Cathay Pacific To Announce ZRH, BOS & MAN

YLWbased · Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:50 am

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 99):

This is hardly surprising, I believe there is a real chance for it to go seasonal double daily.

YLWbased

jacobchoi · Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:47 am

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 99):
CX357 HKG0100 MAN0620 x357 77W
CX358 MAN1200 HKG0755+1 x357 77W

They used CX357 for the flight code, I personally thought it was going to be CX2XX given that this is the code they normally use for European flights, and the CX3XX for the Chinese fights.

AF185 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:48 am

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 99):

CX357 HKG0100 MAN0620 x357 77W
CX358 MAN1200 HKG0755+1 x357 77W

Quite a large a/c to (re)start this O&D route..

davidho1985 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:11 am

Quoting AF185 (Reply 102):

Quite a large a/c to (re)start this O&D route..

Their smallest long-haul plane excluding 343

LondonCity · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:40 am

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 99):
Suprising that it is a direct flight rather than a tag on of another Europe flight

Great news for MAN and the UK's Northwest. It does seem that CX is adding much capacity but you have to remember that MAN has an extensive catchment area. Trains links (direct to the airport) run to many Northern cities and reach as far north as southern Scotland.

rutankrd · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:50 am

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 104):
It does seem that CX is adding much capacity but you have to remember that MAN has an extensive catchment area. Trains links (direct to the airport) run to many Northern cities and reach as far north as southern Scotland.

Its a truck with seats and once again 140,000+ boardings pa -Cathay already know this market dynamic and its certainly not to much capacity !

gkirk · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:51 am

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 104):

Trains run to Glasgow Central and Edinburgh, both of which are in central Scotland

CX Flyboy · Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:42 am

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 103):
Quoting AF185 (Reply 102):

Quite a large a/c to (re)start this O&D route..

Their smallest long-haul plane excluding 343

Its actually their biggest long haul plane excluding the 744.

rutankrd · Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:49 am

Quoting CX Flyboy (Reply 107):
Its actually their biggest long haul plane excluding the 744

Only the 9 first and 10 Economy difference, and of course the 77W is a truck down below !

CX Flyboy · Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:02 am

Just to add that the service will be operated with the 77G configuration, with 340 seats with no first class.

Luftymatt · Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:32 am

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 98):
Manchester have a rather strong business tight with Hong Kong, I still don't understand why anetters voted MAN as the least likely destination for CX to start service.

I agree, especially as other airlines are currently reaping the benefits of no direct flights from MAN to HKG. People who know MAN, know that there is a lot of demand for these flights.

SKAirbus · Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:28 pm

Congrats to MAN especially for attracting CX back...

However, MAN really needs to improve itself. It is one of the worst and most badly laid out airports I have ever had the displeasure of flying through, especially Terminal 1. In order to service world class airlines, you need to provide world class service on the ground.

I presume CX will operate out of T3?

Cipango · Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:42 pm

I just had a look at some dummy bookings for MAN-HKG in December, January and February. There clearly is no sign of an introductory fare on this route as the cheapest Y seat I could find was £800.

spud757 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:29 pm

Great news for MAN!

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 111):

Agree. T1 has been renovated but neither of the piers for boarding are great. It has decent exec lounges though.

T3 isn't great either, especially for an aircraft of this size. It handles most of the domestic services well. BA/AA (+US soon) operate from T3. CX could go with that to use BA's exec lounge. Security would be a nightmare!

T2 would be a great terminal for CX 777 if lounge offering was better (but it seems to suit premium carriers like SQ and QR).

T1 or T3 would be better suited for transfer passengers, if CX will interline with BE for the domestic connections of BHD / GLA / EDI / IOM / INV / EXT

LondonCity · Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:53 pm

Quoting cipango (Reply 112):
There clearly is no sign of an introductory fare on this route as the cheapest Y seat I could find was £800.

Conventional airlines tend to wait nearer the time before adjusting fares to match market demand.

Danfearn77 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:13 pm

The problem with MAN is the piers in T1 are listed and its hard to do much with that restriction.

Good news on the horizon potentially, plans are afoot to remodel the terminals. And that does include the bulldozing of a lot of the current infrastructure.

adamh8297 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:26 pm

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 97):
Expect the other two in a further announcement around 2nd May

The level of discussion in the Manchester area has forced the hand of Cathay into a earlier than planned statement.

Will the other two destinations be 4x weekly as well?

skipness1E · Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:18 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 90):
And btw the world has not a "de facto capital" and more places than London could dispute that place.

New York or Hong Kong perhaps.

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 115):
The problem with MAN is the piers in T1 are listed and its hard to do much with that restriction.

What? Actually listed or was that sarcasm? They have changed gate 12 quite a lot for the A388.

mainMAN · Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:06 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 117):
What? Actually listed or was that sarcasm?

Or hopefully, just humour. Listed as ancient monuments? Either way, I'm sure even English Heritage wouldn't complain when both piers face the wrecking ball!

Not wanting to labour the point, I'm looking forward to seeing the plans for a new T1, fit for the likes of CA, CX and SQ, linked to a couple of secondary terminals dealing with domestic, LCC, and charter.

Liverpoola380 · Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:50 pm

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 115):

That's great news do you know any details on what the plans are?

Danfearn77 · Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:55 am

Im not joking, from what i have heard the piers are listed. Im not sure to what grade but apparently it allows modifications but not much else. Certainly this sounds plausible because they are not really fit for purpose in their current state.

As for the future plans, its only word of mouth stuff. I dont know too much other than T1 and T3 are (rumoured) to be merged into one big terminal with a dedicated domestic wing. There are also plans for a new airside transfer bridge/tunnel between T1 and T2. Im guessing T2 will be left alone, maybe just a spruce up and expand the terminal to encompass stands 216-219 and maybe the satellite pier.

mainMAN · Fri Apr 11, 2014 12:12 pm

As far as I know (previously reported), T1 will also be pulled back towards the station. Makes perfect sense, it would occupy the current short stay arrivals parking, currently a waste of much needed space.

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 120):

Im not joking, from what i have heard the piers are listed. Im not sure to what grade but apparently it allows modifications but not much else.

If true, that's ridiculous. Some heritage nazi really has been working overtime!

rutankrd · Fri Apr 11, 2014 12:25 pm

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 120):
m not joking, from what i have heard the piers are listed. Im not sure to what grade but apparently it allows modifications but not much else. Certainly this sounds plausible because they are not really fit for purpose in their current state.

Myth and not true according to English Heritage, neither grade listed or scheduled monument nor is it registered as a structure of architectural significance or even interest.

They have not listed any post second world war airport structures to date and why would they.

If they were going to list a pier design hows it Gatwick structures of earlier date and similar construction are gone?

The items that were listed were those horrible/beautiful you decide chandeliers and they are stored in boxes somewhere !

The tower block is iconic yet not listed (Not for want of trying actually) either.

Buildings at Speke and Barton however are as are several at Hatfield Farnborough and a structure or two off the A4.

Elmdon terminal also get a mention

[Edited 2014-04-11 05:39:27]

flythere · Fri Apr 11, 2014 12:38 pm

It means MAN will have another one-stop choice via HKG to OZ other than via middle-east~~

LondonCity · Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:46 pm

Quoting flythere (Reply 123):
It means MAN will have another one-stop choice via HKG to OZ other than via middle-east~~

Good point. It's easy to forget that the existing SQ B777-300ER MAN-SIN flight is routed via MUC so flying SQ to Australasia takes that little bit longer.

BlueShamu330s · Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:06 pm

With respect, Hogwash !!

English Heritage, I believe, attempted to get the front facade of Terminal 1 (where the iconic yellow lettering "Terminal 1" was) overlooking the red top, and Tower building listed, to no avail.

There is no hindrance on that score when it comes to redevelopment.

Terminal 1 redevelopment is going to be a huge undertaking. Due to the constraints of the airport's footprint and usable space, it is going to have to be demolished and rebuilt whilst still in use, but it can be done.

Expect everything to be temporarily moved backwards, i.e. north, into the arrivals car park area whilst Terminal 1 and the multi-storey is demolished, making way for a completely new Terminal 1 & 3 as one huge terminal. The work and readjusting of the terminal orientation will facilitate more gates and a realignment of various taxiways, including the removal of the God-awful kink abeam the 44s towards Juliet 5. It will also facilitate a double sided pier for lo-cos where the current stands 50s are, to the delight of easy and Ryanair. The "A380 problem" will be addressed and I believe there are now plans for 2 dedicated stands with appropriate air bridges for the monster.

Things are progressing forward towards project commitment behind the scenes. Finance, it would seem, is already earmarked.

Anyone want to wager when it will all be done? I'm going for a 2020 opening. {thumbsup]

Rgds

SQno1 · Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:33 pm

According to the current schedules, there's a 55 minute connection from the new Manchester service onto CX 139 to SYD. Surely this is something that needs to be addressed before the service begins?

rutankrd · Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:17 pm

Quoting SQno1 (Reply 126):
According to the current schedules, there's a 55 minute connection from the new Manchester service onto CX 139 to SYD. Surely this is something that needs to be addressed before the service begins?

Why ?

This is a service for regional connections but primarily point to point traffic and not another route to Australia !

Anyway the problem with CX139 is the Sydney curfew !

So yep your going to spend maybe 10 hours at Hong Kong to take a red eye and arrive follow morning or take the morning Melbourne that departs an hour later than CX139.

Boeing74741R · Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:31 pm

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 120):

T2 is fine. All it needs is expansion on both sides so the remote stands become part of the terminal and maybe sort out the spacing between the present stands so a widebody isn't taking up more than 1 stand, as well as a new satellite pier at he other side of the apron in the medium/long term if growth is forthcoming.

T2 has a some spare capacity in the afternoon/evening, especially in winter, so unless existing airlines move over this is where I reckon most future growth at MAN is going to be accommodated. I also think this will be perfect for the return of CX.

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 125):

A merger/expansion/development of T1 and T3 would make sense. A trick was missed when T1 was redeveloped a few years ago to do that. The pier where the EK A380 is catered for still leaves a lot to be desired and isn't a great first impression for inbound passengers. As for T3, post-security the layout is very illogical and although it's a nice enough place to be when quiet, there isn't a lot of room and can feel cramped, though T1 isn't much better even after redevelopment.

ASA · Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:36 pm

When is CX getting their A359s?

It seems they are launching new Business and First seats too
CX To Debut New Business And Economy Class On A350 (by kaichinshih Apr 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

It would be really cool if they launch BOS with those!

Update: From another link
http://talkairlines.wordpress.com/20...ass-and-economy-class-on-a350-900/

"Cathay Pacific’s first A350-900XWB, which shall be MSN029 according to abcdlist.nl, is scheduled for delivery in February 2016."

So ... NO ... please launch BOS sooner .... 77Ws are just fine! Big grin

[Edited 2014-04-11 14:41:05]

flythere · Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:27 am

Quoting SQno1 (Reply 126):
According to the current schedules, there's a 55 minute connection from the new Manchester service onto CX 139 to SYD. Surely this is something that needs to be addressed before the service begins?

Why the 55-min connection is a concern given the minimum connection time for CX at HKG is currently set at 35 mins?

flythere · Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:49 am

Here is an synopsis on CX's move to serve Manchester by CAPA.

Cathay Pacific launches Manchester, continuing long-haul re-balance and clawing back at Emirates
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...nd-clawing-back-at-emirates-163180

MAN2SIN2BKK · Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:03 am

Quoting flythere (Reply 131):
Here is an synopsis on CX's move to serve Manchester by CAPA.

Cathay Pacific launches Manchester, continuing long-haul re-balance and clawing back at Emirates
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...nd-clawing-back-at-emirates-163180

Very interesting report; thanks for sharing, should shut a few critics of Manchester up

musapapaya · Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:54 am

Quoting flythere (Reply 130):
Why the 55-min connection is a concern given the minimum connection time for CX at HKG is currently set at 35 mins?

Is the minimum connection time really 35 mins in HKG? If so this MAN service COULD be another route to australia!

flythere · Fri Apr 18, 2014 10:56 am

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 133):
If so this MAN service COULD be another route to australia!

Absolutely~ Just search on CX website, it has already been loaded into the system and no problem for MAN-HKG-OZ bookings.

TreeHillRavens · Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:00 am

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 133):
Is the minimum connection time really 35 mins in HKG? If so this MAN service COULD be another route to australia!

Not sure about 35 minutes but 50 minutes connection at HKG is quite a norm. I personally have done many such short connection at HKG and so far they have never accidentally left my luggage at HKG once!

skipness1E · Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:10 pm

Quoting Man2SIN2BKK (Reply 132):
Very interesting report; thanks for sharing, should shut a few critics of Manchester up

People keep saying this, but there are way more imaginery critics than actual ones

chrisnh · Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:45 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 136):
People keep saying this, but there are way more imaginery critics than actual ones

I'm not one of them. I can only wish our 'Manchester' had 1/10th the service that yours does. For its size, MAN has a phenomenal array of traffic. I'd love to visit sometime. I believe I have a business trip to conference being held at the RICOH stadium in Coventry; not sure if MAN is the airport to fly to, though.

Closer to me (about an hour south) is Boston, and I hope our city gets Cathay. We're on quite a roll here.

SQno1 · Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:13 pm

Quoting flythere (Reply 130):

I always work on the assumption when i'm flying that the minimum connection time should be 75 minutes and more if i'm going through places such as DXB.

To be honest though, I transited through HKG last week whilst en-route from SIN to LHR and I was back in the departures area fifteen minutes after stepping off CX714. Maybe i'm just being a little bit pessimistic.

Do you not think though that less than sixty minute connections will deter a small minority passengers when choosing one airline over another?

Alex

[Edited 2014-04-19 13:13:53]

BHXviscount · Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:18 pm

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 137):

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 137):
I believe I have a business trip to conference being held at the RICOH stadium in Coventry; not sure if MAN is the airport to fly to, though.

BHX is closest less than 20miles from coventry but you are rather stuck with only UA EWR-BHX though

BHXviscount

rutankrd · Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:13 pm

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 137):

Going to Coventry best option would be Boston-Dublin-Birmingham with Aer Lingus return with pre-clearance at Dublin.

From Birmingham use the Maglev from the terminal direct to the adjacent Birmingham International Railways Station catch one of the frequent services to Coventry.

To Manchester you would have to connect via JFK Newark or Washington and endour a couple of hours on the UK rail network with two or three connections !

chrisnh · Sun Apr 20, 2014 2:38 pm

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 140):
Going to Coventry best option would be Boston-Dublin-Birmingham with Aer Lingus return with pre-clearance at Dublin.

Yes, economically, too. We favor Aer Lingus at our company. Last fall my trip to Coventry was Boston-YYZ-LHR on Air Canada and then a drive up from London to Coventry. Came back Heathrow-Montreal-Boston. That was terrific because, as with Dublin, I cleared up in Montreal. Basically a quick wave of the agent's hand as I transited at YUL. Marvelous. With all the new international carriers at Boston, pre-clearance elsewhere is the way to go. Long lines at Boston otherwise.

Humberside · Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 pm

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 140):
To Manchester you would have to connect via JFK Newark or Washington and endour a couple of hours on the UK rail network with two or three connections !

Should only need to connect once if travelling MAN-Coventry. There is an hourly cross country service from Manchester Piccadilly to Coventry. Of course BHX is the best option geographically for Coventry as the cross country service mentioned stops at the BHX station en-route

[Edited 2014-04-20 08:16:14]

rutankrd · Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:20 pm

Quoting Humberside (Reply 142):
Should only need to connect once. There is an hourly cross country service from Manchester Piccadilly to Coventry

Thought about the Arriva Crosscounty Voyagers horrid things !

True you could even make a same platform connection at Stockport !

However think this person really is better served via Dublin in this instance and that from an exiled Manchester evangelist !

adamh8297 · Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:47 pm

In terms of BOS what other new 1-stop destinations would be available with a CX BOS-HKG flight

Off the top of my head and including DragonAir:

DPS
CEB
SUB
BKI
REP
PNH
CNX
Any Chinese market not covered by HU.

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 141):
With all the new international carriers at Boston, pre-clearance elsewhere is the way to go. Long lines at Boston otherwise.

Flew B6 GCM-BOS last night which landed at around 6:50PM. Flew through immigration and customs alongside an FCO-BOS flight that arrived 20 minutes before. I did have row 8 which helped as well. The longest part of my wait was waiting for the checked baggage after going through immigration. My parents did SXM-BOS two weeks ago and they noted the foreign national line was fairly long due to DXB-BOS which arrived about an hour before. Once the full international lineup is in place in June it will be a different story for sure though the flight I was on is seasonal for January through April.

I'm surprised the Caymans, Turks and Caicos, and any other British West Indies island does not have preclearance.

One interesting side note: several people on the GCM-BOS flight were connecting to DCA.

flythere · Mon Apr 21, 2014 1:40 am

Anyone can shed lights on the O&D traffic between YYC Calgary and BOS?

Could a tag-on HKG-YYC-BOS make this route viable for 5-weekly from traffic standpoint? Coz seriously I just don't see that much traffic for HKG-BOS to stand alone. Please correct me if I am wrong. Cheers

CX Flyboy · Mon Apr 21, 2014 1:21 pm

Quoting flythere (Reply 145):
Coz seriously I just don't see that much traffic for HKG-BOS to stand alone. Please correct me if I am wrong. Cheers

Considering they think EWR is big enough to be able to fill two daily 77Ws, I am sure a 4x weekly or daily BOS flight would do ok.

adamh8297 · Mon Apr 21, 2014 2:15 pm

Quoting cx flyboy (Reply 146):

I think it will be 4 weekly for 77W and go to daily once A359 comes in.

I do wonder if Southern China-BOS traffic will be stimulated by CX coming in. There is also a decent sized Cambodian population in Greater Boston which now has a 1-stop option to PNH or REP. I do not know how much they travel though. BOS-HKG traffic should obviously increase as well. The final item would be CX grabbing any high yielding BOS-HKG-PVG traffic.

Also, there should be plenty of feed from B6 and AA.

Quoting flythere (Reply 145):
Anyone can shed lights on the O&D traffic between YYC Calgary and BOS?

Under 30 PDEW.... YVR would be better for BOS but this flight will be non-stop.

flythere · Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:25 am

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 147):
Under 30 PDEW.... YVR would be better for BOS but this flight will be non-stop.

Oh wow! I didnt realize that there isn't a direct flight between YVR and BOS! If someone launch it, then it would probably own the route. And that's just a 12% detour when compared with flying direct HKG-BOS.

adamh8297 · Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:50 am

Quoting flythere (Reply 148):
Oh wow! I didnt realize that there isn't a direct flight between YVR and BOS! If someone launch it, then it would probably own the route.

I don't know why AC doesn't run this route at least seasonally as they have done in the past. They ran what looks like a biweekly in summer 2003. Canadian ran the route in the late 90's up to the end of that airlines.

Quoting flythere (Reply 148):
And that's just a 12% detour when compared with flying direct HKG-BOS.

CX wouldn't get the subsidies for running BOS-YVR-HKG from Massport the operating agency of BOS.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net