JV with QR: some personal observations
 

I just flew CDG-HKG with my wife, J tickets bought on QR for 2,000 euro return (HKD17,500). I fly CX and BA many times a year on that route in J/F, but first time on QR. I was dreading the midnight stop in DOH, but that went well and the price was right. Let me add that I am a great fan of CX.

CDG-HKG was QR A380. Fabulous flight. Great seat; similar setting as CX but much more space, I would say 30% more space, wider, longer and much more storage. I sleep on the side with bent knee. I can only do it on one side on CX seats (non-aisle side), but could do it on both sides on QR. Bigger better screen, excellent movie selection. Food/wines was amazing. Each dish prepared and served individually, great quality. Wines are comparable to CX F. Service was provided by a team of many nationalities Europe/Asia; and would compare to F service despite the plane being full. The lounge is so big and welcoming with Krug and mezzes. They lost some 12 J seat to provide that lounge.

The DOH-HKG leg was operated by CX A330. Everything paled in comparison. Seat much less spacious. Food typical of current CX J, meaning a trolley passing some reheated plates, unappetizing and tasteless; just what you used to get in Y a few years back. The praline was a bad date, while on QR you keep getting excellent valrhona and godiva pralines. Wines are mediocre to say the least. Only 12 pax in J but service was poor. Had to ring to get a wine refill and the crew mostly remained talking in the galley. It seems to me that most of the J pax were QR connecting from Europe (I am sure for 7 of the 12).
As I stated above, I really like CX. I have not tried other QR planes, but they have been retrofitting like crazy and, as I travel with my wife, I do not mind the flat bed 2x2x2 on the 777s that I will get in a few days.

CX can go cost-cutting and preventing ME3+TK to get many landing slots at HKIA. But ME3 are putting a lot of high-quality competition on CX to Europe. I understand the benefits of a JV with QR. CX provides one daily feeder to DOH (QR also has one flight) and ME3, like QR, are attractive as they fly to many secondary European airports. On the other hand, the JV with QR provides a few additional destinations to CX via DOH.

Another observation is that CX is not remaining passive in terms of pricing. For several months, CX has been offering fares from CDG to Asia (but not HK) at prices around 2,100 euros (HKD18,500 all inclusive) with fairly flexible conditions (200 refund fee, 150 change fee). Given CX fairly high cost structure, I can understand the need for cost-cutting; but ME3, and particularly QR, have really upped the quality of competition.

brunos great post and thread.

Totally agree. The QR A380 in J is fantastic, as is J in their 787.

The A332 I've flown QR to/from Hong Kong on them leaves a lot to be desired due to the lack of a true lie-flat bed.

You nailed the F&B.

Overall, yea great offerings from ME carriers and some cost cutting at CX (plug aggressive pricing you point out at certain outports) are all related.

Not sure if you're willing to try EK ex-HKG....EK is a bit more expensive ex-HKG but they've got an even better schedule than QR/CX. EK flies ex-HKG 3x daily nonstop to DXB, and 1x daily to DXB via BKK for 4 total flights. At least 2 minimum are A380, on some days 3 A380s. The early morning EK flight is usually operated by a 77W which is the same F product, but no showers on board.

Whilst its true the A380 is a fantastic aircraft, try the QR A330 and see if you come away with such a glowing impression. That's where CX comes out on top; consistency. I'd take any CX long haul config over the old QR cabins.

Totally agree.

QR B787 are fabulous in J.
QR A330 not very good at all - I'd rather take the CX flight

Food is fabulous on QR J, better than CX F (I don't eat salmon/caviar)

I've flown on QR J via DOH to CPH, TXL, MUC - much better than flying CX/BA to LHR and connecting to BA Club Europe.

For MUC would flying to ZRH and taking the train there not be as convenient as transiting Heathrow?

I agree on the A330 (and the A340). I did 2 return trips recently from HK to London and to Istanbul and experienced at least 3 different configurations:
- angled lie flat
- flat bed in 2-2-2
- flat bed in 1-2-1

The first is to be avoided, the second looks and feels like QF's older flat bed business seat and the third is a herringbone similar to CX.

But I don't know which I will get as they seem to switch constantly, and the continued existence of the angled lie flat means going through an equipment lottery for HKG/DOH. I'd rather have CX as the good night's sleep means more to me than food and IFE.

I prefer flying directly there - didn't even consider the train!

Oh I had no idea. I thought all the A330 were angled business seats without full recline.

They have refitted many of them with flat beds in a 2-2-2 config. They are attempting to guarantee certain routes (inc. HKG) with the new seat but a) angled seats still appear from time to time and b) the CX seat is still much better than either of them.

The real issue for me is why this JV seems to preclude QR using anything better than an A330.

Yea, until the QR solution is predictable the way to get the most out of the JV is to fly CX metal on the HKG-DOH-HKG segments. Then, depending where you're flying try to get on the A380, B787 or A350 if in J class on the DOH-XXX-DOH sectors.


Agreed. Stick with CX metal on the DOH sectors.

I suspect you're highlighting the downside to the JV...little incentive to light a fire under their backside to improve the offering. I would kill for QR to send the 787 or A350 to HKG, but little chance. Such a contrast with them flying the A350 to SIN....

I also wonder if part of the JV precludes QR's superior planes on the route. It would make sense for both operators; QR doesn't have enough A350s+B787s to replaces all the A332s yet, and with a JV in place there is no need to dispatch the plane in less-than-competitive market. QR's reverse herringbone is really awesome...all together, QR on the reverse herringbone is superb, significantly better than CX's overall J product....I suspect this would heavily skew demand towards QR's flight, and upend the balance in the JV.

If QR flew the A380, B787 or A350 to HKG, there is zero chance I'd take CX's product if I could utilize either timing. The overall J product on those planes is much superior to CX.

Have an upcoming trip where I would end up flying CX640 on the final inbound back to HKG. (The entire trip in Y.) Having flown QR in Y before, I am dreading this final leg where in the back of my mind I believe it will be a complete let down. If anybody has conflicting information, please share. :)

As I usually travel with my wife, I have a different opinion on flat beds 2x2x2 on A330/340.
I understand that a solo traveler would prefer the individual Cirrus seats.

But the flat beds offered by some airlines on their A330 with 2x2x2 provide more spacious seats for a pair. They have a length of 78" width of 21" from shoulder to feet, and allow me to sleep sideways on either side. The CX seats are more narrow except at belly and very narrow at feet. Actually, they use more plane space than the cirrus seats. Basically 4 rows of angled seats with 60' pitch are replaced by 3 rows of flat beds with 78". The difference is even more on 777 where there is still only 2x2x2, while CX can fit more seats by increasing the angle of the seat from the nose of the plane.

I actually prefer the 2-2-2 QR seats over their newer 1-2-1 seats too. Same reason i.e. they're slightly roomier.

CX Y is fine. Maybe difficult if you're used to J. If I am forced to fly Y long-haul, I would pay more for CX, SQ and TK, and only consider other airlines if the price is significantly lower or there is a mileage / status target to achieve.

Just curious, what are the letdowns of QR Y? I always wanted to try it if I have to fly to Europe on $ instead of miles...