cx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 137 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 19215 times:
According to the CX world issue, paragraph of "Flexibility key as capacity adjustments are made" you can see that "It will also deploy more fuel efficient 777-300ERs on longhaul flights to destinations ......... the team wanted to get the 747s off long-haul routes as much as possible .......... “That’s why we’re robbing North America of some 777s and putting them on Europe" They plan to partially cut JFK 845/846, LAX 884/885 and completely 828/825 after September
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6072 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 19185 times:
Wow. JFK doesn't necessarily surprise me, as it seems like they were adding a new frequency every other day, which is a bit crazy on a 15-16 hour flight! I assume the start of ORD doesn't help JFK either.
However, the cutback for LAX is a bit surprising to me.
I mean lets put this in context, even with these cuts, CX still has one of the (if not the) strongest presences in North America amongst the big Asian carriers.
Nope, CX826/829 will continue to operate on a daily basis with the 77W. Evening arrival (around 8pm) and early morning (around 1:30am) departure out of YYZ.
The flight getting cut is the one that arrives in the early afternoon and departs around 3pm.
The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
ordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 583 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 16732 times:
They had been adding so many flights to JFK over the past few years, too bad they are taking away the YYZ one, I poped my international F cherry on that one a year back. Where are these 747s that are leaving europe going then, are they going to add capacity to their asian network with them or send them to the desert.
cx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6341 posts, RR: 56 Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12317 times:
Quoting ordjoe (Reply 12): Where are these 747s that are leaving europe going then, are they going to add capacity to their asian network with them or send them to the desert.
They will mostly if not all end up with the scrapman. Three 744s will be retired this autumn, five next year and depending on the state of the economy, another 3-4 the year after that. In the meantime they will be deployed regionally where the shorthaul flights mean that not as much fuel is burned/wasted.
Quoting yegbey01 (Reply 13): How will this capacity be replaced?
Last November, I flew YYZ-HKG (F) and then HKG-YVR-JFK (J). Every seat was filled. and I am sure Y was just as full.
Our loads are pretty high everywhere at the moment but ticket prices are not high enough to even cover the fuel costs, especially to Europe on the 744. There has been talk of cutting back YYZ for some time now. JFK does ok but not good enough to cover the loss-making 744 routes to Europe. Fact is, that the 77Ws are needed off those North American flights to put to Europe asap. Once more 77Ws come and the economy picks up a bit, those frequencies will be restored.
as739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5820 posts, RR: 23 Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12114 times:
What are the plans for SFO? Being the last N. American destination with 2 daily 744's, will they go to 2 daily 77W or look into adding a 3rd flight say 4 weekly down the road?
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
cx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6341 posts, RR: 56 Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 11476 times:
Quoting as739x (Reply 16): What are the plans for SFO? Being the last N. American destination with 2 daily 744's, will they go to 2 daily 77W or look into adding a 3rd flight say 4 weekly down the road?
Becomes 1x 744 and 1x 77W daily starting July 1st. Not sure when it will become double daily 77Ws though. Priority now is to get the 744s off Europe where the yields are low.
aviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1347 posts, RR: 12 Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11035 times:
Quoting sq_ek_freak (Reply 5): I mean lets put this in context, even with these cuts, CX still has one of the (if not the) strongest presences in North America amongst the big Asian carriers.
I'd give that to Korean Air.
Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
cx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6341 posts, RR: 56 Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11015 times:
Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 18): I wonder if it would have helped if CX had ordered their 77Ws a bit earlier, like EK, AF, JL, NH or BR.
When CX ordered their 77Ws is was a record breaking order for us. CX have always been conservative and the original plan when the 77Ws were ordered was for them to be replacements for the 744s. The last of the 744s should have left this year under the plan of several years ago. The economy however kept doing so well that the 77Ws were used to expand the network instead of replacing the 744s. Now the economy is turning for Cx and the fuel price is sky high so it is time for the 744 to leave but the 77Ws were already used to expand the network a lot so they are struggling in terms of not having enough planes. In hindsight obviously it would have been better to order more 777s but they had no idea the 744s would be staying for so long.
Thats the thing about aviation, it is hard to come up with a long term plan when in the short term things change so much!
cx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 137 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10276 times:
SO they are on the dilemma of cutting the 77w or allow the 747 to continue to fly. It seems that the revenue from JFK 845/846 is not enough to cover the loss from any of the European destination. So now from JFK, LAX and YYZ they can free up three more 77W with 28 in total. They will receive another 77W this year and total of 29. JFK use 6, LAX 5, ORD 2, YYZ 2, YVR 2, SFO 2, and the proposed EWR 2, already 21 in total so only 8 left for European route, MXP 2, LHR seems using 3 for 1.5 daily using 77W, so three more left, really shortage of planes. They seem to use A340 to LHR, CDG and AMS, just curious they suddenly have so much A340 or they pull the three A340 from dessert back again??
cx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6341 posts, RR: 56 Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10021 times:
We still have 11 A340s. The ones that were stored were leased and returned to the leasing company a while ago. They are now flying for Sri Lankan and Aerolineas Argentinas.
We do have a few 77Ws that fly around the region every day. The company is rearranging schedules to get these planes off regional flying and send them longhaul which is there they are supposed to be. I am not sure if the A340s will start to do more longhaul once again as they are hardly doing any longhaul flying at the moment.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9860 times:
Quoting cx flyboy (Reply 3):
EWR is on the backburner for the time being.
I'll be shocked if EWR ever is served by CX.
25 flythere: Not really. YYZ frequency is only down from 10 to 7 weekly. The route is still there. I assume it would be if it is the case. But CX has been quite c
26 cx flyboy: At one stage we were deciding on a crew hotel for the EWR crew, so it was close to happening before they pulled the plug when the economy didn't real
27 cx828: So actually New York doesn't decrease the frequency, instead is an increase. From 4 JFK to 3.5 JFK and 1 EWR.
28 trex8: If a 744 loses money, a 77W burns about 25% less than a 744 and a 748 is supposed to be getting 10%+ better than a 77W, no wonder no one wants a 748!
29 workhorse: Actually, unfortunately (for me) they pulled the 340 out of CDG some time ago. Before, we had the "main" 747 service leaving CDG at 2pm and arriving
30 iahflyer: Does the YVR-JFK flight pre-clear customs in Vancouver?
31 yegbey01: NO. All pax get off the plane and are held in a transit area for about 60 minutes
32 sq_ek_freak: Thanks for your great insightful posts. Are the operational costs of the 744 so prohibitive that even swapping a few North American routes where the
33 ZK-NBT: Where did you get that, read below again. Capacity I think just to give CDG a few more seats. CDG is showing as 2 daily non stop serivce with the A34
34 cx flyboy: North America was a priority to get the 744s off when the 77Ws started to be delivered a few years ago. This has almost completely happened now and s
35 RyanairGuru: During December/January they often send them to Australia for a capacity bump over the 330. To use BNE as an example, CX155/156 went 340 over the las
36 jakob77: The 744's cost are really so prohibitive at this time when fuel price is sky high. cx flyboy has very well summarized the rational behind the change
38 trex8: Wouldn't it be more cost effective to have a stop for routes to US east coast than the nonstops, regardless of the equipment. What are the landing fee
39 DTWLAX: Doesn't CX 884/885 operate only during spring/summer season? And that is also not daily (if I am correct). CX has always had 2x daily consistently fr
40 MarcoPoloWorld: My question would be this - There are quite a few 747 operators out there, especially on routes across the Pacific. Cathay says that they can't make b
41 flythere: Yea, they do fly across Pacific, but they dont fly as long as or as far as Cathay does. I believe UA thinks the same way, they cant wait to pull off
42 cx828: Just curious why BA and LF's 744 sill efficient to fly long haul then?? They both still have a bunch of 744.
43 jonathanxxxx: I'm pretty sure it is because they use them on shorter stage lengths. LHR-MIA or FRA-IAD are nowhere near as long as HKG-JFK or HKG-LAX
44 cx flyboy: Who said they were efficient? Numerous airlines around the world are reporting financial figures at the moment and they either continue to be losses
45 trex8: No doubt the 77W has lower "operating" costs but the capital acquistion costs aren't chicken feed with lease rates at 1 million + /month for a 77W, fi
46 cx828: I think only 6 more 77w are coming next year, so 744 may still need to stay for some years unless they receive more from boeing.
47 lightsaber: I found that interesting. I'd like to see a CASM analysis broken down by different costs at today's fuel prices. I couldn't see an airline that is ca
48 flythere: That never comes close to BA. 744 only accounts for less than one-fifth of pax fleet of CX, all others are 777/333/340
49 flythere: That never comes close to BA. 744 only accounts for less than one-fifth of pax fleet of CX, the rest are 777/333/340
50 cx flyboy: The plan is for five 744s to retire next year and for the entire fleet to be gone in 3-4 years. One of the problems is not only the 77W numbers arriv
51 lightsaber: I think BA is 'being bitten' by 744 fuel burn right now. But that is just my opinion... You make a good point there. Perhaps there is too much overla
Sponsor Message: 
From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 137 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6072 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2000, 1584 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2670 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7177 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
