-NRT 20yrs ago, if they wanted to. The aircraft could easily do it. But of course they didn't, because they would've lost their shirts on such a market. Same thing that most airlines still feel today, as obviously expressed by their continuing absence.

zakuivcustom · Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:04 pm

Miami wrote:
LAS already has flights to Asia and so does HNL. Unless you're saying they'll get CX first. But MCO over MIA? That's the beyond ridiculous.

Yes, I do indeed mean you'll most likely see CX flying HKG-LAS and HKG-HNL before you'll ever see HKG-MIA.

What's wrong with MCO over MIA? The PDEW is actually higher thanks to a certain mouse. But as LAX772LR puts it, the yields will not be high given that it's mostly leisure traffic. Even if people pay a premium to fly non-stop in the back of the bus, the J will be empty.

LAX772LR wrote:
SQ for example, maintained since 2013 that it wanted to serve N.America nonstop, but that the A345 wasn't worth the cost of operating/maintaining a shrinking oddball fleet, and that the 77L wasn't much better. So they waited half a decade and found a solution in the A359ULR.

I thought for the A345, SQ can't make money even if they sell every single business class seats on that plane at full price, just b/c of the fact that A345 is so inefficient that it's literally burning tons of fuel to carry more fuel, for 18hrs.

LAX772LR · Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:20 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
Yes, I do indeed mean you'll most likely see CX flying HKG-LAS

SQ tried HKG-LAS nonstop and failed. And that was before MFM was anywhere near as accessible and popular as it is now.

I'm surmising a 0.0001% chance that we see CX on that route *any* time soon.

LAX772LR wrote:
SQ for example, maintained since 2013 that it wanted to serve N.America nonstop, but that the A345 wasn't worth the cost of operating/maintaining a shrinking oddball fleet, and that the 77L wasn't much better. So they waited half a decade and found a solution in the A359ULR.

I thought for the A345, SQ can't make money even if they sell every single business class seats on that plane at full price, just b/c of the fact that A345 is so inefficient that it's literally burning tons of fuel to carry more fuel, for 18hrs.[/quote]
I'd call that a bit of an exaggeration. The flight would've never survived the fuel insanity of 2008 or the economic crash of 2009 if that was the case, yet it persevered for another half-decade.

Miami · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:23 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Miami wrote:
Second, MIA is largest US market without a nonstop flight to Asia.

Which of course isn't true, seeing as MIA has multiple airlines operating multiple nonstops to Asia, just via the Atlantic.

You know what I meant.

LAX772LR · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:27 pm

Miami wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Miami wrote:
Second, MIA is largest US market without a nonstop flight to Asia.

Which of course isn't true, seeing as MIA has multiple airlines operating multiple nonstops to Asia, just via the Atlantic.

You know what I meant.

And yet you still wrote an abject inaccuracy... that makes it even dumber. :razz:

pmartin · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:36 pm

https://www.anna.aero/2019/03/06/100-ro ... p-service/

Top unserved in Europe:
- Geneva, Berlin, Prague (although Düsseldorf, Stockholm and Vienna are not counted because they were still served in the considered period). On the list Geneva combines the highest volume with the highest yield (close to 40% HY according to GVA airport).

-

Miami · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:42 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Miami wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Which of course isn't true, seeing as MIA has multiple airlines operating multiple nonstops to Asia, just via the Atlantic.

You know what I meant.

And yet you still wrote an abject inaccuracy... that makes it even dumber.

MIA-EAST Asia is largest US market without a nonstop flight . Happy?

LAX772LR · Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:44 pm

Miami wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Miami wrote:
You know what I meant.

And yet you still wrote an abject inaccuracy... that makes it even dumber.

MIA-EAST Asia is largest US market without a nonstop flight . Happy?

Well, should I be? ...seeing as that's still rather sloppily worded.

PHL can easily make the exact same claim, depending on the assigned interpretation of "largest market"

zakuivcustom · Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:02 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
Yes, I do indeed mean you'll most likely see CX flying HKG-LAS

SQ tried HKG-LAS nonstop and failed. And that was before MFM was anywhere near as accessible and popular as it is now.

I'm surmising a 0.0001% chance that we see CX on that route *any* time soon.

LAX772LR wrote:
SQ for example, maintained since 2013 that it wanted to serve N.America nonstop, but that the A345 wasn't worth the cost of operating/maintaining a shrinking oddball fleet, and that the 77L wasn't much better. So they waited half a decade and found a solution in the A359ULR.

I thought for the A345, SQ can't make money even if they sell every single business class seats on that plane at full price, just b/c of the fact that A345 is so inefficient that it's literally burning tons of fuel to carry more fuel, for 18hrs.

I'd call that a bit of an exaggeration. The flight would've never survived the fuel insanity of 2008 or the economic crash of 2009 if that was the case, yet it persevered for another half-decade.[/quote]

I did forgot about SQ HKG-LAS.

I don’t disagree that the chance of that flight on CX is tiny. I believe I mention something about “why bother going to Venetian Vegas when Venetian Macao is a 1 hr boat/bus ride away” myself :white:

zeke · Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:19 pm

amadorE175 wrote:
Someone else upthread mentioned SAN as a possible destination. Zeke, would A359 be able to do SAN-HKG considering SAN's runway and the terrain?

09 is a bit short, 27 would limit payload to about 25 tonnes which would not be commercially viable on the -900. Would get better payload with the -1000.

Miami · Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:26 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Miami wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
And yet you still wrote an abject inaccuracy... that makes it even dumber.

MIA-EAST Asia is largest US market without a nonstop flight . Happy?

Well, should I be? ...seeing as that's still rather sloppily worded.

I did it on purpose but now I give up. :white:

DLHAM · Sun Apr 21, 2019 12:10 am

mdavies06 wrote:
In the 2016 chart towards the bottom of the thread below, you will see what was a list of candidate cities in Europe. IMO GVA, BHX and BER makes most sense considering potential business and leisure demand, and competition from other airlines.
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1409193

They could think about HAM as well (number 5 on that list just below Berlin).
More than 41.000 passengers on HAM <> HKG in 2018. Traffic: 60% Business (!!!), 26% leisure, 13% VFR and 1% "other". Also Cargo demand should be high and there is no direct competiton to Asia unlike Hainan and Scoot from Berlin. And there is a nice, modern Airport with space.

Cathay777300ER · Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 pm

I think they are going to focus on European routes. I don't think they'll expand too much into America. They've had their American expansion and have a significant proportion of that market. Now they are aiming to be bigger in Europe. A year ago they were half the size of Sing in Europe.

x1234 · Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:52 pm

Also IAH has EVA on IAH-TPE 6x weekly so there's even more reason DFW/IAH/ATL already have East Asia flights. Someone said here that Lenovo helps drive traffic on TPAC out of RDU but that's a easy connection via DFW/IAH/IAD/JFK/EWR/ORD/DTW/YYZ/YUL.

AirAfreak · Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:33 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
J343 wrote:
Thanks for the information. I never realised KE has been serving ATL for a while. Comparing KE and CX, KE has a much larger presence in the US and CX comes second (correct me if I am wrong, JAL could be bigger for all I know). SAN is also another destination I think CX could start with the A359; perhaps 3x/ week.

Let see...as of this week:

KE:
SFO: 2x 77W
LAX: 2x 388
JFK: 2x 388
ATL: 1x 748
SEA: 1x 77W
ORD: 1x 77W
IAD: 1x 77W
DFW: 5/wk 77W
BOS: 5/wk 789
Plus:
HNL: 1x 748 (ICN-HNL), 1x 333 (ICN-NRT-HNL)

NH:
LAX: 2x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
ORD: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
JFK: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
SFO: 1x 77W
IAH: 1x 77W
IAD: 1x 77W
SJC: 1x 788
SEA: 1x 788
Plus:
HNL: 2x 789 (NRT), 1x 789 (HND)

JL:
JFK: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 77W (HND)
LAX: 1x 77W (NRT), 1x 789 (KIX)
SFO: 1x 77W (HND)
ORD: 1x 77W
DFW: 1x 789
BOS: 1x 789
SEA: 1x 788
SAN: 1x 788
Plus:
HNL: 2x 789, 2x 763 (NRT), 1x 789 (KIX), 1x 789 (NGO)
KOA: 1x 763

CX:
SFO: 2x 77W, 1x 359/35K
LAX: 3x 77W
JFK: 3x 77W (plus 1 more 77W from YVR)
ORD: 1x 77W
BOS: 1x 77W
EWR: 1x 359
SEA: 4/wk 359 (going daily in summer)
IAD: 4/wk 359

BR:
SFO: 3x 77W
LAX: 19/wk 77W
JFK: 1x 77W
SEA: 1x 77W
IAH: 1x 77W
ORD: 4/wk 77W

If my math is correct, KE is #1 in seats, then if you're counting mainland US only, CX barely edged out NH. If you count Hawaii also, JL has the most frequency.

Ultimately, KE presence is not really THAT much larger. They fly to two more cities compare to CX (DFW and ATL). DFW is serve by AA for CX, though. ICN-BOS is also brand new (only 1 week old).

KE005/006 ICN-LAS-ICN 4w/77W can be added to your list of destinations.

Morgenstern1234 · Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:50 am

Maybe a resumption to Moscow DME for CX?

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 26, 2019 5:14 pm

Meanwhile, CX is ending CNS:
https://www.ausbt.com.au/cathay-pacific ... b3Hrunjefs

So any wish of DRW is just that - wishful thinking. Some are thinking that CX may transfer the route to KA A321neo, though, once those comes in.

Alternatively, perhaps Jetstar can jump onto that route?

SQ001 · Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:46 pm

My votes are 2nd daily flight to ORD with late afternoon/evening departure time, or new destination at ATL or DFW, also with late afternoon/evening departure time.

Also, anyone think Nashville might have a chance becoming a black horse?

zakuivcustom · Fri Apr 26, 2019 10:36 pm

SQ001 wrote:
My votes are 2nd daily flight to ORD with late afternoon/evening departure time, or new destination at ATL or DFW, also with late afternoon/evening departure time.

Also, anyone think Nashville might have a chance becoming a black horse?

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... %20chicago

CX did briefly operate 3 additional weekly flights to ORD back in 2015. Didn’t last long, though.

As for BNA - I would be surprise if there are 1% of the population in HK even know of the city, much less what’s there. Many probably doesn't even know anything about cities like Dallas or Denver (They may know Atlanta just b/c of the Olympics b/c HK won its (so far) one and only gold medal there).

SQ001 · Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:32 am

zakuivcustom wrote:
SQ001 wrote:
My votes are 2nd daily flight to ORD with late afternoon/evening departure time, or new destination at ATL or DFW, also with late afternoon/evening departure time.

Also, anyone think Nashville might have a chance becoming a black horse?

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... %20chicago

CX did briefly operate 3 additional weekly flights to ORD back in 2015. Didn’t last long, though.

As for BNA - I would be surprise if there are 1% of the population in HK even know of the city, much less what’s there. Many probably doesn't even know anything about cities like Dallas or Denver (They may know Atlanta just b/c of the Olympics b/c HK won its (so far) one and only gold medal there).

Thank you for that awesome knowledge base. That additional 3 flights would have had the better time slot, especially for same-day connection from mainland China by bus.

Anyway, would love to see CX flies into ATL or DFW or additional ORD flight. There's a lot of traffic potential there, I believe. Plus I will be around. Could use an easy flight via CX rather than inconvenient connections via the west coast.

YLWbased · Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:40 am

SQ001 wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:
SQ001 wrote:
My votes are 2nd daily flight to ORD with late afternoon/evening departure time, or new destination at ATL or DFW, also with late afternoon/evening departure time.

Also, anyone think Nashville might have a chance becoming a black horse?

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... %20chicago

CX did briefly operate 3 additional weekly flights to ORD back in 2015. Didn’t last long, though.

As for BNA - I would be surprise if there are 1% of the population in HK even know of the city, much less what’s there. Many probably doesn't even know anything about cities like Dallas or Denver (They may know Atlanta just b/c of the Olympics b/c HK won its (so far) one and only gold medal there).

Thank you for that awesome knowledge base. That additional 3 flights would have had the better time slot, especially for same-day connection from mainland China by bus.

Anyway, would love to see CX flies into ATL or DFW or additional ORD flight. There's a lot of traffic potential there, I believe. Plus I will be around. Could use an easy flight via CX rather than inconvenient connections via the west coast.

You'd be surprised how many people know where Dallas and Denver is, especially people below 40, the popularity of NBA is certainly one of the key reason behind that.

YLWbased

x1234 · Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:21 am

I really wonder how loaded is the AA 77W on DFW-HKG. Reports last year indicates the seats were selling out during the summer. Maybe 2nd daily CX A359 DFW-HKG!? Also noticed the A350-1000 upgrade and IAD going 5x weekly. So IAD seems a success so far. I don't think its worth it for CX to fly to MIA as the local market is small. Nearly every connection from MIA except for the Carribean is available in DFW except for PTY (Panama City Panama). Maybe ask AA to add DFW-PTY (Chinese shipping business for the Canal). Also AA now flies LAX-GRU/EZE, the 2 largest markets in South America, CX884/885 (the first LAX flight) connects both ways as LAX-GRU/EZE is overnight (4x weekly GRU, 3x weekly EZE, AA tried daily and it was losing money).

I forgot to add PTY (Panama City Panama) is mostly Star Alliance as COPA/UA flies PTY-SFO/LAX/LAS/IAH/DEN/ORD/YYZ/YUL/MIA/FLL/TPA/MCO/IAD/EWR/JFK/BOS and Air China has 5th freedom 2x weekly PEK-IAH-PTY.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net