1010101

Yes, but nothing to worry about. The EASA is frequently issuing these for various aircraft types, it shows a good safety process.

Here is the original:

https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2017-0154-E

maortega15

6 A350-1000s to be converted into A350-900s as well as 5 A350-1000s to be deferred from 2020 to 2021

cx4ever

WHY?!?!?! :/

So now it's 28 A359s and 22 A35Ks. What I don't really get is how they say they can operate the A35K to the US East Coast with better efficiency than the A359 when the A35K has slightly less range?

I'm assuming that with 6 more A359s we'll get more new destinations soon as well? When are they coming?

G-CIVC

Actually, I sort of did a brainstorm about what outports can support a 35K. Not that many honestly (just like there are not that many 77Gs)

It's a wise move

KrazyTrain18

The A350-900 has hit the sweet spot for CX in terms of capacity for many existing routes and launching new routes that wouldn't have worked with previous larger or less efficient aircraft. Getting more 359s and earlier is a great thing, the 77Ws can hold down the fort a bit longer on select routes until the 35K and 779 come later on.

Aus106080

Cathay pacific apparently wants to try more long thin route.
UA also convert 35 A35K to 45 A359.

Kachjc

lol Deferred
bring on HX it seems like in 5 years HX will have a larget network out of HKG than CX...

SLGO

Thought CX had worked out a magic ratio between the A359 and A35K, so a bit unexpected to see this change. The A359s must be performing SO well, and perhaps the change of CX's policy on new routes makes A359s even more suitable. Just curious on what would have happened if CX chose 787-8/9 sometime ago, which seem to have similar capacity and range?

1010101

A35K has slightly less range but can carry more cargo + passengers than the A359 for most of its range. The crossover is i believe around the 9,000 mile mark i.e right at the limit.

QRC3288

B787 is too small for CX, especially with HKGs slots. Both the 787-8 and 787-9 are smaller than the A350-900. There just aren't enough slots at the airport for CX to have small planes. A333 is their "small" frame.

The B788 was simply a nonstarter given its size. Way too small. The B789 might've worked at the small end for CX, but the two sizes of A350 worked better. CX wasn't in the market for the B787-10 and I dont think a single plane type fleet made sense (B789) vs having both A359 and A35k. Not to mention CX got killer delivery slots for the a350.

Aus106080

Impossible as the CX/KA has already held nearly half of the slots in HKG and the increase in slot in future 5 year is limited.

patrickw

Just to clarify they are not deferring all A35K, only 5 which supposed to get delivered in 2020 will now move to 2021 and they are still getting the first one around next Apr.

Maybe they don't want to reconfigure them when they launch the new F and J with B777-9, which also start delivering in 2021

cx4ever

Are you saying that some A35K will have upgraded J?

G-CIVC

Never too late to the game, but I finally had two 35G sectors and fortunately both were not full so I got to 'try' different seats (and chat w/ crew) [both SIN-HKG]

Pros:
The 'second' armrest is definitely much more sturdier and present compared to the FB2 one where you have to pull it up (at an angle), if only it was not falling apart on the older frame (LRD)

There are some 'wide-at-hip' seats on the FB2 configs like 11DG for 77G/H/33E/K...on the 35G they seem to be 11DG and 20DG. 20DG is not bad at all if just the partition at the legs being a bit too short.

The padding of the seat felt more thick and solid than FB2 which was great - was indeed able to power nap comfortably on both sectors. The movable tray table is great too.

Cons:
I found the footwell to be quite tight across every seat, without much difference, compared to the existing configs which have 'prime' seats (77H 11AK, 16K, 77G 11AK, 33E/K 11AK 19A etc) that I really, really like...am I the only one that values that much more than the new 'knee' space? Especially the 'headroom for the feet'? For the former, unless I bend my knees, I really don't think it widens the bed area much.

On the newer frame (LRR) there were no peeling and falling apart observations, although two lavs were faulty - did not light up after locked; LRD was yes indeed showing faults here and there, not major inconveniences but had one just flown a QR plane, it would be quite obviously worse.

As for IFE, indeed hugely improved cosmetically, but most things are the same overall, except for maps/cameras and live TV. [disclaimer - I didn't use the wifi]; there are again some bugs/minor things that might be worth fixing- for example you can only use the handset monitor when detached, and exiting the map/camera stops the background music at the same time.

Maybe I will feel differently after going through a full night's sleep on a long haul (booked for December!) but so far I felt it was between good and meh. Both SPs agreed with me that it still doesn't beat my all time favorite 77H 11A yet...the tightness was between A330 and 77W as I felt it.

I found 20A a great seat sadly with a missing window, but 12A was fine too (although my friend said it was bad for a long haul as the toilet light kept flashing between green and red). 21A very good too, although there is no extra storage bin behind it. And obviously, 11DG is really a nono and why they did it like that still puzzles me.

Arbeysix

What exactly is the point of your posts? Suggest that if you have a personal axe to grind you take it up direct with CX. You are wasting space here.