Why CX doesn't fly to HNL?

That is a great question! I wish they did....apparently a long time they did.

Until now they haven't had the appropriate equipment, at least that's some casual conversations over the years. B747 and B77G too big (and too few, taking up valuable frames from better routes), B77H too premium and the yields not there. You would think if CX had any plane that could make HNL work, it would be 35G.

Ok A333 vs A332 you got me, but there is still a lot that can be done with 5000 miles with full load on this config. If CX can fly fifth freedom I can't see why KA can't. They can certainly start from TPE/ICN/JP/Russia-US. They can just pick up more ppl at the refueling point or tech stop.

FYI TK is currently doing ATL-IST on A333. Probably with payload restriction.

IIRC they flew to HNL before the 747-400 enabled non-stops to USA west coast. I imagine now that since it's a leisure destination, the yield isn't worth the route these days.

Definitely, given that CI uses A333 for the same route as well.

(Well...maybe it is time for KA to think about center fuel tank?)

IIRC, the fifth freedom is TPE-NRT.

But I don't think the fifth freedom will stop at TPE. As practical as it sounds, if TPE-HNL is profitable to CI, I doubt that BR will not restore service ASAP.

PVG/SHA sounds more plausible.

The target market of this proposed route (if approved) is not Hong Kong, but the Mainland market. So a nonstop is never the plan (as stated by the DOT's approval).

Absolutely not.

1. KA does not need another approval for Guam. As I mentioned, KA has the authority before this application. In fact, it was approved in 1988.

2. If HKG-GUM is so profitable as it seems, why do UA only operates 4 RT flights/week and UO has to suspend its service?

No way.

FWIW, Scoot is actually having a similar plan to HNL as well. Not to repeat myself, I have analyzed relevant data that the proposed Scoot route (via Japan) will be a dead end:

Scoot to Hawaii

It has been granted for 2 years. Further extension will be required.

Why it has to be HNL? If you have been traveled on UA's GUM-HNL recently, you will know that domestic flight is the only U.S. domestic flight that provides Mandarin as one of the PA language. Seriously - UA's HKG/PVG-GUM-HNL has been bringing a massive profit from Mainland China because of the demand, especially those group tours. Even with visa-free travel for CNMI only, Mainlanders can no longer be satisfied by Saipan.

Unfortunately, most Mainlanders, especially those have joined group tours, fly Y only.

Unfortunately, also not going to happen.

1. At HNL, UA dominates, despite being as a hub for HA. The only advantage of HA is its interisland connections, which HA works with others (including UA).

2. The majority of Hawaii's incoming air traffic is from the CONUS and Japan. Excluding Mainland China, the rest of the Asian traffic is minimal.

3. Attacking US3 also means pissing off one of CX/KA's OW partner - AA.

Again - not going to happen.

1. Including Jin Air, there are 4 Korean airlines serving ICN-HNL. CX/KA does not need that kind of competitions.

2. There are only 4 hubs located in the Mainland's coastal area - CAN, PVG/SHA, PEK. CAN is too close to HKG. PEK is served by both CA and HA. Given the partnership between CX/KA and CA, PVG/SHA will be the best intermediate point.

Not enough demand.

I believe that CX used to fly to HNL because of refueling. HNL is not really that far from Midway Island.

Insisting a point I made in a prior thread - While agreeing A333 may theotically make the route, it does not mean an airlines has to operate like this.

How about HKG-GUM-HNL? This is just a guess and based on my previous experience flying UA from HKG-GUM, there are some transit traffic to HNL and UA has a monopoly on that route.

Unlikely. Guam's economy is based around the US military who use United for their civilian flights. Noone else is getting in on that, especially not a Chinese carrier, and without it there's no market.

KA/CX would have no local traffic rights between GUM and HNL due to Cabotage laws.

KA does not have the plane to fly to US (except Guam). Any plan for KA to order new planes (or wet lease CX plane)?

The difference on that route is that in neither direction are the prevailing winds strong enough to affect the aircrafts performance. Between NA-Asia, crossing the pacific westbound is generally always into a fair headwind.

Not exactly true.

While it is true that the presence of the U.S. military in Guam helps Guam's economy, tourism is more important than DoD, as the federal money mostly ends up with the Territory Government and the tourism money go to residents and businesses.

Also, the use of UA by the DoD are limited to GUM-HNL (and maybe GUM-NRT) only.

In other word, CX/KA will have to be a U.S. carrier in order to operate GUM-HNL.

That's why the need of a stopover.

The North Atlantic is comparable to the North Pacific for head/tailwinds. That said, a flight HKG-HNL is not going through the North Pacific. It would fly into an area where winds are not especially strong. An A333 can do it. It's well within range and there are alternates in Hawaii and on the way.

The real issue is its costly to fly with a full tank. Hawaii doesn't have the market to support it.

My bet is on HKG-TPE-HNL given that CX has one spare fifth freedom right after cancelling HKG-TPE-FUK... (but I don't know how many other limitation are there for CX's fifth freedom in TPE)

i think the demand of tpe -hnl is quite limited.

PR uses A333 for their MNL-HNL routes though...Theres about a 200 mile difference between MNL-HNL and HKG-HNL though...