In addition to IAD, CX A350-1000 will serve LAX and EWR in the second half of the year. Before long-haul services commences, the aircraft will undergo test trails on shorter, regional routes.

Furthermore, A350-900 will serve JNB, DXB, MAD, AMS, LHR, YVR and all Australian routes.

Source
https://twitter.com/A350_Production/sta ... 9528759296
https://www.facebook.com/cxsecret/posts ... 4570305777

1. A35K will be entered service between Jul-Aug 2018, before long haul service to Washington, Newark and Los Angeles in Sep-Dec 2018
2. There will be 1 ISM, 1 SP, 4 FP and 6 BC on 35K
3. The following routes will be operated by 35G in 2018 : JNB, DXB, MAD, AMS, twice daily LHR, All YVR (except 888) and all Australian Routes

Quite an extensive list, I'm looking forward to seeing it at LHR. I wonder how the conversion to 10ab will affect the distribution of 77Ws, whether they'll fly more short haul routes and the A35K takes over a lot of the flying, because a lot of these routes have been exclusive 77W territory for a while now (for CX).

Also of interest is 2 new destinations - Cape Town and Canberra

Nice to see the A35K in MAD.......

Where are all those 77Ws going?

airzona11 wrote:

Where are all those 77Ws going?

Some will go to the desert.

CX to start 777 10-abreast upgrade in March, first 77W retirements to follow

pabloeing wrote:

Nice to see the A35K in MAD.......

That will be served by the A359 not the A350-1000

Congrats to CPT and CBR!!!

5 777-300ERs retiring? What about the 777-200s and 777-300s? Are they still planning on getting 777-300s from Emirates?

damn. i was really hoping YYZ would get A350 service this year. not looking forward to 10 abreast 77W from YYZ to HKG.

MrHMSH wrote:

Quite an extensive list, I'm looking forward to seeing it at LHR. I wonder how the conversion to 10ab will affect the distribution of 77Ws, whether they'll fly more short haul routes and the A35K takes over a lot of the flying, because a lot of these routes have been exclusive 77W territory for a while now (for CX).

I think so. AMS will get the A350 instead of the 77W, which is good because we will be spared another 10-abreast 777 route. Although I was hoping for the A350-1000 instead of the -900.

A359 LAX-HKG, how will that affect their loads? So is A359 replaces all 77W?

[*]

pasu129 wrote:

A359 LAX-HKG, how will that affect their loads? So is A359 replaces all 77W?

It’s a 35K or 1000 for LAX. The 35K won’t have F so it will be probably 1 at most 2 daily with atleast 2 daily remaining 4 class 77W.

Really looking forward to seeing CX A350-1000s at LAX! I guess this will make them the first operator of the A35K into LAX?

I hope people do not take everything off Facebook unofficial accounts as being factual. That Facebook account is mainly used by cabin crew to complain and spread gossip. While no doubt some of what is said does come to light, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Some of it makes little sense to me.

zeke wrote:

I hope people do not take everything off Facebook unofficial accounts as being factual. That Facebook account is mainly used by cabin crew to complain and spread gossip. While no doubt some of what is said does come to light, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Some of it makes little sense to me.

I agree. Not sure about the A35G to LHR, twice a day at that! I'm not buying the dine on demand either.

In the comment section, someone mentioned that the 777-200's will be retired in 2018, replaced by 777-300 from EK (and these are the ones with 10-abreast first). Is that still the plan?

Not my place to say, developments if and when they occur will be announced officially in due course. What has been announced in the annual report is (page 11 2017 interim report) :

CX 3xA330 lease expire this year
CX 1x77W lease expire this year
KA 2xA320 lease expire this year
KA 2x A330 lease expire this year
LD 2x A306 lease expire this year
LD 2x744BCF lease expire this year

Five Boeing 777-300 used aircraft will be delivered from 2018.

CXGabriel wrote:

I agree. Not sure about the A35G to LHR, twice a day at that! I'm not buying the dine on demand either.

What's an A35G?

It’s the seat plan code for the A350-900 in the current 3 class configuration.

You lucky folks at LAX go from having 0 A350s to 3 relatively quickly, one of them being an A35J

ZK-NBT wrote:

[*]

pasu129 wrote:

A359 LAX-HKG, how will that affect their loads? So is A359 replaces all 77W?

It’s a 35K or 1000 for LAX. The 35K won’t have F so it will be probably 1 at most 2 daily with atleast 2 daily remaining 4 class 77W.

Just curious why CX would not put an F cabin on the 35K? If they are sending it to LAX and JFK, Im sure there would be demand for F.

Runway28L wrote:

You lucky folks at LAX go from having 0 A350s to 3 relatively quickly, one of them being an A35J

Is one of them a DL350-900? cause i believe the 2018 summer schedule is showing LAX-PVG on a A350-900,currently the route is on a 777LR.

CX should consider a 4-class A35K. EWR used to be served with 4-class plane before the change.

zeke wrote:

It’s the seat plan code for the A350-900 in the current 3 class configuration.

Thank you.

The 772's should he going this year I heard. As for the EK 773's I've heard it's off... and it's on so who knows ....

aemoreira1981 wrote:

CX should consider a 4-class A35K. EWR used to be served with 4-class plane before the change.

No, it was 77G 3-class.

itisi wrote:

The 772's should he going this year I heard. As for the EK 773's I've heard it's off... and it's on so who knows ....

The EK 773s are definitely still coming.

scotron11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

[*]

pasu129 wrote:

A359 LAX-HKG, how will that affect their loads? So is A359 replaces all 77W?

It’s a 35K or 1000 for LAX. The 35K won’t have F so it will be probably 1 at most 2 daily with atleast 2 daily remaining 4 class 77W.

Just curious why CX would not put an F cabin on the 35K? If they are sending it to LAX and JFK, Im sure there would be demand for F.

Floor space really I think and the fact that from 2021 779’s will start arriving which should have F, until then they have decided to stick with the 77W’s having F. Not all LAX/JFK flights have F.

and BOB on all flights to Philippines and Ho Chi Ming City and red-eye flights within Asia

scotron11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

[*]

pasu129 wrote:

A359 LAX-HKG, how will that affect their loads? So is A359 replaces all 77W?

It’s a 35K or 1000 for LAX. The 35K won’t have F so it will be probably 1 at most 2 daily with atleast 2 daily remaining 4 class 77W.

Just curious why CX would not put an F cabin on the 35K? If they are sending it to LAX and JFK, Im sure there would be demand for F.

CX will be using the 777-9s to replace those 777-300ERs with First Class. The A350-1000 replaces 777-300ERs without First Class.

CX operates multiple daily frequencies. Its possible that their F demand is only substantial on certain frequencies. Alternatively they may not have sufficient F demand to require more F seats than they currently have.

3 class long haul seat comparison

77W - https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_NP/ ... 7/300.html

Business: 40
Premium Economy: 32
Economy: 268
Total Passengers: 340

A350-1000

Business: 46
Premium Economy: 32
Economy: 256
Total Passengers: 334

https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_NP/ ... /1000.html

Doubt Australia will go all A359. CX has taken delivery of most of its A359 on order already. If so many A359 is going to Australia, where are they going to come from? Besides, SYD is such a busy route that A359 will be too small for it.

On the other hand, deploying A351 to North America makes sense. Actually I would think all 3-class North America flights will become A359/A351, and the 77W withdrawn from North America can be used to expand capacity to key Australia markets such as SYD and MEL.

CX is returning aircraft?
can't they renew the leases?

an airline like CX that barely flies to 50 destinations can't afford to give away new aircraft....

Can't believe CX is not keeping aircraft for expansion, Munich,Istanbul, Seattle are just a few cities that would sustain CX service....

If they're launching CPT, will it be nonstop?

Can't see that it will be a tag from JNB flight while they're already then reducing capacity on JNB route by introducing A359...unless increasing JNB frequency with some as tag-on to CPT.

Good to see more A350 flying. The jet is so much more comfortable than the 777.

oldannyboy wrote:

Good to see more A350 flying. The jet is so much more comfortable than the 777.

In what way, if i may ask? Haven't been on the 350.. And isn't the 777 even wider?

Lilienthal wrote:

oldannyboy wrote:

Good to see more A350 flying. The jet is so much more comfortable than the 777.

In what way, if i may ask? Haven't been on the 350.. And isn't the 777 even wider?

The A350 is more comfortable at 9 a row than the 777 at 10 a row and that is what you will get in Y if you fly those birds.

Lilienthal wrote:

oldannyboy wrote:

Good to see more A350 flying. The jet is so much more comfortable than the 777.

In what way, if i may ask? Haven't been on the 350.. And isn't the 777 even wider?

The 777 cabin is pretty noisy - very noisy, according to some people. I personally find it annoying after a number of hours, particularly at the back of the cabin. The A350 is A LOT quieter, and the extra width (at 9 across) is very welcome once the 777 go @10across. In case of CX the A350 seats in Y are also quite a bit more comfortable than those on the 777. The Airbus wing provides also much smoother flying in case of bad weather.

Kashmon wrote:

CX is returning aircraft?

Yes.

Kashmon wrote:

can't they renew the leases?

Also, yes.

Kashmon wrote:

an airline like CX that barely flies to 50 destinations can't afford to give away new aircraft....

So many things wrong here. So a small airline must always expand? 50 destinations is small? They actually fly to 75+. You realize they fly nearly 150 aircraft, all widebodies. In addition, not renewing a lease is not "giving away" new aircraft. Its not a new aircraft at 10 years old.

Kashmon wrote:

Can't believe CX is not keeping aircraft for expansion, Munich,Istanbul, Seattle are just a few cities that would sustain CX service....

They are, they have about 25 more A350s to be delivered then 21 779s. You want them to never retire an aircraft and always expand? You may want to read up on how businesses operate.

oldannyboy wrote:

Lilienthal wrote:

oldannyboy wrote:

Good to see more A350 flying. The jet is so much more comfortable than the 777.

In what way, if i may ask? Haven't been on the 350.. And isn't the 777 even wider?

The 777 cabin is pretty noisy - very noisy, according to some people. I personally find it annoying after a number of hours, particularly at the back of the cabin. The A350 is A LOT quieter, and the extra width (at 9 across) is very welcome once the 777 go @10across. In case of CX the A350 seats in Y are also quite a bit more comfortable than those on the 777. The Airbus wing provides also much smoother flying in case of bad weather.

I agree with that. Also, I found the CX A359's PEY and Biz class seats are better than the 77W's. I think the PEY seats in A359 have 2 more inches of leg room than the 77W's.

oldannyboy wrote:

The 777 cabin is pretty noisy - very noisy, according to some people. I personally find it annoying after a number of hours, particularly at the back of the cabin. The A350 is A LOT quieter, and the extra width (at 9 across) is very welcome once the 777 go @10across. In case of CX the A350 seats in Y are also quite a bit more comfortable than those on the 777. The Airbus wing provides also much smoother flying in case of bad weather.

Having recently experienced both back-to-back, I would say that if you just consider the seat then the current CX B777 economy seat is more comfortable than their A350 seat. The 777 seat's extra width (especially in the armrests) and extra seat padding is quite apparent. Obviously this advantage will disappear once CX refits their 777's to 10 abreast.

Now if you talk about the entire cabin experience, this is where the CX A350 does shine in it's quieter cabin noise, lower cabin altitude, updated IFE system and wifi access. Oh yes, honourable mention to the new A350 economy headrests as well, they are superior to the older ones.

jbs2886 wrote:

Kashmon wrote:

CX is returning aircraft?

Yes.

Kashmon wrote:

can't they renew the leases?

Also, yes.

Kashmon wrote:

an airline like CX that barely flies to 50 destinations can't afford to give away new aircraft....

So many things wrong here. So a small airline must always expand? 50 destinations is small? They actually fly to 75+. You realize they fly nearly 150 aircraft, all widebodies. In addition, not renewing a lease is not "giving away" new aircraft. Its not a new aircraft at 10 years old.

Kashmon wrote:

Can't believe CX is not keeping aircraft for expansion, Munich,Istanbul, Seattle are just a few cities that would sustain CX service....

They are, they have about 25 more A350s to be delivered then 21 779s. You want them to never retire an aircraft and always expand? You may want to read up on how businesses operate.

for an airline that historically kept aircraft for 20 years, 10 years is young.
CX flies only to 50 destinations- not 75 - cargo only does not count
oh and they cancelled Dusseldorf and Beijing
look at how many aircraft SQ,QR,EK have on order- CX will lose without scale

also A330's, A320's are also leaving not just 777's

Kashmon wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

Kashmon wrote:

CX is returning aircraft?

Yes.

Kashmon wrote:

can't they renew the leases?

Also, yes.

Kashmon wrote:

an airline like CX that barely flies to 50 destinations can't afford to give away new aircraft....

So many things wrong here. So a small airline must always expand? 50 destinations is small? They actually fly to 75+. You realize they fly nearly 150 aircraft, all widebodies. In addition, not renewing a lease is not "giving away" new aircraft. Its not a new aircraft at 10 years old.

Kashmon wrote:

Can't believe CX is not keeping aircraft for expansion, Munich,Istanbul, Seattle are just a few cities that would sustain CX service....

They are, they have about 25 more A350s to be delivered then 21 779s. You want them to never retire an aircraft and always expand? You may want to read up on how businesses operate.

for an airline that historically kept aircraft for 20 years, 10 years is young.
CX flies only to 50 destinations- not 75 - cargo only does not count
oh and they cancelled Dusseldorf and Beijing
look at how many aircraft SQ,QR,EK have on order- CX will lose without scale

also A330's, A320's are also leaving not just 777's

Lose, without scale? Typically CX were conservative and made a lot of $, they have expanded recently and struggled somewhat, partly due fuel hedging and partly competition, yes there are ways of growing by scale but it requires vision. CX have added more fuel efficient aircraft 77W/A359 and retired older types 744/A343, the A350 is a real winner here at 280 seats and is right sized to grow into markets previously not feasible.

Keep in mind CX has been sitting around #10 in the worlds ranking of most number of international RPKs or RTKs flown. Comparing the number of aircraft or destinations does not provide a true picture of how the airline compares.

CX sending the A350 to LAX-SFO-EWR. Interesting that HX has begun LAX & announced SFO already. HX has said their next destination is NYC. Has CX tipped us off as to which NYC airport it will be for HX??? My question though is, has the this been CX plan all along with the A350 in North America or just a response to HX entering the market?

jerseyewr777 wrote:

CX sending the A350 to LAX-SFO-EWR. Interesting that HX has begun LAX & announced SFO already. HX has said their next destination is NYC. Has CX tipped us off as to which NYC airport it will be for HX??? My question though is, has the this been CX plan all along with the A350 in North America or just a response to HX entering the market?

The assumptions being made I think are incorrect, namely all services at every port are going to A350s. Everyone should be able to realize there is not enough frames to cover all of that flying. Now if you look at historical CX networks were you would have the 744 or 77W were at the same port as the A340, I think that will be more realistic picture going forward.

Thank goodness, hope the A350-1000 to LAX is true. Anything to avoid 10 across 777s

737max8 wrote:

Thank goodness, hope the A350-1000 to LAX is true. Anything to avoid 10 across 777s

You have to wonder if airlines will begin recognising this - not just those with A350s and 777s (at 10 abreast), but also those with 787s (at nine abreast - which is all but one). If the operate both 777s and A350s on particular routes, won't they start seeing a trend of passengers selecting one type over another, or of discussions on forums/social media, advising people to select one type over another. And that being the case, what does it mean for the 777-9? Sure it will be quieter and maybe a little wider (will they be able to bring cabin altitude down to 787 levels?), but if it's still 10 abreast, won't pax continue to prefer the A350?

I know there are those who say that passengers don't really notice the differences between one plane and another, but I reckon that those choosing airlines on long haul routes do more homework, particularly those willing to pay more than the baseline fare.

airzona11 wrote:

Where are all those 77Ws going?

To me, it maybe be heading for Rossiya of Russia.

kaitak wrote:

737max8 wrote:

Thank goodness, hope the A350-1000 to LAX is true. Anything to avoid 10 across 777s

You have to wonder if airlines will begin recognising this - not just those with A350s and 777s (at 10 abreast), but also those with 787s (at nine abreast - which is all but one). If the operate both 777s and A350s on particular routes, won't they start seeing a trend of passengers selecting one type over another, or of discussions on forums/social media, advising people to select one type over another. I know there are those who say that passengers don't really notice the differences between one plane and another, but I reckon that those choosing airlines on long haul routes do more homework, particularly those willing to pay more than the baseline fare.

This exact thing was happening at BOAC back in the '60s, with people electing to fly on the quieter, smoother VC10 over the 707, on the few routes these two types were competing on. VC10 flights used to go fully sold, and on the same days the 707s were going out at say 60%..... but that didn't stop BO from getting more 707s and not ordering more VC10s sadly..

I’ve just done AKL-HKG-CDG with CX. A359 on HKG-AKL, 77W on the rest. All legs in Prem Economy. The A359 was so much more modern and comfortable. The venerable 77W just felt so last century.