Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
9W To Hong Kong  
User currently offline15A From India, joined Jan 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8783 times:

Front Page in Mumbai's DNA newspaper today announcing new 9W service to Hong Kong.
Aircraft - A332 with Premiere and Economy
Schedule (from Amadeus)
9W 41 Departs Bom at 01:05 and arrives HKG at 09:15 (5:40 flight time)
9W 42 departs HKG at 19:05 and arrives Bom at 23:15 (6:40 flight time)

Service starts 14th April and is a terminator service.

Also, from 26th March, as per their website, 9W will move Singapore operations to Terminal 3 (from T1)

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBrenintw From Taiwan, joined Jul 2006, 1671 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8747 times:

That's a long time on the ground in HKG ... I wonder if an add-on to somewhere else (PVG or TPE perhaps) is on the cards?

I doubt very much 5th freedom rights for HKG-TPE would be allowed ... but there's still a possibility.

Times, however, are pretty good for OW connections to other Asian destinations.



I'm tired of the A vs. B sniping. Neither make planes that shed wings randomly!
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12523 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8749 times:

Ten hours on the ground in HKG ... that's a hell of a layover; presumably they are organising the timings to catch some European connecting traffic?

User currently offlineBjwonline From UK - England, joined Mar 2007, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8654 times:

With HKG being a strong One World port in Asia thanks to CX, could this be another sign of 9W aiming to join the One World Alliance.

I hope so, would fit in well!  bigthumbsup 


User currently offline15A From India, joined Jan 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8608 times:

I thnk the layover is to allow for a full business day in Hongkong for anyone travelling from India. It is similar for instance to the 9W Bom-Sin-Bom schedules.

What the long time on ground does allow however is for a second flight to Hongkong - maybe from Delhi (or who knows - even Blr) which is a day time flight utilising another A332 which could be say a day time departure from India and Hongkong. This is something similar to what 9W does in Sin with the Bom-Sin aircraft rotated with Sin-MAA

As for 9W and CX working together - i really doubt it. In all the messages they are sending out so far, it appears to be a horses for courses approach - QF for Sin and AA for JFK but AC for LHR. Keep in mind that BA knocked 9W of their FFP list.
Also their FFP partnerships span the range of alliances with partners in Star, One World and Skyteam.
I wont be at all surprised if they did a tieup with either a china carrier (for feed on to china from HKG) or indeed NW or UA to the US (if the timings work)..on the other hand, they might surprise us and do a tieup with CX and KA - which would indeed strongly indicate a One World link.


User currently offlineCX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6620 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8584 times:

Jet and OneWorld are indeed in talks.

User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1448 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8564 times:



Quoting Bjwonline (Reply 3):
With HKG being a strong One World port in Asia thanks to CX, could this be another sign of 9W aiming to join the One World Alliance.

How I wish they can join the real Alliance, Star Alliance instead of 'N'one World.  duck 



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineDiesel33 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8528 times:

Any chance of 9W looking at MNL?

I travel a lot between the two countries and I am looking for a way to make it more easier and faster...

Any airlines looking at non-stop flights between the two countries?


User currently offlineKaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2892 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8358 times:

Great news for 9W and some much needed competition for the overloaded CX 773 aircraft.

Karan


User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1448 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8350 times:



Quoting Karan69 (Reply 8):
overloaded

Are you sure about that??



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineKaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2892 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8278 times:



Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 9):
Are you sure about that??

Dont know about the recently added non-stops but the flights via BKK go choker block and are amongst CXs top grossers system wide

Also been on them 3 times in the last yrs chocker block each time

Karan


User currently offlineNimish From India, joined Feb 2005, 3262 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7854 times:



Quoting Brenintw (Reply 1):
That's a long time on the ground in HKG ... I wonder if an add-on to somewhere else (PVG or TPE perhaps) is on the cards?



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Ten hours on the ground in HKG ... that's a hell of a layover; presumably they are organising the timings to catch some European connecting traffic?



Quoting 15A (Reply 4):
I thnk the layover is to allow for a full business day in Hongkong for anyone travelling from India. It is similar for instance to the 9W Bom-Sin-Bom schedules.

I can only guess this 10 hour layover is to do with the 14+ hours each way flying time on HKG-SFO-HKG. So from the time the flight arrives at HKG from BOM it needs the following time to return:

2 hours HKG layover
14 hours HKG-SFO
2 hours SFO layover
14 hours SFO-HKG
2 hours HKG layover
--------
34 hours - which is basically 1 day + 10 hours!!! So the flight arriving the first day at HKG at 0915, will fly to SFO and return in time for the next evenings 1905 departure back to BOM!

I do hope that my guess is true and 9W launch BOM-HKG-SFO sooner than later. With EK having already announced and loaded their DXB-LAX, competition is coming too close for 9W to drag their heels on this route!



Latest Trip Report - GoAir BLR-BOM-BLR
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4802 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

9W's flight timings to HKG are good for O&D pax + transitting pax as the HKG bound flights connect conveniently in both directions via BOM to BRU and LHR.

So it seems that according to 9W, the 10 hour halt for their A 332 at HKG is justified as their target market is two fold i.e. O&D pax to BOM + 6th freedom to BRU and London. I will not be surprised to see 9W attracting a lot of J class pax from HKG to BRU especially.

Does anyone think that CX would want a SPA (Sales Promotional Agreement) with 9W for the BOM-BRU-BOM sector? CX's new nonstop HKG-BOM-HKG flights connect well with 9W's BOM-BRU-BOM flights!


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 47
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7290 times:



Quoting Nimish (Reply 11):
34 hours - which is basically 1 day + 10 hours!!! So the flight arriving the first day at HKG at 0915, will fly to SFO and return in time for the next evenings 1905 departure back to BOM!

A real possibility. Excellent analysis.


User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2134 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6897 times:



Quoting 15A (Reply 4):
It is similar for instance to the 9W Bom-Sin-Bom schedules.

I don't know whether this is true, but it was said that the driver behind the BOM-SIN timings was to allow the same crew to operate the return to BOM (with their daytime rest being sufficient for the short flights).



The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1448 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6432 times:



Quoting Nimish (Reply 11):
I can only guess this 10 hour layover is to do with the 14+ hours each way flying time on HKG-SFO-HKG. So from the time the flight arrives at HKG from BOM it needs the following time to return:

2 hours HKG layover
14 hours HKG-SFO
2 hours SFO layover
14 hours SFO-HKG
2 hours HKG layover

An A332 will not be able to do HKG-SFO-HKG without major penalties if it can even do it, especially East bound. HKG-SFO is around 11 hours on a 744 and about 14.5 SFO-HKG.

Quoting Karan69 (Reply 10):

My point was 'overloaded' is a big word. Full or packed, yes but not overloaded.



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineAg92 From India, joined Jul 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4677 times:



Quoting WestWing (Reply 14):
I don't know whether this is true, but it was said that the driver behind the BOM-SIN timings was to allow the same crew to operate the return to BOM (with their daytime rest being sufficient for the short flights).

Because of the number of flights coming into Singapore with Jet Airways
MAA - SIN - MAA - 1745 - 0920
DEL - SIN - DEL - 1715 - 2310
BOM - SIN - BOM - 0725 - 1910
All the timings above are the times of which the plane is in SIngapore

One plane should go BOM - SIN - MAA as the timings seem perfect for it
One plane should go DEL - SIN - BOM and the timings seem perfect for it
The last one would go from MAA - SIN - DEL and the timings are OK

I think for me this is a sign that 9W will start to operate to HKG from more than one destination in India


User currently offlineAbrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5124 posts, RR: 55
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4635 times:



Quoting Nimish (Reply 11):
I can only guess this 10 hour layover is to do with the 14+ hours each way flying time on HKG-SFO-HKG. So from the time the flight arrives at HKG from BOM it needs the following time to return:

2 hours HKG layover
14 hours HKG-SFO
2 hours SFO layover
14 hours SFO-HKG
2 hours HKG layover
--------
34 hours - which is basically 1 day + 10 hours!!! So the flight arriving the first day at HKG at 0915, will fly to SFO and return in time for the next evenings 1905 departure back to BOM!

= While I usually agree with you, I am going to disagree with you here and see how things play out  Smile. HKG-SFO will be a weight restricted 330 ... which is NOT in 9W's interest. Moreover (and more importantly), SFO is planned to be a higher yielding route and 9W would want to send their flagship 77W FIRST SUITES product. There is little incentive for "loyal" J/F passengers to switch unless there is some marginal benefit to switching ... which price and product differentiation can provide.

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 12):
So it seems that according to 9W, the 10 hour halt for their A 332 at HKG is justified as their target market is two fold i.e. O&D pax to BOM + 6th freedom to BRU and London. I will not be surprised to see 9W attracting a lot of J class pax from HKG to BRU especially.

= I am with you on this. Also, most people on this board inherently equate a long idle time as inherently bad. With the prices of oil as it is, it makes sense to have aircrafts sit on the ground IF the idle time can be made up by the price premium the passengers are willing to pay for the convenient time and product. I bet this is 9W's thinking ... and I actually think it makes sense.

Quoting Ag92 (Reply 16):
I think for me this is a sign that 9W will start to operate to HKG from more than one destination in India

= Given the block time and turnaround times involved, it would be mostly impossible to have the 332 fly to one more destination.

Cheers,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4134 times:

The ground time will be halved when they start Delhi-HK later in S08.

Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 15):
An A332 will not be able to do HKG-SFO-HKG without major penalties if it can even do it, especially East bound. HKG-SFO is around 11 hours on a 744 and about 14.5 SFO-HKG.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 17):
HKG-SFO will be a weight restricted 330 ... which is NOT in 9W's interest.

Who said SFO will receive A332s?

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 12):
CX's new nonstop HKG-BOM-HKG flights connect well with 9W's BOM-BRU-BOM flights!

Cathay has double daily full fifth freedom between India & EU (excl UK) anyway. I doubt they will use them imminently though. They are more interested in India-HK-US.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1448 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3992 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 18):
Who said SFO will receive A332s?

Well sir, 9W is will be flying an A332 to HKG so forgive us for assuming. Maybe they'll change it to something else later but for now it's an A332.



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineAg92 From India, joined Jul 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3829 times:



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 17):

= Given the block time and turnaround times involved, it would be mostly impossible to have the 332 fly to one more destination.

What I mean by this is that soon we may see flights from DEL and MAA to HKG if not any other destination, who will fly routes which when combined together make sense


User currently offlineNimish From India, joined Feb 2005, 3262 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3745 times:



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 17):
While I usually agree with you, I am going to disagree with you here and see how things play out. HKG-SFO will be a weight restricted 330 ... which is NOT in 9W's interest.

Actually you make a valid point - I never thought of the possible restrictions in flying a 332 on the HKG-SFO route. There's no way they'd want to compromise on their F product either. So I'm guessing then that the BOM-HKG service announced may soon be joined by a DEL-HKG service and the a/c will switch at HKG. Or they'll launch the 77W on the BOM-HKG-SFO route in a little while (I don't know if they have any spare), and then the 332 will be pushed to an alternative route.



Latest Trip Report - GoAir BLR-BOM-BLR
User currently offlineAisak From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 763 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3646 times:



Quoting 15A (Reply 4):
In all the messages they are sending out so far, it appears to be a horses for courses approach - QF for Sin and AA for JFK but AC for LHR

Well, RJ was in a similar situation even after they joined oneworld.
By the time they joined oneworld they were handing passengers over to AC at LHR, to HP at JFK and they were flying ORD-DTW in a triangle route and their "Asia gateway" sort of speak, was BKK.
Now they have launched some AMM-ORD nonstop, they codeshare onto AA out of JFK and ORD and AA do the same on RJ on key EU routes. Also, BKK service has been extended to HKG as a tag-on. It takes some time to change the 1-on-1 agreements and be replaced with similar in-alliance ones.

Quoting 15A (Reply 4):
Keep in mind that BA knocked 9W of their FFP list.

Also that's not that relevant. Past/current moves don't threaten future agreements. Especially for airlines these days. Malev has FFP and codeshare agreements with virtually every Skyteam member but they joined oneworld because of "strong ties with Finnair". Also Air Europa had FFP agreements with KLM and NW but not with AF. Some time later AF and UX signed codeshare agrements with each other but still no FFP. UX were invited to join Skyteam as associate with Air France being their sponsor and still no FFP agreement. When UX finally entered the alliance, Air Europa's Fidelitas FFP was changed to AF-KLM's Flying Blue.
Alliances future memberships are not driven solely by codeshare and FFP agreements.


User currently offlineLutfi From China, joined Sep 2000, 778 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3490 times:

It could be that 9W will get HAECO do do light maintenance (A checks) during the ground time. CO do this with their B777 in HK (schedule a long ground time to make use of HAECO good quality/ reasonable price)

User currently offlineAndaman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3454 times:

Quoting Aisak (Reply 22):

Malev ---------- joined oneworld because of "strong ties with finnair".

That's news to me. Said who?
Finnair did have a role in the process:
"The formal invitation to join the alliance has been preceded by a six-month survey led by Finnair" (Finnair.com 2005)
...but I can't see what would had been those "strong ties" forcing Malev to join OW?

[Edited 2008-03-15 17:51:31]

25 Cricket : But I doubt DEL will be the market that 9W targets since CX suddenly increased freq from 4x weekly to daily and once they hit double daily in summer,
26 Lightsaber : I agree with you. It looks like the current timing is odd until more airframes come into the system. Does 9W have rights for HKG to the US? I know th
27 Cloudyapple : It's not crowded. 3x daily by 2 carriers. The route is still underserved. Delhi is a given for Jet. Double daily full fifth freedom between US and HK
28 Abrelosojos : = If you read the entire thread, you will understand the context of my posting. Cheers, A.
29 Nimish : Are they looking to serve the sector with the 77W? And is it intended to be an extension of their BOM-HKG service?
30 Cloudyapple : Whatever they originally planned to use between Pudong and San Francisco will now apply to this sector when it materializes. My speculation is that H
31 Cricket : 9W has usually been the beneficiary of gov't interference...
32 15A : Keep in mind that today Maa has a A332 on ground the whole day (as a result of using 3 for Maa-Bru-YYZ) and similarly when Blr-Bru-??? starts, that to
33 Jlk : between US (west coast) and HK to be precise.
34 Jlk : It is actually between the North American west coast and HKG to be spot on which includes YVR as well.
35 Mk777 : So if 9W has 5th freedom rights, i am going to assume 77W from BOM-HKG-SFO in the near future. What about the other US west coast destination?? Wasn't
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...
Niamey To Hong Kong posted Sat Jul 28 2007 01:04:52 by Dalavia
Win A Trip On A380 With LH To Hong-Kong 50 People posted Tue Mar 6 2007 14:24:32 by LHStarAlliance
El Al To Fly Daily To Hong Kong And Beijing posted Mon Jun 26 2006 15:47:14 by IAD380
Asian Aerospace Exhibition Will Move To Hong Kong posted Tue Feb 14 2006 05:35:02 by YLWbased
Rumor: Did A380 Ever Come To Hong Kong Last Year? posted Fri Nov 25 2005 16:41:58 by CaptainTim
Finnair Still N/s To Hong Kong? posted Thu Oct 27 2005 08:26:03 by Kaitak
CX Vs. AC From Toronto To Hong Kong posted Fri Mar 18 2005 19:20:03 by CA228
Air India To Add Bangkok To Hong Kong Service posted Sat Mar 12 2005 19:35:12 by B747-437B
BA To Hong Kong Tonight posted Wed Sep 8 2004 01:31:14 by EZYAirbus
CO Newark To Hong Kong posted Sun Jul 11 2004 19:22:09 by Justloveplanes
BA To Hong Kong Tonight posted Wed Sep 8 2004 01:31:14 by EZYAirbus