As in my trip to Melbourne, I can see that on CX105, the ADL-MEL sector, the plane is very light in loading. So, should CX negotiate with the Australian Government for gaining the right to take Domestic passengers in the ADL-MEL sector, providing that they codeshare with Qantas for the domestic sector? (Same case happens in the CX103, the CNS-BNE sector)
Also, should CX resume the use of BA lounge in YYZ, rather than paying $$ to Skyteam?

I see no reason for the Australian government to allow CX to serve those domestic segments. Sure, it would be good for CX, but codesharing wouldn't really benefit Qantas or Australia.
Those segments only exist to get passengers to/from Hong Kong, and it would be sort of silly if a situation came up as 'sorry we can't fly you HKG-BNE because the BNE-CNS segment is sold out'.

When I was on CX104/105 ADLMEL a few days ago it was packed. A lot of passengers in transit but a lot also joining in ADL.

The situation can be solved by increasing CX156/7 to a daily basis as a compensation, and resume the use of A340-300 to these flights. (even B777-300ER in the future as CX has bought 14 more of the 77W)
Also, the codesharing between CX and QF can help QF to strengthen its domestic networks.

A343?!?!!? CX wants to make money not lose money...

But, why CX still use A340-300 for flights HKG-FCO and HKG-JNB, as well as HKG-AKL, though CX knows A340-300 is fuel-consuming? B777-300ER should be deployed to save fuel cost.

Im sure CX would love to be able to carry domestic pax on the intra Australia sectors, but no doubt the government said no, and it is not likely that they would change their minds. CX still operates these tag ons, as someone said above because they are designed to fly pax to and from HKG.

With regard to the YYZ lounge situation. I think CX should definetly switch lounges from the KLM to the BA lounge. The BA lounge is a far superior offering to the KLM lounge, + it is a oneworld member. Ideally though it would be nice of CX could open its own lounge in YYZ now they are double daily. I think CX needs to open a lot more lounges worldwide as they dont have that many outside Asia.

i`m pretty sure someone did the math

No more likely they make their decisions based on the analysis in Flyertalk.

They probably want to get rid of the 340s and replace them with 777 as soon as they can anyways.

Exactly, after all, we're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars for a plane and you don't exactly pick it up in a dealership and do a trade-in with your old plane for a new one.

I can see CX bought the planes when the fuel prices are relatively low, and the cost-benefit analysis shows profit. However, with ridiculous fuel prices nowadays, despite CX's best attempt to dump them on consumers, they are going to pay much more in cost, and A343 (or any A340) is just not going to be worth it. I'm not surprise if CX internal audit shows those flights by A340 are a losing cost, but they have to keep offering it to stay in market and waiting for more 773ERs to arrive.

Fuel prices are making airlines suffered. I read Thai airlines had to cancel New York-Bangkok route because their internal audit shows they need to consistently sell 90% of seats just to break even on every flight!!!!

i�m pretty sure these calculations will show that flying these planes is making them more money (or costing less) than leaving them on the ground. Of course with new metal coming in there might be more optimal solutions, but I can�t see an airline keep bird in the air for the sake of burning extra money

I though it was something like 120% then, more like 150% now. Loads were very good though, although politics undoubtedly played a part too. But with the 340-500 that they used there was almost no way to make money though.

CX exercises its own stopover rights on the ADL-MEL and CNS-BNE (v.v.) sectors. This means that chooses to operate those sectors and they can stop operating these sectors if they want to.

To be honest, I would prefer CX to delink ADL from MEL and operate a triple daily direct service between MEL and HKG, plus a 4x per week direct service between ADL and HKG. A similar thing may work for CNS and BNE (ie delink CNS from BNE).


Apart from fuel-consumption, one other factor that CX may choose to operate the 343 is that the markets they serve (eg AKL, DME, FCO and to a certain extent JNB) has insufficient demand to sustain a F cabin and a large J cabin (53 or 57 on the 77W compared to 26 on the 343).

What I think CX may do (and this is pure speculation) is to configure some 77W in J/Y+/Y. Not only would this resolve the need to use those thirsty 343, it would also suit the nature of the routes the 343 serves.

The F Cabin can be sold as J class, with J service. (like the HKG-CTS route)