I thought that was YTZ....
If that were to happen, the majority of the originating pax would move there due to the AIF being cheaper by $5+HST.

of course you can hope. Dfw makes sense...in fact, I thought dfw before ewr but clearly still lots of demand in nyc area.

agree!
and i think next destination for CX in the US might be SEA or DFW!
and probably GUM for KA? haha :)
hope to see more destinations! CX FTW!

did you say it wont work!?! for the last few times i've checked HND it was booked full flatout. seems like you've underestimated how little domestic flights there are from narita... and how much further is NRT from Tokyo. full i mean full.... not a single seat left.

I'd just add that CO has never taken lightly to competitors encroaching on its turf at EWR. They practically ran JetBlue out of town a few years ago, I think they only have a few flights now to Florida.

It wouldn't surprise me to see COUA add another flight EWR-HKG to try and prevent CX from gaining much share. They have more flexibility to do so as a combined carrier from a fleet perspective. Not sure about the regulatory/slot aspects though.

If it's any mirror of ORD-HKG, the premium cabin loads are going to drop quite a bit, as will prices. On ORD-HKG, it used to be impossible to burn a SWU on UA, now there's (IME, when I've looked) often 1-2 seats in R inventory.

The widebody fleet is already stretched far enough, where could they find 2 772's or 744's to run a second EWR-HKG? I think CX could easily beat UA/CO in both the price and service game by running a larger, more cost effective plane (in terms of CASM).

The 744 can't make it; but the 744-ER can. Does UA have any 744-ERs?

Only Qantas has it.

I know pre-merger CO's widebody fleet is stretched, but there's a lot more flexibility to shuffle things around within the combined CO and UA fleets, particularly as I believe UA is converting its handful of domestically-configured 763s for international use. Could free up some 777s on routes that don't really need all that capacity. Additionally, CO's current daily service EWR-HKG is very inefficient from a utilization standpoint. Sure, they do maintenance cheaply during the ~12 hours the aircraft sits idly on the ground in HKG -- but every day?

JetBlue had lower costs and better (coach) service and it didn't matter.

In any event, it will be interesting to see whether CX will charge $25k r/t for F tickets on the EWR flights.

The other thing is that these proposed CX flight timings are much more "efficient" from a business travelers point of view. The current CO schedule just wastes too much time, in both directions. I think if CO does nothing, they could potentially lose some lucrative J traffic.

No, actually, it is YYZ and not an YTZ. Because the entire 77W does not have enough room.

Right. Only QF does have it and not everyone else.

I live near IAD, and having booked two award trips on CX, I'd agree. I could think about driving to EWR, but not JFK. But the clincher is the return -- 15-hour flight and 4+ hour drive? Uh huh. The funny thing is, when my wife and I have traveled, we've been gone for 4+ weeks at a time. At that point, it's cheaper to buy the airfare from IAD than it is to drive and park.

I'm the idiot who doesn't. For our first trip on CX, we stayed in Manhattan for two nights, and on the way home, we took CX 888 with a 4-hour layover before catching B6 home. My theory with the B6 flight was that if we miss it, we'll just deal. This trip was in the middle of December/January. Staying in Manhattan for two nights was as much about the air logistics as it was about seeing the city.

For the next trip, we're leaving in late September, but taking the ORD-HKG flight out. Again, we'll hang out in Chicago for two nights before we leave. My wife loves the city, and well, it helps with the connections issue. However, on the way home, we'll have to come back through JFK. We'll have to overnight near JFK before coming back to DC the next day. If we used ORD instead, we'd have a forced overnight in HKG.

I'd be little surprised; the fuel alone would be approximately $250k per round trip and the fully allocated costs would exceed $500k per day (round trip). That would be one expensive flight to attempt to protect turf. And ya gotta think that with CX starting a flight, yields will come down. If CO also starts a new flight, they'd have lots and lots of seats to give away.

And that ignores the other issue: which (presumably) more profitable flight would UA/CO cancel to free up the pair of 777s necessary to operate a second daily flight to HKG?

YTZ is Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport.

YTZ can only handle turboprop and regional jet.

I would love an HKG EWR route. I just moved to HKG after college for work but fly back to Washington DC 6 times a year to see my family. I currently fly CX J into JFK, YYZ, or ORD (based on whichever is cheapest) and connect to either IAD or DCA.

I would definitely consider driving home to DC from EWR... but certainly not from JFK. Hopefully, Amtrak would add a late pickup from EWR station that could connect to PHL and to Wasington... reducing the need for connecting flights. Especially since trains are rarely canceled.

And I would fully support a CX flight into IAD!