Cathay Pacific Asia Miles - Opinions A340 vs. 744? Am I not 'flying right'?

Having done three legs in F on CX's 744s last night's A340 HKG-SFO was a disappointment. The plane was a 34S and thus did have new first class but even so, I felt the experience far inferior to flying the 744 even though the interior seemed newer/fresher and the A340 had the full StudioCX system vs. an older more limited version on the 744s. My complaints are mainly down to the fact (I was in row 2 in seat 2K) that even though the F cabin is sealed off, light still leaks through from the J cabin if their lights are on. Also, if someone back there is talking loudly, snoring, what have you, it's very audible. I was using Etymotic headphones/plugs and could STILL hear a couple arguing away in Chinese in the row behind me... with an occasional massive phlegm-clearing as punctuation from him. Most pleasant. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

So, is it just me? Or am I correct that the A340 just isn't as comfortable?

I agree with you.

The F cabin on an A340 is just too small for the same comfort on a 747. In row 1, you are right behind the galley. In row 2, you're right at the curtain for business class.

In a 747, row 4 is the only row comparable to an A340. Row 1, 2, and 3 all give you reasonable separation from noise sources [galley and J-cabin].

I am going F on CX in October, YVR-HKG-SYD-HKG-LAX. All segments are on 744's except CX839 which is A340-300. The A340 does not have the flat sleeper beds according to the reservation system. I called CX and was told all the A340's are supposed to have the flat sleeper beds by late summer even though 839 is not shown as having them at this time.

CX can only reserve seats 180 days in advance. What seat should I request on the A340 with and without the flat sleeper beds?

[This message has been edited by SallyL (edited 03-25-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">with an occasional massive phlegm-clearing as punctuation from him.</font>

You now know the national sound of China...

If you're flying F, 747s are the way to go. You get the quiet nose all to yourselves with the galley distantly behind.

In J, I prefer the A340 because there are no center seats and more of them have the new J.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PaulSEA1:
You now know the national sound of China...</font>

*LOL* along with any other bodily emination... I noticed this on my first trip there back in 1998. Most people just did their business (the phlem snort/clear/spit, the flutterblast, etc..) whenever and wherever and didn't give a ****. The first few times, I was shocked. After that I learned to ignore it but when one's trying to get to sleep and someone does it RIGHT behind them at right about ear/head level it's very very disconcerting! At least he didn't break wind. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

You guyz will have to accept the fact that CX flies not only 747s but also A340s as their core long haul routes.

Service is service. It's miles better than any AA flight than I've ever taken, and I would opt for the A340 on routes flown by them over another OneWorld carrier or any other carrier for that matter.

The A340 is a much smoother aircraft and I feel that even though F may not be up to par to some of you, I'm content in flying with CX.

What would you propose? 1-1-1 configuration?

The best thing they can do is to add another row of F seats in the A340. It would mean that CX would populate the cabin with a third FA, which is good. It'd also create a middle row, which would be more isolated from noise sources.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Guy Betsy:
You guyz will have to accept the fact that CX flies not only 747s but also A340s as their core long haul routes.

Service is service. It's miles better than any AA flight than I've ever taken, and I would opt for the A340 on routes flown by them over another OneWorld carrier or any other carrier for that matter.

The A340 is a much smoother aircraft and I feel that even though F may not be up to par to some of you, I'm content in flying with CX.

What would you propose? 1-1-1 configuration?</font>

IMHO CX is ahead of everyone in the service department AND in the case of the 744s in the equipment department as well. It's not that the A340s are so bad, it's that their 744s are so GOOD! IMHO a 1-1-1 config wouldn't help matters at all. What might help is having a fully sealed bulkhead instead of what's there now.

I would like a 1 configuration. Just me. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif Maybe with an option for a 1-1 configuration for when people go with me. But it will be like one of those suburban assault vehicles, where you can put the seat in and take it out when it is needed. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

BTW, light leak bothers me a lot too, and it is one reason I try to book the 747s. But if given a choice between a CX a340 or most of the viable alternatives, I will take CX. I don't know how or why, but actually Lan Chile's a340 didn't have light leak. The 767 still does, though.

I agree that the light leak from the galley annoys the heck out of me. CX puts 2 curtains at each of the lanes leading to the FC galley for a good reason. The crew should just remember to use them!!

And stop coming up the aisle to the FC galley when the pax are trying to sleep. If you need supplies from that galley, get it moved to the mid-aircraft BC galley earlier in the flight. Don't do it while we're in the middle of the Pacific ocean.

I see this more on domestic China flights, but have you ever seen a Chinese do the whole phlegm/hacking process (with no effort at being discreet), spit the wad into the barf bag, then put the bag back in the seat pocket? Of course, that's the least. Sometimes they take off their shoes.......

P.S. CX does not have a no phlegm guarantee, even in F. The guy in 2A hawked all the way from YVR to HKG last week, and it sounded like he was right next to my 4G seat.

(I was originally in 1A but moved because the video system was not working in any of the A seats)

But with connection, it may become a tough choice, it seems to get a sure shot for 747, one need to fly through LAX, but then you will stuck at the 2-class AA Domestic for few more hours back to Midwest or East Coast.

It gonna be my first FC in my life and want to get it right... is the 747 that good and deserve to trade 4-hour domestic back to MD-80 or should I just take 34C all the way to YYZ and enjoy a few more hour on with CX?

Equipment Type for May02/Jan03
SFO: EQV/34C
LAX: 74J/74J
JFK: EQV/EQV
YVR: EQV/74B/343-old FC
YYZ: 34C/34C

So.. where are all those 747 goes?

Out of JFK, it's definitely a 747.

The EQV is just for the different configs of the 747, but I'm pretty sure all of them have the sleeper beds in First. So you should just fly out of JFK.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Plato90s:
Out of JFK, it's definitely a 747.

The EQV is just for the different configs of the 747, but I'm pretty sure all of them have the sleeper beds in First. So you should just fly out of JFK.</font>

All 747s have the sleeper seats in First. Fly out of JFK.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HK-UMICH:
...is the 747 that good and deserve to trade 4-hour domestic back to MD-80 or should I just take 34C all the way to YYZ and enjoy a few more hour on with CX?</font>

That's easy to me, take the CX A340 over AA's MD80, even if CX is flying the old seats. An added bonus is that the YYZ flight over Alaska and northern Canada is spectacular if you're bold enough to open your window shade.

I read today that 747 to return on SFO to HKG route.

Also LAX will now have 10-11 flights a week up from 7

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by eireman:
I read today that 747 to return on SFO to HKG route.

Also LAX will now have 10-11 flights a week up from 7

</font>
Where is CX getting the extra 747s? Presumably from European routes, or is Japan business so bad that the NRT flights are being cut? It sounds like 4 extra 747-400 for North American service.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by number_6:
Originally posted by eireman:
I read today that 747 to return on SFO to HKG route.

Also LAX will now have 10-11 flights a week up from 7

</font>
Where is CX getting the extra 747s? Presumably from European routes, or is Japan business so bad that the NRT flights are being cut? It sounds like 4 extra 747-400 for North American service.



Could be from the NRT flights? I know that when I booked NRT-HKG the first flight of the day was in the schedule as a 772 but at some point it changed to a 74B. I was very *very* happy to move my flight up. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif I will also say that the meal service out of NRT completely trumped HKG-SFO... it was in an utterly different league.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by kanebear:
Could be from the NRT flights? I know that when I booked NRT-HKG the first flight of the day was in the schedule as a 772 but at some point it changed to a 74B. I was very *very* happy to move my flight up. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif I will also say that the meal service out of NRT completely trumped HKG-SFO... it was in an utterly different league.</font>
There is daily scheduled HKG-NRT in order to offer F service on this route (I hope it continues as I'm booked on it several times this year). Is the meal service out of NRT better because it is dinner while HKG-SFO is supper? Or because CX is competing with JL and has to match their meal level for F? I suspect the latter (it isn't the same as dinner on other CX flights on the same day, but I don't know this for a fact).
Best I can make out CX must be putting new A330s into service and these are displacing A340s which in turn are displacing 747s. Not a bad strategy as they have to pull the A340s for refurbishment. Maybe the 4xA330 that were delivered last year have finally percolated through to releasing 4x747 and these are all going into North American routes.

Actually this was CX509, the first flight out of NRT which was listed as a 773 with 2 class service (I was wrong about the 200 vs. 300 bit) but was operated as a 74B with F service so it was lunch and *still* outclassed HKG-SFO. I must've gotten 'em on a bad catering day or something. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by kanebear:
Where is CX getting the 747s?</font>

I think they've parked a lot of them or flown them on less full schedules. CX had 14 flights to LAX pre-9/11.

Here's the article:
Cathay Pacific to reinstate certain North America flights

Cathay Pacific Airways today announced that it will reinstate a number of flights to North America and Jakarta that were suspended late last year in a measured response to improved market demand.

From 1 June, Cathay Pacific's service to Los Angeles will increase from seven to 10 flights a week. From 1 July, the airline's service to Vancouver will rise from 11 to 14 flights and San Francisco will switch from being served by an A340-300 to a higher-capacity B747-400.

Jakarta will get back two flights a week from 1 July, meaning the resumption of a daily non-stop service. Jakarta is also served by a daily flight via Singapore.

The reinstatement of these flights will give added flexibility and convenience to the airline's passengers and cargo customers. They will also help strengthen the airline's network connections and enhance Hong Kong's position as a leading regional hub.

The airline meanwhile is maintaining a cautious outlook about a broader recovery, and is sticking by its plan to park a number of passenger and cargo aircraft.

Cathay Pacific Director Corporate Planning Augustus Tang said: "Cathay Pacific reinstating previously suspended flights is a measured response to some signs of recovery in those markets. The flexibility of our fleet and our ability to deploy the slightly larger B747-400 to San Francisco also enables us to respond in a very effective way to changing market conditions.

"In addition to improving demand, the airline's earlier capacity reduction has also contributed to load factors being high on these routes. Competition is still very tough and prices remain soft. Even though we are still some way from a full recovery, Cathay Pacific will continue to invest in its product and strengthen its network where appropriate in order to position itself to take advantage of a broader recovery when it does come."


[This message has been edited by PaulSEA1 (edited 04-03-2002).]

I just flew CX LAX-HKG-SIN-HKG-SFO last week. I was ticketed in D class. LAX-HKG had many empty seats in J, even though coach was overbooked. HKG-SIN-HKG, same thing, although coach wasn't full; in fact I had an empty seat next to me on the first three legs. HKG-SFO was a different story though. The plane was packed, I can see why they need to upgrade the 343 to a 744. I booked the return into SFO to try out the new J class seats, but, unfortunately I didn't get to try them out-I was surprised with an op-up to F, my first one on CX! I thought I didn't do badly for a lowly OW Sapphire! One problem though, now I'm hooked on the F seats, and I am considering upgrading my award travel in September from J to F.

I'm flying YVR-HKG in J class next month. What are the best seats on 34C? Thanks.