where is the 346
Mar 26, 2003 | 5:41 pm
#5
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bellevue, WA - AA EXP 3MM
Posts: 2,793
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by number_6:
Upgauged to 744. Maybe CX got sick of all the *****ing by US travelers whenever the 346 had a mechanical and was replaced with old J/old F.</font>
Upgauged to 744. Maybe CX got sick of all the *****ing by US travelers whenever the 346 had a mechanical and was replaced with old J/old F.</font>
Apr 5, 2003 | 1:33 am
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,027
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by B-HXB:
The CX100/1 Hong Kong - Sydney is supposed to kick in with a 346 sometime round then.</font>
The CX100/1 Hong Kong - Sydney is supposed to kick in with a 346 sometime round then.</font>
Apr 5, 2003 | 1:46 am
#7
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York
Posts: 7,988
Well, the 346 will be used on the SYD flight (CX 100/1) for the summer season. Originally, it will also be used to launch the NYC nonstop flight, but is obviously not happening. I suspect that it will show up randomly on CX's network... maybe on the YYZ flights soon.
To be fair, the new studio CX had some teething problems throughout the fleet... even on Boeing 747s and Airbus A340-300s. It is new technology and we need to give CX some times. Even SQ has problems with their systems too.
About A346s, I am sure that those teething problems will be resolved within the next quarter.
About the 2nd nonstop flight to LAX, it has just been eliminated till June 1, 2003, due to SARS. The sole nonstop will use Boeing 747.
Carfield
To be fair, the new studio CX had some teething problems throughout the fleet... even on Boeing 747s and Airbus A340-300s. It is new technology and we need to give CX some times. Even SQ has problems with their systems too.
About A346s, I am sure that those teething problems will be resolved within the next quarter.
About the 2nd nonstop flight to LAX, it has just been eliminated till June 1, 2003, due to SARS. The sole nonstop will use Boeing 747.
Carfield
Apr 5, 2003 | 3:02 pm
#8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,011
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mhtaipei:
not according to the CX website. did they just change the designation to EQV, or am I just blind? I can't find the 346 on any route. Did they take it back to the shop?</font>
not according to the CX website. did they just change the designation to EQV, or am I just blind? I can't find the 346 on any route. Did they take it back to the shop?</font>
I've booked CX101 in early January and it's the 346 - and it'd better stay that way! Toronto, you be content with the 343!!
Apr 5, 2003 | 9:53 pm
#9
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AA Plat4Life4MM/DL MM SM4Life, UA/CO 1K
Posts: 645
I just booked my June travel..and the A346
creeps back in the schedule as the 11P flt
LA HKG . Yikes . Me no like it . And the
744 is leaving at 12:55AM with only about
an hour to connect in HKG...so , I am
stucked again on that beauty !!!
creeps back in the schedule as the 11P flt
LA HKG . Yikes . Me no like it . And the
744 is leaving at 12:55AM with only about
an hour to connect in HKG...so , I am
stucked again on that beauty !!!
Apr 8, 2003 | 9:01 pm
#10
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 611
Aside from the fact that I'm no fan of A340s, I wouldnt be surprised at all if CX terminates their acquisition of these aircraft... what need do they have for them? An NYC nonstop that they've never been all too serious about implimenting for one reason or the next (three attempts and no results is somewhat pathetic)? Are the restrictions imposed on 744As flying HKG-LAX great enough to warrant a subfleet of 3 aircraft?
------------------
A340s don't fly... they're repelled from Earth by their ugliness!
------------------
A340s don't fly... they're repelled from Earth by their ugliness!
Apr 9, 2003 | 10:20 am
#12
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 611
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by peasant:
They never acquired them in the first place.
5 year lease from ILFC</font>
They never acquired them in the first place.
5 year lease from ILFC</font>
*referring to former post*
In other words... it may be cheaper/easier for CX to terminate/renegotiate their lease as opposed to keeping 3 aircraft in operation that they werent even intended (by CX) for.
------------------
A340s don't fly... they're repelled from Earth by their ugliness!
Apr 11, 2003 | 8:21 am
#14
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,027
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by drewsq:
Where are the 346's??
In the workshop, of course!
Sorry... was just shocked no one else had posted it yet!</font>
Where are the 346's??
In the workshop, of course!
Sorry... was just shocked no one else had posted it yet!</font>
Seriously: all 346 entries in the cx system seem to have been replaced with the nondescript EQV. Now I'll only catch it by chance. I was trying to sample superior Airbus performance on a flight to SYD - the most likely destination these days.
Apr 13, 2003 | 9:58 pm
#15
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago,IL.
Posts: 3,022
My August flight (CX 883) was just changed from a 74J to a A346 ? Seating went from 86AC to 14 AC....
Reading the above I trust this is pretty bad news ? I am slightly surprised though, I thought a brand new aircraft would be nice ?
Reading the above I trust this is pretty bad news ? I am slightly surprised though, I thought a brand new aircraft would be nice ?