Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5682819/

Topic: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: HB-IWC
Posted 2013-02-06 15:03:52 and read 12123 times.

On June 27, CX will be launching a fifth daily HKG LHR service:

CX239 HKG LHR 1025 1615
CX238 LHR HKG 2235 1715

This flight will operate with a 3-class B77W (without First Class service).

Where does the LHR slot to operate this service come from? Is it NZ's soon to be abandoned HKG LHR HKG slot or did CX find a different source. As fas as I know, no replacement for the NZ slot has so far been announced.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Lutfi
Posted 2013-02-06 16:10:27 and read 11836 times.

Yes. it is the NZ slot

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2013-02-06 16:24:15 and read 11762 times.

I understand the need for VLAs now...

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: na
Posted 2013-02-06 16:38:07 and read 11676 times.

High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Lutfi
Posted 2013-02-06 17:01:50 and read 11567 times.

Why a waste? The number of HKG-LHR flights has actually reduced (used to be 11, plus one to LGW, it is now 9 I think)

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2013-02-06 17:06:09 and read 11531 times.

Quoting Lutfi (Reply 4):
Why a waste? The number of HKG-LHR flights has actually reduced (used to be 11, plus one to LGW, it is now 9 I think)

LHR slots are very expensive, as iare the extra cists from fuel, pilots, etc.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2013-02-06 17:11:47 and read 11515 times.

Wait...without F service? If a HKG-LHR flight (because CX has F on other LHR flights, but still) cannot sustain F, I wonder if any route in the world can.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-06 17:19:34 and read 11452 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

Looking at the updated schedule, while this new flight is very close to an existing flight, the others are spread out a bit more through the day:

HKG -LHR

CX255 dep 0035 local arrive 0620 local B744
CX257 dep 1005 local arrive 1600 local B77W
CX239 dep 1025 local arrive 1615 local B77W - New Flight
CX253 dep 1400 local arrive 2030 local B77W
CX251 dep 2355 local arrive 0540 local (next day) B77W

LHR- HKG

CX252 dep 1230 local arrive 0705 local (next day) B744
CX250 dep 1820 local arrive 1305 local (next day) B77W
CX256 dep 2015 local arrive 1505 local (next day) B77W
CX254 dep 2220 local arrive 1705 local (next day) B77W
CX238 dep 2235 local arrive 1715 local (next day) B77W - New flight


Does CX expect to pick up most of the ex-NZ passengers? If NZ was using a 747-400, the total seats on the route are relatively close (379 for NZ vs. 340 for CX).


Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 6):
Wait...without F service?

I am guessing the other flight departing in the same block has First Class?

[Edited 2013-02-06 17:22:25]

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: NZ107
Posted 2013-02-06 17:20:16 and read 11446 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 6):

They know which flights F travellers go on.. Generally they wouldn't take day flights when you can fly overnight. It also increases Y capacity quite substantially. What's missed in the OP is the fact that the 4-class 77W operates on a Wednesday; more likely due to lack of 3-class 77Ws than anything I'd imagine.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Lutfi
Posted 2013-02-06 17:26:18 and read 11419 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 5):

True, and as you can see, the total number of flights has dropped. (QF/BA/VS have all reduced flights) Actually, it is now 8 flights a day (down from 11) and this extra CX flight will mean capacity stays the same. Only difference is that CX now has 63% of the flights, whereas before they had 36% (4/11, now 5/8)

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2013-02-06 17:27:07 and read 11418 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 8):
They know which flights F travellers go on.. Generally they wouldn't take day flights when you can fly overnight. It also increases Y capacity quite substantially. What's missed in the OP is the fact that the 4-class 77W operates on a Wednesday; more likely due to lack of 3-class 77Ws than anything I'd imagine.

Well, that's an extra reason to eliminate the extra day flights and consolidate them into fewer flights...

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: NZ107
Posted 2013-02-06 17:44:45 and read 11339 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
Does CX expect to pick up most of the ex-NZ passengers? If NZ was using a 747-400, the total seats on the route are relatively close (379 for NZ vs. 340 for CX).

NZ have operated the 772 on this route for a while - it was only a 744 right at the beginning and was changed not long after. Either way, NZ passengers can't codeshare on the LHR services yet (for some reason or another).. The only way to get to LHR on NZ remains via LAX. In other words, this easily covers the capacity of passengers heading to LHR; though there would be many NZ passengers terminating in HKG.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 10):
Well, that's an extra reason to eliminate the extra day flights and consolidate them into fewer flights...

What are you on about?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: airdfw
Posted 2013-02-06 18:20:56 and read 11212 times.

Are these frequencies are the biggest in terms from Hub to hub connection (long haul)? Does anybody else like UA-LH has this kind of frequencies?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: ChazPilot
Posted 2013-02-06 19:02:21 and read 11026 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
Does CX expect to pick up most of the ex-NZ passengers? If NZ was using a 747-400, the total seats on the route are relatively close (379 for NZ vs. 340 for CX).

I think CX is more interested in the increasing # of Mainland visitors to the UK, which is taking active steps to be more China-tourist friendly and is even in the process of revamping the visa application process to be more streamlined with that of continental Europe (France currently still scores 5x number of high spending Chinese tourists than UK!) And given the choice, most Chinese intl. travelers much prefer to fly CX - even with the added connection - than fly direct on, say, MU or CA.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-06 19:12:26 and read 10980 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 11):
NZ have operated the 772 on this route for a while - it was only a 744 right at the beginning and was changed not long after.

Thank you. Are the 1025 and 2235 slots similar to what NZ had? Or was CX allowed to adjust them?



Quoting ChazPilot (Reply 13):
I think CX is more interested in the increasing # of Mainland visitors to the UK...

And thank you, as well.

I'm guessing they have seen strong demand at those two times (~1000 ex-HKG and ~2200 ex-LHR)? If so, did CX consider moving CX257 and CX238 to a 747-400 for the additional Economy seating? Or is demand strongest in Business and Premium Economy (which the four-class 777-300ER offers more of in comparison to the four-class 747-400)?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: HB-IWC
Posted 2013-02-06 19:20:16 and read 10950 times.

I find it interesting that CX and for instance not one of the Middle Eastern carriers got its hands on the NZ slot. LHR slots are increasingly hard to come by and the last major transaction before this NZ to CX swap was the SA CPT slot which went to SQ.

Coming up are the QF LHR BKK and LHR HKG slots, which have been temporarily leased out to BA, but which are expected to go to EK once they are returned from lease. Apart from those, there are no immediate signs of any LHR slots being vacated, although if the situation at GF continues to go downhill that 2 pairs of LHR slots, including one prime morning arrival may become available.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: gemuser
Posted 2013-02-06 19:20:29 and read 10952 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
the others are spread out a bit more through the day:

Not really:
HKG-LHR
CX251/255 are 40 min apart
CX257/230 are 20 min apart

LHR-HKG
All flights, except CX252 are within a 4:15 window and three of them are within a 2:20 window.

Surely CX251/255 could be combined IF an A388 was big enough. (I now think I understand why CX may want the A389!) and CX257/239 certainly could. Eastbound CX254/238 seem obvious, but same condition as CX251/255, surely CX 250/256 could be combined at about 1900.(Slot constraints aside)
BTW I assume NZ has leased the LHR slots to CX, anybody know for how long?

Gemuser

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Lutfi
Posted 2013-02-06 19:34:57 and read 10898 times.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 15):
I find it interesting that CX and for instance not one of the Middle Eastern carriers got its hands on the NZ slot. LHR slots are increasingly hard to come by and the last major transaction before this NZ to CX swap was the SA CPT slot which went to SQ.

CX & NZ did a codesharing deal, and I guess CX buying/ leasing the slots from NZ was part of that deal (so there is now CX/NZ codesharing on the HKG-AKL flights, and will be on HKG-LHR)

I think CX has bought the slots, not leasing, but we won't know until the annual reports come out

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: NZ107
Posted 2013-02-06 19:41:47 and read 10870 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
Thank you. Are the 1025 and 2235 slots similar to what NZ had? Or was CX allowed to adjust them?

Seems like the slots are within half an hour of NZ's current timings - adjusted for daylight saving of course. Currently, NZ35 lands at 1445 (30 min off the daylight saving arrival of 1615) and departs as NZ38 at 2105 (30 min off the daylight saving departure of 2235).

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 15):
I find it interesting that CX and for instance not one of the Middle Eastern carriers got its hands on the NZ slot.

Why? It wouldn't make sense for NZ to sell it - I'm sure they could operate another route to LHR sometime in the future; possibly from another point in North America. So it is highly likely it was leased to CX. NZ isn't that close with any Middle Eastern carriers either.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: gemuser
Posted 2013-02-06 19:48:23 and read 10838 times.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 15):
Coming up are the QF LHR BKK and LHR HKG slots, which have been temporarily leased out to BA, but which are expected to go to EK once they are returned from lease

That's interesting! Is this just speculation or is there a more concrete basis for it?
Whatever, I can't see QF selling the LHR slots, they very well may lease them to EK once they are returned from BA but I just cannot see them being transferred permanently to anybody. I fully expect QF to return to four daily LHR flights, although not for a while, maybe not even until the 2020-2025 or even 2025-30 time frame.

Gemuser

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: CXA330300
Posted 2013-02-06 19:52:37 and read 10821 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

On one of the world's most lucrative and trafficked long-haul routes? Hardly a waste.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: PHLwok
Posted 2013-02-06 20:02:29 and read 10790 times.

Quoting airdfw (Reply 12):
Are these frequencies are the biggest in terms from Hub to hub connection (long haul)? Does anybody else like UA-LH has this kind of frequencies?

I would think JFK-LHR is probably the winner in this regard. On Fri Mar 1, for example, I see 4 flights on VS, 3 on DL, 5 on AA and 7 on BA for a total of 19 versus 8 on HKG-LHR on BA/CX/NZ/VS.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-02-06 20:57:25 and read 10647 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

What a good schedule you mean. However much you might wish, they don't need the B747-8, it's not that much bigger than the B77W, indeed the CX257 / 256 is often an A343. Seems that all the worlds B77Ws end up in LHR one day, I hadn't even realises there were two configs til now! Good news indeed.

[Edited 2013-02-06 21:10:35]

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: migair54
Posted 2013-02-07 03:03:55 and read 9536 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
CX257 dep 1005 local arrive 1600 local B77W
CX239 dep 1025 local arrive 1615 local B77W - New Flight
Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
CX254 dep 2220 local arrive 1705 local (next day) B77W
CX238 dep 2235 local arrive 1715 local (next day) B77W - New flight

I´m not sure if CX will ever order the A380 but this two flights are perfectly suitable to be replace by one A380 only.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22):
I hadn't even realises there were two configs til now! Good news indeed.

Actually according to seatguru the B777-300 has 5 different versions.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: LHRFlyer
Posted 2013-02-07 03:11:44 and read 9453 times.

I think CX operated five daily LHR-HKG flights for a period of time before before the financial crisis, but unless I'm mistaken the fifth flight departed LHR much earlier in the day (at around 4-5pm).

If QF leases two slot pairs to EK, this will incense BA.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: CX Flyboy
Posted 2013-02-07 03:18:49 and read 9904 times.

Quoting migair54 (Reply 23):


Actually according to seatguru the B777-300 has 5 different versions.

Actually we have 3 different configs for our 77Ws, one with 3 class including first. One 3 class with premium economy but no first class and a 4 class one. Our regional 777-300s have a high density two class fit.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: gemuser
Posted 2013-02-07 03:33:16 and read 9740 times.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 24):

If QF leases two slot pairs to EK, this will incense BA.

I doubt it, its just business. And I not really sure EK would want 2 extra slot pairs seeing EK only has 4 banks (or 3.5 if you prefer) 7 slots seems over kill and as I said above they would only be leased. There's also the consideration that QF may not want EK to have them.

Gemuser

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: nickofatlanta
Posted 2013-02-07 03:35:45 and read 10011 times.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 24):

I think the two LHR slot pairs that QF are not using are leased to BA.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-02-07 04:07:10 and read 9740 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

Cathay is a frequency airline even on their longest routes, why would that change ? Would you be saying "waste" if the flights were 5 A380's ?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: justinlee
Posted 2013-02-07 04:07:31 and read 9814 times.

Quoting PHLwok (Reply 21):
I would think JFK-LHR is probably the winner in this regard. On Fri Mar 1, for example, I see 4 flights on VS, 3 on DL, 5 on AA and 7 on BA for a total of 19 versus 8 on HKG-LHR on BA/CX/NZ/VS.

I think DXB-LHR is the No.2. For today, there are 5x388 by EK, 1x744 and 2x777 by BA, 1x333 by VA and 1x772 by BI: a total of 10 but 5x388, which means for available seats, the figure is closer to JFK-LHR. And I can see a big growth potential in the future after the QF-EK coopeartion.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: factsonly
Posted 2013-02-07 04:44:28 and read 9338 times.

DXB-LHR is definitely getting into to the high frequency & high capacity long-haul market, especially with 7x A380 daily this Summer 2013.

- 01:00 05:30 QF009 A380
- 01:55 06:20 BA106 B744
- 01:55 06:25 BI097 B767
- 02:05 06:35 QF001 A380
- 02:30 07:00 EK007 A380
- 07:45 12:15 EK001 A380
- 09:30 14:05 BA108 B777
- 09:40 14:20 EK029 A380
- 10:55 15:55 VS401 A343
- 14:15 18:40 EK003 A380
- 15:45 20:15 EK005 A380

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: babybus
Posted 2013-02-07 05:11:39 and read 9018 times.

I think CX look like a likely candidate for an A380 or two.

Flying to Heathrow you don't need to have such frequency to connect well. LHR has plenty of departures to Europe and domestically all day.

I thinking global greeness here. Five flights a day is an extravagant waste of fuel.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: CXB77L
Posted 2013-02-07 05:53:25 and read 8668 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

How so? HKG-LHR is one of the highest demand routes, and by increasing frequency they are both increasing capacity as well as choice for the customer. CX have shown in the past that they prefer to increase frequency where the market demands justify such an increase, instead of upguaging, because that allows them the flexibility to reduce the frequency again if and when demand drops, and it also negates the need for a small subfleet of very large aircraft for one or two routes, which ultimately adds to cost.

Quoting babybus (Reply 31):
I thinking global greeness here. Five flights a day is an extravagant waste of fuel.

The 777-300ER burns less fuel per trip than the A380. 5 x 777-300ER will burn less fuel than 5 x A380. The environment doesn't care about fuel burn per seat, it cares about emissions, which in commercial aviation has a correlation with fuel burn per trip.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: HKG212
Posted 2013-02-07 06:01:36 and read 8572 times.

Quoting justinlee (Reply 29):
I think DXB-LHR is the No.2. For today, there are 5x388 by EK, 1x744 and 2x777 by BA, 1x333 by VA and 1x772 by BI: a total of 10 but 5x388, which means for available seats, the figure is closer to JFK-LHR. And I can see a big growth potential in the future after the QF-EK coopeartion.

If you add LCY-JFK and LHR-EWR, with additional BA, VS, and UA flights, the number of available seats between NYC-LON is much, much higher than LHR-DXB or any other international city pair, by a large margin.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: bthebest
Posted 2013-02-07 06:04:51 and read 8478 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
HKG -LHR

CX255 dep 0035 local arrive 0620 local B744
CX257 dep 1005 local arrive 1600 local B77W
CX239 dep 1025 local arrive 1615 local B77W - New Flight
CX253 dep 1400 local arrive 2030 local B77W
CX251 dep 2355 local arrive 0540 local (next day) B77W

LHR- HKG

CX252 dep 1230 local arrive 0705 local (next day) B744
CX250 dep 1820 local arrive 1305 local (next day) B77W
CX256 dep 2015 local arrive 1505 local (next day) B77W
CX254 dep 2220 local arrive 1705 local (next day) B77W
CX238 dep 2235 local arrive 1715 local (next day) B77W - New flight

I'm assuming its the timing of the slot that dictates where the new flight is? Otherwise it would make sense to move the 3 original LHR-HKG evening departures forward starting at say 16.00 to catch the after lunch travelers and spread the new flight out a bit? 12.5 hr layover for the 251/250 aircraft seems quite excessive

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: CX Flyboy
Posted 2013-02-07 06:36:27 and read 8234 times.

Quoting bthebest (Reply 34):
I'm assuming its the timing of the slot that dictates where the new flight is? Otherwise it would make sense to move the 3 original LHR-HKG evening departures forward starting at say 16.00 to catch the after lunch travelers and spread the new flight out a bit? 12.5 hr layover for the 251/250 aircraft seems quite excessive

Your assumption is correct. CX, along with most operators at LHR simply do not have the luxury of picking what slot they want. Even getting a slot is quite a task, let alone picking a perfect one. Sometimes you just have to make do with what you have.

The extended ground time is certainly not wasted. A number of maintenance tasks are always done with the time on ground, especially cabin defects and general maintenance, deep cleaning etc... These tasks must be completed somewhere on the CX network at some point, so the airline makes use of ground time in LHR as well as several other ports around the network to complete simple maintenance tasks and checks.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-02-07 06:47:28 and read 8127 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 2):
I understand the need for VLAs now...

   But does CX have enough routes to maintain a sub-fleet of VLAs? IMHO, 17 is the minimum economic number for an airframe.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
HKG -LHR

CX255 dep 0035 local arrive 0620 local B744
CX257 dep 1005 local arrive 1600 local B77W
CX239 dep 1025 local arrive 1615 local B77W - New Flight
CX253 dep 1400 local arrive 2030 local B77W
CX251 dep 2355 local arrive 0540 local (next day) B77W

LHR- HKG

CX252 dep 1230 local arrive 0705 local (next day) B744
CX250 dep 1820 local arrive 1305 local (next day) B77W
CX256 dep 2015 local arrive 1505 local (next day) B77W
CX254 dep 2220 local arrive 1705 local (next day) B77W
CX238 dep 2235 local arrive 1715 local (next day) B77W - New flight

Thank you. Did 238 catch one of the last departure slots at LHR?

I would assume 255/252 are the two most popular flights (due to the 744), but I would have thought it would be 255/256 on timing.

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-07 07:41:23 and read 7683 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
I'm guessing they have seen strong demand at those two times (~1000 ex-HKG and ~2200 ex-LHR)? If so, did CX consider moving CX257 and CX238 to a 747-400 for the additional Economy seating?

CX is desperately trying to get rid of 744 on long haul routes due to the high fuel prices. Even if they can pack a 744, they're still losing $$ on routes such as HKG-YVR, HKG-LHR.

I believe that's one of the reason they reduced HKG-JFK frequency to free up a 77W on another long haul (LHR?)

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: ecbomberman
Posted 2013-02-07 08:31:02 and read 7236 times.

Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 37):
Quoting flyinghippo (Reply 37):
CX is desperately trying to get rid of 744 on long haul routes due to the high fuel prices. Even if they can pack a 744, they're still losing $$ on routes such as HKG-YVR, HKG-LHR.

Any proof of that? I think CX is an airline which give CHOICES to their customers. Plus I believe if they can fill up the front end (a la First and Business Class) they won't lose any money...

It's not just CX that flies HKG-LHR in such a short timeframe 2300-0100... BA and VS does at that timeframe.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: flyinghippo
Posted 2013-02-07 09:06:05 and read 6932 times.

Quoting ecbomberman (Reply 38):
http://www.businesstraveller.asia/as...c-announces-readjusted-routes-to-s

In an internal newsletter to CX employees (Which I cannot find right now), it also stressed that CX is accelerating the retirement of 744s, and that CX is reducing some 77W to NA so they can be used on flights to Europe, replacing 744s on those European routes.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: PW100
Posted 2013-02-07 09:08:11 and read 6928 times.

Quoting Lutfi (Reply 4):
Why a waste? The number of HKG-LHR flights has actually reduced (used to be 11, plus one to LGW, it is now 9 I think)
Quoting Lutfi (Reply 9):
True, and as you can see, the total number of flights has dropped. (QF/BA/VS have all reduced flights) Actually, it is now 8 flights a day (down from 11) and this extra CX flight will mean capacity stays the same. Only difference is that CX now has 63% of the flights, whereas before they had 36% (4/11, now 5/8)

We might be overlooking an important factor here. True, the number of flights might have reduced, but what about the NET capacity HKG-LHR?

Important factor is off course that many of those11 were merely using HKG as a stop. So many pax on those flights were not flying HKG-LHR or vv. They were travelling SYD-LHR, or AKL-LHR. So the net capacity available to HKG-LHR was (much) less than the equivalent of those 11 flights.

True, many pax on today’s 4 (soon to be 5) CX flights are also not travelling HKG-LHR, but transferring at HKG. But then again, those pax can just as easily use a different hub, like SIN, SEL, KUL, BKK, DXB etc. That choice elasticity was less on the previous QF/BA/VS flights direct SYD-LHR, AKL-LHR etc.

PW100

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: YULWinterSkies
Posted 2013-02-07 11:37:58 and read 5868 times.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
High time to get 748s or A380 for CX. Five flights per day to LHR, what a waste.

Indeed. Time has come.

Quoting na (Reply 3):
Why a waste?

Because if you look at the schedule below, they are only flown over 3 time slots one way and four time slots the other way. CX would save much by concentrating those flights into one.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
HKG -LHR

CX255 dep 0035 local arrive 0620 local B744
CX257 dep 1005 local arrive 1600 local B77W
CX239 dep 1025 local arrive 1615 local B77W - New Flight
CX253 dep 1400 local arrive 2030 local B77W
CX251 dep 2355 local arrive 0540 local (next day) B77W

LHR- HKG

CX252 dep 1230 local arrive 0705 local (next day) B744
CX250 dep 1820 local arrive 1305 local (next day) B77W
CX256 dep 2015 local arrive 1505 local (next day) B77W
CX254 dep 2220 local arrive 1705 local (next day) B77W
CX238 dep 2235 local arrive 1715 local (next day) B77W - New flight

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-02-07 12:01:55 and read 5682 times.

Not sure how you get two B77W loads onto an A380. So you sell the slots to the other guy then get slammed in a pincer movement on frequency? How many routes does CX *need* a VLA for given HKG is likely to get two new runways?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-07 12:30:09 and read 5520 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 42):
Not sure how you get two B77W loads onto an A380.

An 80m A380-900 would offer about the same cabin floor space as two 777-300ERs (though you might not be able to actually fit the same number of seats). However, it would only offer the cargo volume of one 777-300ER.

A 550-seat A380-900 would need 22 of the 44 LD3 positions for passenger bags (using the IATA standard of 1 LD3 per 25 passengers), leaving 20 open for revenue cargo. CX's 777-300ERs dedicate 11 of their 44 LD3 positions to passenger bags using the same formula.

So if CX replaced two 275-seat 777-300ERs with a 550-seat A380-900 they would be giving up 64 LD3 positions worth of cargo volume. CX could send a 777F to make up the difference, however.   

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: TC957
Posted 2013-02-07 12:58:15 and read 5314 times.

When is the first CX 77F due ?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: gemuser
Posted 2013-02-07 13:52:09 and read 4942 times.

Quoting nickofatlanta (Reply 27):
I think the two LHR slot pairs that QF are not using are leased to BA.

Yes, but only for two years from when HKG/BKK-LHR ceased. The talk of the slots going to EK is *after* the two years is up.

Gemuser

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-02-07 16:33:10 and read 4366 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
When is the first CX 77F due ?

Didn't they swap them with CA for more B747-8Fs?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-07 16:42:09 and read 4352 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 46):
Didn't they swap them with CA for more B747-8Fs?

There have been rumors to that effect, but Boeing still shows 2 747-8F and 8 777F still on order.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: workhorse
Posted 2013-02-07 23:43:09 and read 4046 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
A 550-seat A380-900 would need 22 of the 44 LD3 positions for passenger bags (using the IATA standard of 1 LD3 per 25 passengers), leaving 20 open for revenue cargo.

Why not 22 (44-22)?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
CX's 777-300ERs dedicate 11 of their 44 LD3 positions to passenger bags using the same formula.So if CX replaced two 275-seat 777-300ERs with a 550-seat A380-900 they would be giving up 64 LD3 positions worth of cargo volume.

Why not 44 ((44-11)+(44-11)-22)?



[Edited 2013-02-07 23:54:22]

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: CXB77L
Posted 2013-02-08 05:26:30 and read 3659 times.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 41):
CX would save much by concentrating those flights into one.

How so? There's no aircraft available at present that can carry the same load as 2 x 777-300ERs. If they had combined two flights into one they might save on landing and departure fees as well as fuel, but they're also making less revenue by having fewer seats and less cargo.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-08 07:17:22 and read 3481 times.

Quoting workhorse (Reply 48):
Why not 22 (44-22)?
Quoting workhorse (Reply 48):
Why not 44 ((44-11)+(44-11)-22)?

Yeah. What you said.  Embarrassment  Smile

Still, if CX is using 77Ws for the cargo volume as well as the passenger volume, then they're going to be giving up a fair bit of volume consolidating two of them onto a single A389.

[Edited 2013-02-08 07:18:36]

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: wawaman
Posted 2013-02-08 08:23:17 and read 3358 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 18):
CX & NZ did a codesharing deal, and I guess CX buying/ leasing the slots from NZ was part of that deal (so there is now CX/NZ codesharing on the HKG-AKL flights, and will be on HKG-LHR)

I tried to book with NZ for April to fly LHR->AKL via HKG and could not find any evidence that NZ have a code share on the LHR->HKG leg. I even called NZ to ask and they said No, call VS.

Any idea when the CX code share on the LHR-HKG route might get announced?

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: workhorse
Posted 2013-02-09 02:32:02 and read 2818 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 50):
Yeah. What you said. Still, if CX is using 77Ws for the cargo volume as well as the passenger volume, then they're going to be giving up a fair bit of volume consolidating two of them onto a single A389.

No problem   You're right, the 77W's cargo advantage over other airplanes (with the exception of the A350-1000) is huge.

The 388 has 38 LD3 positions with only 17 or 18 available for freight, and the 748i 40 with about 22-23 for cargo.

I guess that if these 5 77W's a day regularly fly with their bellies full, the hope to see some day a 748i or a 388 in CX's colors would be reduced. If not (if, for example, cargo loads stay the same as in the 744 era) a mix of 77W's and 388's could work (use the 77W's to haul most of the cargo and the 388's most of the people).

I also still have hard time to believe that, in terms of image, CX can afford not having a VLA when all their neighbors and competitors do.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-02-09 04:28:04 and read 2628 times.

Thats the key issue, image. Does Malaysian really need a small fleet of A388s? Are Thai going to fill the flying forehead? (I love that phrase!)
For some like EK, there's a solid business case, for others it's all part of the willy-waving contest in that part of the world. Much like everyone buying the B747-100 then realising they couldn't turn a profit with one.

For Cathay, I suspect they'd want more than a handful but there's not a need for that given how good the B77W is.

Topic: RE: CX To Lauch 5th Daily LHR
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-02-09 07:32:31 and read 2424 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 53):
Thats the key issue, image. Does Malaysian really need a small fleet of A388s? Are Thai going to fill the flying forehead? (I love that phrase!)

For some like EK, there's a solid business case, for others it's all part of the willy-waving contest in that part of the world.

At the time MH and TG placed their orders (2003 and 2004, respectively), the A380-800 was the only available 747-400 replacement is you operated a three-class configuration and needed/wanted to increase capacity.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/