Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CX Changing Its Tune To The 777-200ER?  
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4555 posts, RR: 5
Posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3172 times:

It seems that once again CX is going to reevaluate its fleet renewal decision due to the slowdown of the the U.S. economy. For all purposes, CX put a stop to ordering the aircraft and is going to see how the U.S. economy fairs. Then the news was reported that a certain "faction" of CX management is pushing for the 777-200ER to serve regional and long-haul routes for the airline. They want the airline to acquire 3 of MAS's 777-200ERs that are up for sale/lease. So, the question is, will the stopagge of ordering the A340-600 mean that the 777-200ER may very well end up at Chek Lap Kok with fellow sister 777-200s and -300s?

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3021 times:

CX is quite frankly hungry for any sort of widebody aircraft it can get that fits into it's fleet, especially for regional lift capability. It would be a good move for them to get the MAS 777s if this pans out. Look at the lengths they went to to get the prototype 777 and converted to their specs? If it's prudent for them to get them, they will do it, but lets also not forget they are *also* aggressively purchasing A330-300s and A340-300s at the same time. I believe the ILFC lease of 2 or 3 A340-600s will still press forward as originally announced late last year via Marc Shaeffer's Orders website. They have delayed their own large aircraft order for now to get a better picture of things, which makes sense due to the shaky US economic picture. I dont see any shift in their vision of operating a broad "mixed fleet" operation at all.


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4555 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2977 times:

I certainly don't think that CX is going to change its mind on operating a mixed fleet. The 747-400s, 777-200s, 777-300s, A340-300s and A330-300s are working quite well together. The addition of the 777-200ER to the fleet would only strengthen it. I must say though that the recent decision to put off a new order has pleased me. That means that my name sake CX 747-400s get to be the "Top Dog" at Chek Lap Kok for that much longer. What I do find interesting is that this important order has been put off once again. The last two times this happened, the entire purchase was rethought. While it would take some fanagling, getting the 777-200ER into the CX fleet is in my opiinon a very good move. Just as the A330-200 is superior to the 767-400ER, the 777-200ER is superior to the A340-300. It moves more people, more cargo, a further distance at a faster speed than the quad. Along with doing it for less cost due to the big twin engines (One would assume RR Trent 895s for CX). I truly can't say whether or not I think this will effect the future order (A380, A340-600, A330-300), but I do think that the -200ER will find a home at HKG and it will be welcomed with open arms.

Just for kicks, what if Boeing were to offer CX a deal like SIA! Take in the A340-300s, sell them 777-200ERs along with 777-300ERs. This would be a fantastic move by Boeing and one that could also land them a 747X order.

Another interesting issue over at SIA is the A340-500.
Supposing that both it and the 777-200LR live up to their "paper performance" the -200LR carries more people, more cargo, a further distance and faster. So, if the A340-500 is found to operate the SIN-LAX route profitably, then SIA will most likely test the -200LR. Could we see a repeat of the A340-300 dump off in favor of the -200LRs older sibling the -200ER? Only time will tell!

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2960 times:

When the Asian economic crisis hit a few years ago causing a drop in regional traffic, CX pre-maturely retired its entire fleet of 13 747 classics (200's & 300's). Since those planes were all in 2-class configuration, that represents a huge cut in capacity. Now that the regional traffic is up again, they'll need a whole lot more 777's, 330's and 340's to fill the void left by the 747 classics.


User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2932 times:

I believe the chances of a SIA 777/A340 swap style purchase at CX are slim. Those types of deals come once in a long while and I think we may have seen the one example of it happening with SIA. CX's fleet planning is so entrenched in keeping a level of independence and broadness of choice to it that I just cant see that happening. It's a very different airline. It would contradict CX's planning which has very much embraced the A340-300 as it's long haul, thin market airplane. They dont want dependence upon a single aircraft supplier. They have been getting the best of both worlds and it's working.

By it's geographical location alone, especially flightplanning over the PRC (which is a nightmare I've been told, especially on routes to/from Europe) CX operates the A340-300 on routes that it's quite comfortable with. In fact, they are going to be adding a nonstop A340-300 run from HKG-JFK this spring. If they get the 777-200ER's from MAS, that could open up more capacity to regional routes within Asia and possibly a foray or two to AUST/NZ. Capacity and flexibility on those routes are what they are salivating after. Go grab a current CX schedule and just look how changeable their equipment into Taipei is for example. That serves as a hub of sorts for them with a lot of flights staging through there to Japan. Plus it's "shuttle" function between TPE and HKG. With the mix of types they have, they have a very good choice of airplanes they can fine tune demand with on a daily basis. That's a very good thing to have within Asia.

I dont think they will be employing the 777-200ER in any transpolar routes like the upcoming CO flights from EWR to HKG, (which is a bold move for CO and should prove rather interesting how it plays out, along with AA's SJC-TPE service starting in April). We may see them more on Middle East flights as they are currently employed, CX passenger flights into New Delhi is now rumored. It will be interesting to see where they go.

I believe SIA's commitment to the A345 is solid. In fact I see them taking all their optioned 345s and maybe even adding to those as well. They are going after a market that is willing to pay a premium price for nonstop service from SIN-LAX, these A345s are supposedly going to be outfitted in quite a luxurious manner. If it's successful, and I think it will, then they may expand this concept to other routes that can command such a market. Their purchase of the A380 cements the other side of that equation in that they plan on using that one with a stop in Japan or Taiwan, carrying much higher loads of passengers. It's a savvy marketing manuever they are appealing to. I also see SIA going for more 777-200ER's and a few more -300s rather than jumping into the newer LR versions. There is a lot of resistance to it still, and yes it's the engine exclusivity issue along with support, commonality and all of that, that is making carriers hold off a bit until they see it proven. They may longer down the line if the airplane proves itself, but also remember the A340NG will have at least an 18 month lead start in service over the LR variants.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8360 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2881 times:

I think CX will anyway order the A380-800.

The reason is simple: they really need the capacity, especially on the HKG-LHR, HKG-SYD and even possibly HKG-NRT routes.

The US economy is down in the dumps now but with interest rates being cut and a major tax cut coming by this fall it will rebound by 2002-2003. In that case, CX will HAVE to get the A388 because of the always-heavy loads on the HKG-LAX route. CX may reassign the 747-400 they now have to fly HKG-SFO.

User currently offlineCX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6811 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2886 times:

A little bird has told me that Cathay's strategy at the moment is to wait for the US economy slowdown, wait till people start cancelling a few planes, prices drop, then we'll get in there and pick up the pieces. Knowing Cathay, this doesn't surprise me at all. Besides, we do not have the crews to man all these aircraft that we are getting, so there is no hurry to buy some more immediately.

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4555 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2877 times:

Gentleman let me say this. Congradulations. We have taken a subject that could have turned into a B vs. A war and handled it with facts and information. Now onto the debate!

CX flyboy: What you said makes alot of since to me. Actually it was like the clouds parted and I could see what was "going on". I really don't think the U.S. economy will be down for that long, so CX should start moving its chess pieces shortly.

777-200ER: I think that some people took my 777-200ER question as saying they won't oder the A380. CX will in my opinion still order it. What I do think the 777-200ER may have an effect on is the future A340-30/600 purchases.

SIA & the A340-500: Yes, the A340-500 will enter commercial service 18 months before the 777-200LR. An interesting point was made by the orders forum moderator Russ Short though on how SIA tests aircraft against one another in the real world,

"The SIA contract on the A340-500 is watertight: if the airplane cannot perform to the specifications guaranteed by Airbus then Toulouse foots the bill. As the first A340-500 has not even entered test phase we do not know if the airplane will meet those guaranteed specifications. We do know that the new A340s are superficially overweight but some compensation is a higher MTOW. IMHO the A340-500 is heading towards being able to meet its specifications as is the -600 [the more important derivative].

We also know that the first 777-200LRs will be delivered some 18 months behind the A340-500. This is an important consideration. How do we know the -200LR will meet its specifications? The airplane just entered detailed design phase.

SIA itself regards its SIN-LAX non-stop services as a trial and would like to begin that trial as soon as possible. Only the A340-500 can provide the means necessary to do so due to its earlier delivery dates. The airline is not yet entirely convinced that the actual services will be a success. However it is not difficult to ascertain that the A340-500 can do it first. For about 18 months the A340-500 will be the longest-range airplane on the planet.

History shows that SIA compared the 757 with the A310 in operation and picked the Airbus [in a quite ruthless manner, too]. The airline replaced its MD-11 LOI for A340s when the MD-11 was unable to meet its specified performance guarantees. And most recently, ofcourse, the airline selected the 777 to replace its A340-300Es. These are performance decisions. The
airplanes with the operating characteristics that best suit SIA operations win and SIA is willing to operate them side-by-side to see which is better. The ULR is no exception. SIA has ordered only 5 A340-500s [the ULR
requirement is 10-15 airplanes] and if that airplane cannot meet its target and the 777-200LR can, SIA will make the appropriate changes to its fleet structure.

This story is not over by any stretch of the imagination. IMO the press release reflects fact: SIA will begin non-stop US west coast services with the A340-500. If the A340-500 is a ripper airplane then Boeing probably won't hear from SIA regarding the replacement of those airplanes. However, ON PAPER the 777-200LR has a superior performance quality over the A340-500 [needless to say we need to presume that the airplanes will perform per design intent]: it flies more payload further, faster, higher and uses less
fuel in doing so.

The question begs, if the SIN-LAX non-stop services are a success with the A340-500, and the 777-200LR is capable of carrying more passengers and/or freight faster between the two points using less fuel, can the elegant quad hold off the megatwin?"

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineKing767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2847 times:

"Just as the A330-200 is superior to the 767-400ER"
CX747, There is not much of a difference between the 764ER and the A332 as some here inflate it to. When the 764LR comes, the A332 and the 764 will be equal. CX747, a difference in aircraft specs does not neccessarily mean that it is "superior" to another. The 764 was designed for a requirement for replacement of L1011s and DC-10s on TransCons, as well as International routes, while the A332 is purely a international aircraft, and would not do well on TransCons. The 764LR is going to fit the bill as an exact international variant, just as the A332 does.

User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 13264 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2833 times:

Sorry, have I missed the CX bit? Although HKG is nearer to the US than SIN, the question for CX would appear to be whether a new ULH aircraft can fly HKG-NYC. CO's experience on the route, due to start shortly, will be watched carefully. However, I still expect CX to go for the 340-600 and following the CX announcement of a delay, I did seek clarification that a proposal to lease 346s from ILFC from 9/02 was going ahead; announced or not, it still appears to be on the cards.

Look at it this way, if there is an economic downturn, the losers are more likely to be those unready to compete on particular routes; if CX is still flying via YVR while UA and CO are flying nonstop, it will cause problems (although I'd chose CX anyday!) There will continue to be very strong traffic between the US and Asia and the winner will also be the one to provide the best hub and link. HKG will come up against strong competition from the new Inchon Airport near Seoul, but HKG is an ideal hub for Asia and CX needs to continue to build it. And for that reason, I don't expect them to wait too long to make an announcement.

User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13756 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2821 times:

CX747: Your detailes post (on the SIA part anyway) was a pleasure to read. Lovely

Where did you get all those facts and quotes?

Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2806 times:

CX will stick with it's order for the A340-600s, this purchase of 3 MAS 777-200ERs will blend in with the rest of their 777 fleet being they are also powered by RR Trents.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8360 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2783 times:

I believe that the maximum range of the higher-weight A380-800R is about 16,000 km (8,600 nautical miles). If you fly a straight line over-pole flight I believe the A388R can fly HKG-JFK non-stop in both directions non-stop--and the A388R will not be subject to ETOPS 207 restrictions.

However, I think CX is -not- interested in HKG-JFK. People forget that Toronto, ON (YYZ) has a VERY large ex-patriate Hong Kong population, and CX would love to serve this market non-stop with a large enough plane. The 747-400 and A340-300E can fly HKG-YYZ eastbound, but YYZ-HKG westbound still requires a technical stop for fuel most likely at ANC on full loads. Eliminating this is something CX really wants, and since the A388R can fly HKG-YYZ in both directions easily, this will be another reason why CX will order the A388 anyway.

While CX will welcome the 777-200ER into its fleet, the downside for CX is that the plane does not carry enough passengers for its very long range. That would not make it practical for CX's busier long routes from HKG to NRT, LHR and SYD.

User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5095 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2748 times:

Cathay Pacific has been very satisfied with 777 so it's no surprising that they may order more!!!!!

Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4555 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2726 times:

The information that I got on the SIA ULR is from the "Orders Forum" and was posted by the very knowledgable Russ Short.

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Happened To The 777-100X? posted Thu Sep 11 2003 01:50:30 by Lehpron
If Lockheed Built A Competitor To The 777 posted Fri Aug 29 2003 15:40:01 by 747400sp
How Does Slide Attach Its Self To The Plane? posted Thu Dec 20 2001 00:22:30 by ILUV767
Will Qantas Eventually Get The B 777-200ER/300ER? posted Fri Mar 9 2001 04:11:37 by United Airline
What Happened To The 777's ..... posted Fri Jan 21 2000 23:42:22 by Teahan
There Is No Such Thing As The 777-200ER? posted Sat Nov 27 1999 17:16:36 by Lufthansa
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Another Varig 777 To The Desert posted Sat Sep 23 2006 04:36:42 by AirTranTUS
How Are The CX Pilots Adapting To The SQ PW's posted Wed Sep 13 2006 11:18:33 by B747
BA And The 777 To SYD posted Mon Jul 24 2006 00:24:41 by Etuk380