Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cathay's Future  
User currently offlinecx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 11555 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was wondering what Cathay will be like in a few years. Eg, fleet, new destinations, and service?? More Passenger or cargo oriented ? Expand more rapidly with the proposed third HKG runway? What are your thoughts?

43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12478 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 11223 times:

I see Hong Kong going from strength to strength and I see CX being a major beneficiary of this. There will certainly be new destinations, although I don't see CX expanding like EK or QR; it will add new routes and certainly new aircraft.

At the risk of opening up a new debate about CX and A380s, which I think we've beaten to death in numerous threads, I certainy see VLAs in its future, most likely the A380 and most likely the -900 version,although I see a limited number of -800s being acquired for London and other key routes.

The 77W will be the backbone of its long haul fleet for a good many years to come, until the A350-900/900R (which I know it hasn't ordered, but I see it as being pretty much a dead cert); the A350-1000 will probably replace the standard 773s. I don't see 787s figuring in CX's plans, nor A358s; A359s would probably replace the A330s at KA and CX, as well as CX's own 772s.

I see its cargo operation expanding, to include 772LRFs and more -8Fs, but not A380s.

I hesitate to give fleet numbers, but focusing on widebody twins, which will be about 90% of the mainline fleet, I see around 15-20 A350-1000s, 30-40 77Ws and anything from 60-80 A359s.

All of the major Asian "big hitters" will be seeking, as they always do, to make their hubs the number one - KE/OZ will do it at ICN, TG at BKK etc, but I think HKG has the perfect geographical advantage and expanding HKG will be of crucial importance to the carrier's success; the sooner it starts, the better.

CX has hugely exciting and bright future ahead of it.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8376 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 11139 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
I hesitate to give fleet numbers, but focusing on widebody twins, which will be about 90% of the mainline fleet, I see around 15-20 A350-1000s, 30-40 77Ws and anything from 60-80 A359s.

CX has ordered 60 777-300ER's, its done so I see the 777 and 60 A350-900, no -1000.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4833 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 10736 times:

CX will do well as it is ideally located at the doorstep to the Dragon that has awakened in China. CX also has its fingers in the pie with subsidiaries/shareholdings to take advantage of the booming China market.


56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2361 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 10666 times:

I just don't see CX in a position of strength when they have no intra-mainland operations. They won't be able to profit on a sizeable portion of the domestic chinese market. Too many routes are inconvenient for HKG connections.

I don't know all thats involved in Chinese laws, but what would be the technical/legal hurdles to a CX & HU merger/JV?



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlineQFA787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 10596 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
I don't see 787s figuring in CX's plans, nor A358s; A359s would probably replace the A330s at KA and CX, as well as CX's own 772s.

I disagree. The 787-10X is tailor made as a 333 replacement for CX.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
until the A350-900/900R (which I know it hasn't ordered, but I see it as being pretty much a dead cert)

Again, disagree. Can't see the -900R ever seeing reality.

I see their future fleet as 787-10X, 359, 77W, either 3510 or 777NG and a few VLAs but their primary focus will remain frequency.


User currently offlineaquariusHKG From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2010, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 10415 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
I just don't see CX in a position of strength when they have no intra-mainland operations. They won't be able to profit on a sizeable portion of the domestic chinese market. Too many routes are inconvenient for HKG connections.

I don't know all thats involved in Chinese laws, but what would be the technical/legal hurdles to a CX & HU merger/JV?

Hong Kong and Mainland China are two different jurisdiction, it would be similar in line to AF/KL merger, but without the EU overhead

but if CX is to merge with anyone in Mainland China, I don't expect it to be HU, IMO they're rival as HU owns HX

CX partner in China is CA, remember CA own 29.99% of CX and CX owns 18.3% of CA, and they have a joint venture in Air China Cargo, with CX owning 49%


User currently offlineCX711 From Singapore, joined Jun 2011, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 10268 times:

I think CX did well to secure its future post-97 with its alliances and cross-holdings and managing to 100% own KA. I agree CX's future in the next 10-15 years looks very bright. However, what level of challenge will HX pose to CX/KA as the dominant HKG-based carrier in say 10-15 years' time?

Correct me if I am wrong, I believe the separate jurisdiction arrangement is only for 50 years after 1997. So what happens after 2047 is still uncertain. 36 years is a long time, but I will not be surprised if thought is being given to different scenarios post 2047. Is it conceivable that CX will be 51% owned by a Chinese entity by then?


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 10102 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
There will certainly be new destinations, although I don't see CX expanding like EK or QR; it will add new routes and certainly new aircraft.

I do not think it would take much imagination to look at where they would like to fly next, looking at the busiest airports in the world, any of these would be possible destinations KOJ, ULN, DOH, OOL, LED, KBP, AYT, IST, CAI, ADD, ARN, WAW, ATH, OSL, CPH, VIE, NBO, HNL, MUC, ZRH, LUX, BRU, MAN, TUN, MIR, DUB, BCN, PMI, SEA, MAD, LIS, CMN, RAK, LAS, CPT, LOS, DEN, PHX, IND, BOS, PHL, DFW, IAH, CLT, ATL, MEX, MIA, BOG, UIO, GYE, GIG, BSB, GRU, EZE

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):

CX has hugely exciting and bright future ahead of it.

I think with the current CEO, that is the case.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):

CX has ordered 60 777-300ER's, its done so I see the 777 and 60 A350-900, no -1000.

CX already has given the intention of 60xA350s with an initial order of 30+30, they will be a mix of -900 and -1000. Contractually only a small number have to be -900s. I think they will be used one for fleet replacement, and one for expansion for every two delivered, I think they will initially replace the A340-300s and 777-200s, then start eating into the A330-300s, 777-300s, and finally into 777-300ERs way down the track, and for expansion they will serve new long thin routes.

I think A350 will be basically the only passenger twin ordered after 2015 for some time for CX, that is not including subsidiaries like KA, if they are still around by then. Boeing needs to cut an enormous amount of weight out of the 777 to make it competitive with the normal loads seen on the network.

HKG airport is the largest constraint in their expansion, all slots are forecast to be filled by 2015. After the physical airports slots, the number of pilots and training capacity is the next constraint.

Cargo will need additional aircraft, and a lot of them, however I do not see the number of dedicated cargo frames to exceed 25-30% of the overall fleet. The livery of these freighter aircraft I think is still unknown, they maybe Cathay Pacific Cargo, Air Hong Kong, or even the China Airlines joint venture, of a combination thereof.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 4):
I just don't see CX in a position of strength when they have no intra-mainland operations. They won't be able to profit on a sizeable portion of the domestic chinese market.

CX owns about 20% of Air China and Air China Cargo, it does have exposure to those markets.

Quoting CX711 (Reply 7):
Is it conceivable that CX will be 51% owned by a Chinese entity by then?

I think it is already over 50% Chinese owned, Hong Kong is part of China when they what it to be.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 10063 times:

With regard to the quads, I see them staying their current course. i.e. no 748i or A388, but A389 if Airbus build it.

User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2361 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 10023 times:

Quoting aquariusHKG (Reply 6):
CX partner in China is CA, remember CA own 29.99% of CX and CX owns 18.3% of CA, and they have a joint venture in Air China Cargo, with CX owning 49%
Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
CX owns about 20% of Air China and Air China Cargo, it does have exposure to those markets.

I'm aware of the CX-CA link. However, with CA in *A, the partnership is useless to OW. CX needs to be able to offer mainland routes for codeshares.

Quoting aquariusHKG (Reply 6):
I don't expect it to be HU, IMO they're rival as HU owns HX

One would assume that HX would be part of the merger as well. I don't see how you could exclude HX in such a merger.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlineQFA787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9997 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
CX already has given the intention of 60xA350s with an initial order of 30+30, they will be a mix of -900 and -1000. Contractually only a small number have to be -900s. I think they will be used one for fleet replacement, and one for expansion for every two delivered, I think they will initially replace the A340-300s and 777-200s, then start eating into the A330-300s, 777-300s, and finally into 777-300ERs way down the track, and for expansion

They haven't indicated at all that they will take any 350-1000s and if they were wise they would wait until Boeing decided what improvements were in store for the 77W, seeing as they nearly have 50 of those in service or on order.
I assume, unlike your rubbish re the 787 cabin width that the 777 cabin is wide enough for CX's seat needs in all classes.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2618 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9974 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 5):
I disagree. The 787-10X is tailor made as a 333 replacement for CX.

CX has already ordered 30 A359s. If they weren't bought to replace A333/A343/772, then what were they bought for? The A359 will be entering service before the 787-10X anyway, given that the 787-10 is not even officially launched. Advantage Airbus.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineQFA787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9918 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
I think A350 will be basically the only passenger twin ordered after 2015 for some time for CX, that is not including subsidiaries like KA, if they are still around by then. Boeing needs to cut an enormous amount of weight out of the 777 to make it competitive with the normal loads seen on the network.

I also think you may find Airbus still have a lot of work to do to get the 359 up to promised spec and weight will have to be added. I include both the -900 and -1000 in that. I suspect CX very well knows this.


User currently offlinecloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9870 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
HKG airport is the largest constraint in their expansion, all slots are forecast to be filled by 2015. After the physical airports slots, the number of pilots and training capacity is the next constraint.

Correction: Maximum runway capacity will be available from 2015 but not expected to be used up until 2019/2020.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
I'm aware of the CX-CA link. However, with CA in *A, the partnership is useless to OW. CX needs to be able to offer mainland routes for codeshares.

Alliances are the least important issue. Remember Continental switched just before they merged with UA?

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
One would assume that HX would be part of the merger as well. I don't see how you could exclude HX in such a merger.

If you knew what sort of an operation HX was then you probably wouldn't want Cathay to merge with them.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 12):
CX has already ordered 30 A359s.

32 if you remember the 2 leases. All delivered by 2019.



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 offlineQFA787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9874 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 12):
CX has already ordered 30 A359s. If they weren't bought to replace A333/A343/772, then what were they bought for? The A359 will be entering service before the 787-10X anyway, given that the 787-10 is not even officially launched. Advantage Airbus.

Different planes, different needs. The 359 will be more of a LH plane and the 787-10X more of a 333 replacement for regional routes. Advantage whoever makes the best aircraft and in all of the 320Neo hullaballoo not much has been said about the 350. Only a matter of time before delays are announced for the 359 IMO.


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12478 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9605 times:

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 15):
The 359 will be more of a LH plane and the 787-10X more of a 333 replacement for regional routes. Advantage whoever makes the best aircraft and in all of the 320Neo hullaballoo not much has been said about the 350. Only a matter of time before delays are announced for the 359 IMO.

Even still, it's unlikely to be anything like as bad as for the 787. I acknowledge that the 787-10 is probably more of a 333 replacement than the 359, but on the other hand, the 359 will already be in the fleet. I wonder if it will be possible for CX to operate a certain number of these acft in a low MTOW configuration, just for inter-Asia flights, configured in a manner more suitable for short/medium haul flights?


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 17, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8867 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
CX needs to be able to offer mainland routes for codeshares.

Do you mean intra China flights ? That would not be possible without starting another airline within China. Currently they have direct flightsto about 15 cities from HKG.

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 11):

They haven't indicated at all that they will take any 350-1000s and if they were wise they would wait until Boeing decided what improvements were in store for the 77W, seeing as they nearly have 50 of those in service or on order.

CX will be getting the -1000s, the contract is for A350s, with only a small number of the initial ones required to be -900s, after that CX has teh faciltiy to have -800s or -1000s. CX has never said that the entire order is for -900s only, or that they were never interested in the -800 or -1000.

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 11):
I assume, unlike your rubbish re the 787 cabin width that the 777 cabin is wide enough for CX's seat needs in all classes.

The 787 is about the width of a Y class seat narrower than the 777. The current CX 777 seats 9 across will not fit inside a 787 9 across, so what "rubbish" do you refer to ?

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 13):
I also think you may find Airbus still have a lot of work to do to get the 359 up to promised spec and weight will have to be added.

I am sure Airbus would love to be in the position where they have to get the aircraft "up to" spec weight, unlike Boeing who are struggling to get the 747-8 and 787 "down to" the spec weight.

Quoting cloudyapple (Reply 14):

Correction: Maximum runway capacity will be available from 2015 but not expected to be used up until 2019/2020.

What growth is that based upon ?

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 15):
Different planes, different needs. The 359 will be more of a LH plane and the 787-10X more of a 333 replacement for regional routes.

Considering they ordered more A330-300 recently, why would they be looking at replacing almost brand new aircraft with an aircraft that has not been launched yet ?



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8767 times:

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 11):
I assume, unlike your rubbish re the 787 cabin width that the 777 cabin is wide enough for CX's seat needs in all classes.

Your assumption would be very wrong in that case. They simply won't fit.

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 13):
I also think you may find Airbus still have a lot of work to do to get the 359 up to promised spec and weight will have to be added.

On what exactly are you basing that please?

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 15):
Only a matter of time before delays are announced for the 359 IMO.

Is that just your guess (hope), or of what factual substance are you using?


User currently offlineqfa787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7968 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 17):
Considering they ordered more A330-300 recently, why would they be looking at replacing almost brand new aircraft with an aircraft that has not been launched yet ?

How old are the oldest 330s? By 2016+, I guess some may be almost ready for replacement. Anyway, you are happy to start replacing 77Ws with 359/1000 well before their use by date.

Quoting zeke (Reply 17):
CX will be getting the -1000s, the contract is for A350s, with only a small number of the initial ones required to be -900s, after that CX has teh faciltiy to have -800s or -1000s. CX has never said that the entire order is for -900s only, or that they were never interested in the -800 or -1000.

Have CX ever said they will be taking -1000s? Have they ever said the 359 order includes 30 options?

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
Your assumption would be very wrong in that case. They simply won't fit.

My assumption was a go at Zeke, as I don't believe the 787 was rejected at CX on seat width at all. This has never been reported by anyone else than Zeke. I say it's complete and utter rubbish.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
On what exactly are you basing that please?

Why should I tell you other than I have my sources and you only have to read between the lines with what Airbus has been saying in the media to know there are problems with the 359.
Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
Is that just your guess (hope), or of what factual substance are you using?

It's amazing what you pick up from the little "birdies".


User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10736 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7758 times:

CX´s future depends on how local competition grows as well what they can offer to the passenger.
While the massive 77W orders man that this plane will be the backbone of what will largely be a monotonous, not to say boring fleet after 2015 well into the 20s, I am sure CX will order about a dozen A380s or 748I relatively soon to stay competitive and offer the highest grade of comfort on its main routes. Otherwise its inviting the competition to do so, which would be able to offer more comfortable planes as well as lower prices.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2618 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7446 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting zeke (Reply 17):
the contract is for A350s,

According to the following articles, the order was for A350-900s.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...0-900s-and-more-boeing-777-300ers/
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...urchase-30-a350s-and-six-777s.html
http://australianaviation.com.au/2010/09/cathay-firms-a350-order/

... and most importantly:
http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_...651b91b210VgnVCM1000000ad21c39____

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 19):
as I don't believe the 787 was rejected at CX on seat width at all.

Do enlighten us then, why did CX reject the 787?

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 19):
Why should I tell you other than I have my sources and you only have to read between the lines with what Airbus has been saying in the media to know there are problems with the 359.

Because it affects your credibility. How do we know you're not making it up?

Quoting na (Reply 20):
boring
Quoting na (Reply 20):
highest grade of comfort
Quoting na (Reply 20):
more comfortable planes


 Yeah sure

Given that SQ uses 19" wide seats and 32" pitch in economy class on both the 77W and the A388, there is no reason why CX, which also operates 9 across 777s, would fit exactly the same seats at the same width and same seat pitch on the A380 if they order them. "Comfort level", therefore, would be exactly the same.

[Edited 2011-07-15 05:13:23]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7411 times:

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 19):

How old are the oldest 330s? By 2016+, I guess some may be almost ready for replacement.

The oldest are progressively being moved to KA, and their newer ones back to CX, that process has already started. CX will end up with all the higher MTOW A330s, which are also the newest airframes.

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 19):

Have CX ever said they will be taking -1000s? Have they ever said the 359 order includes 30 options?

Yep and no, it is not 30 options, it is 30 orders plus 15 options and 15 purchase rights if you want to get technical about it, plus 2 additional leased airframes.

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 19):

My assumption was a go at Zeke, as I don't believe the 787 was rejected at CX on seat width at all. This has never been reported by anyone else than Zeke. I say it's complete and utter rubbish.


That is nothing but a personal attack against me, let the facts speak for themselves.

Are you willing to dispute that the 787 cabin is about the width of one Y class seat narrower than a 777 ?

Are you willing to dispute that the 787 cannot handle equivalent 777/A330 Y class seat currently installed 9 {777} / 8 {A330} abreast ?

Look at the numbers :

Typical 777 Y class seat (9 abreast) = 18.5"
Arm rest = 2"
Isle = 19" (reduced from 19.25 to match the A330)

Typical A330 class seat (8 abreast) = 18"
Arm rest = 2"
Isle = 19"

Numbers from page 6 of http://www.boeing.com/commercial/startup/pdf/777_cross.pdf

Minimum width = 18.5 x 9 + 2 x 12 + 2 x 19 = 228.5" using the 777 seats
Minimum width = 18.0 x 9 + 2 x 12 + 2 x 19 = 224.0" using the A330 seats

787 internal cross section = 213"

Shortfall = 15.5" using the 777 seats
Shortfall = 11.0" using the A330 seats

So the only way that the 787 can match economics is by putting in a different seat product (an internal commercial decision), or matching the seat product and reduce the economics by running the aircraft 8 abreast (another internal commercial decision).

Please show me a public link to where any airline has reported their internal methods for selecting and not selecting different airframes. Airlines do not go around doing that, as that information and process is their intellectual property, it is their competitive advantage.

If you worked for an airline, you might actually be privy as to how these multi-billion dollar purchase decisions are derived.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7200 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 21):

According to the following articles, the order was for A350-900s.

As I explained earlier, CX is only obligated to take the initial number specified in the contact as -900s, and they have the option to change them to -800s or -1000s.

If one were to google "A350 XWB Purchase Agreement" one will find a number of interesting documents online, this paragraph is typical of the language used in the contracts and was returned in one of the google links. It clearly demonstrates the point I was making.

Quote:
An Amended and Restated Airbus A350 XWB Purchase Agreement, which supersedes the A350 Purchase Agreement dated September 27, 2005 between US Airways Group, US Airways, AWA and AVSA, S.A.R.L. (now Airbus S.A.S.). The new purchase agreement increases the number of firm order aircraft from 20 A350 aircraft to 18 A350-800 XWB aircraft and four A350-900 XWB aircraft, with the option to convert these aircraft to other A350 models, subject to certain terms and conditions. Deliveries for the 22 A350 XWB aircraft will begin in 2014 and extend through 2017. US Airways expects to use these aircraft for modest international expansion or replacement of existing older technology aircraft, as market conditions warrant. The Amended and Restated Airbus A350 XWB Purchase Agreement also gives US Airways purchase rights for the acquisition of additional A350 XWB aircraft, subject to certain terms and conditions.


The announcements surrounding the US Airways order indicated the "18 A350-800 XWB aircraft and four A350-900 XWB aircraft", where one can see in the contract they retain the express ability to change models.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2618 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7052 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting zeke (Reply 23):
and they have the option to change them to -800s or -1000s.

I don't doubt that they may convert their orders if they wanted to, but have they, to date, expressed any desire to take up that option?



Boeing 777 fanboy
25 qf002 : Not that I want to get involved in this, but they would be able to fit the same seats as in the 744 IIRC. They seem happy to fly the 744 on long haul
26 CX Flyboy : Zeke, any idea when KA's 330s will be transferred to CX? So far none have, yet CX have 'given' them three A330s already with A330s leaving KA being r
27 Post contains links zeke : Who said anything about "regional" aircraft ? when they ordered the A350, they said they will become the "backbone of our mid-sized long haul wide-bo
28 kaitak : The new J Class config looks great; incidentally, Sam Chui has done a trip report involving an A330 flight, with the new J Class layout, and it looks
29 Byrdluvs747 : True, but wasn't the chinese govt involved in CA's decision to go with *A? By allowing Skyteam to gather up so many chinese carriers, it seems as tho
30 PVG : i think that the in-flight experience and comfort is just fine on any of their planes with the newer seats. Their main problem I think is going to be
31 cx828 : what is the difference between the 15 options and 15 purchase right??
32 washingtonian : When did CX order its initial 77Ws? It seems that almost overnight a whole bunch of airlines wound up with HUGE 77W fleets!
33 qf002 : Are you actually kidding? This whole discussion has involved the A333, and I'm pretty sure that you'll find that they come under the umbrella of 'reg
34 CX Flyboy : Actually I have never heard of such complaints, but then again that accounts for very little.
35 qf002 : It accounts for the fact that CX has never stated a move to making their aircraft more comfortable in Y because customers were unhappy with seat widt
36 CX Flyboy : I know CX have wanted to replace the Y seats for quite a while but has taken their time because resources were dedicated to the new business class, w
37 Post contains links cloudyapple : This is what we have been working with. http://www.hkairport2030.com/en/development/twoRunway_capacity.html Growth patterns are similar at airports a
38 EddieDude : CX has indicated it would like to serve MEX via SFO or LAX with fifth freedom rights. It is very unlikely the Mexican government will authorize this.
39 SCL767 : It would be great if CX flew into MIA one day...CX Cargo already operates into MIA on a regular basis. Connections to/from GYE are already available
40 CX Flyboy : They are looking into the feasibility of a HKG-YVR-MEX.
41 Post contains images EddieDude : Wow! This is certainly news! I had read news reports on their interest in launching HKG-LAX-MEX or HKG-SFO-MEX, subject to obtaining 5th freedom righ
42 CX Flyboy : I think 5th freedom rights from LAX-MEX would be very hard to get. Besides, it is just one thing they are looking at. They are always looking at a la
43 EddieDude : To say the least. I would actually say "impossible". It would be in the best interest of UA, AS, AM and whoever replaces MX in this route to oppose.
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...
Cathay´s Future posted Sat Jul 29 2000 17:56:41 by Flying-Tiger
Cathay´s Future posted Sat Jul 29 2000 17:56:41 by Flying-Tiger
Cathay: No Plans For 787 Or A380 For Near Future posted Tue Oct 30 2007 14:58:44 by EI321
Future Of Cathay Pacific Cargo posted Tue Mar 12 2002 23:16:35 by Bowen0614
Cathay: No Plans For 787 Or A380 For Near Future posted Tue Oct 30 2007 14:58:44 by EI321
The Future Of Cathay Pacific posted Thu Aug 30 2001 08:01:18 by CXCPA
Future Of Cathay Pacific... posted Sun Apr 16 2000 07:39:50 by Louis
Future Plans For ANC? posted Wed Jul 13 2011 22:15:31 by ANCsupercub
Future Of Cathay Pacific Cargo posted Tue Mar 12 2002 23:16:35 by Bowen0614
US Airline Current Fleets And Future? posted Wed Jul 13 2011 21:29:05 by sancho99504
The Future Of Pickering Airport posted Tue Jul 12 2011 09:52:02 by xero9
The Future Of Cathay Pacific posted Thu Aug 30 2001 08:01:18 by CXCPA
An Analysis Of The Future Of Terminal 8 At JFK posted Wed Jul 6 2011 18:48:29 by washingtonian
China: Future Destinations For Foreign Carriers posted Wed Jul 6 2011 03:07:36 by IndianicWorld
Future Of Cathay Pacific... posted Sun Apr 16 2000 07:39:50 by Louis
Future Plans For ANC? posted Wed Jul 13 2011 22:15:31 by ANCsupercub
US Airline Current Fleets And Future? posted Wed Jul 13 2011 21:29:05 by sancho99504
The Future Of Pickering Airport posted Tue Jul 12 2011 09:52:02 by xero9
An Analysis Of The Future Of Terminal 8 At JFK posted Wed Jul 6 2011 18:48:29 by washingtonian
China: Future Destinations For Foreign Carriers posted Wed Jul 6 2011 03:07:36 by IndianicWorld