FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Cathay Pacific | Cathay (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay-487/)
-   -   Cathay to axe Cairns after 25 years (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay/1967256-cathay-axe-cairns-after-25-years.html)

Jackolee Apr 28, 2019 4:14 am

Cathay to axe Cairns after 25 years
 
From 27 October 2019 onwards.

https://www.ausbt.com.au/cathay-paci...g-kong-flights

percysmith Apr 28, 2019 6:40 am

"The Cairns cancellations will, however, mean that all Cathay Pacific departures from Brisbane will run as non-stop flights, rather than some overnight journeys from Hong Kong making an early call into Cairns as the sun is coming up, so that passengers can enjoy a bit more uninterrupted sleep before reaching Brisbane."

Given my usual destination is Sydney, this is good news actually

Cryofern Apr 28, 2019 8:44 am

so... there'll be all of two destinations left in the "Medium" distance zone:
https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_...ub-points.html

kaka Apr 28, 2019 10:05 am

sad day

djsflynn Apr 28, 2019 6:30 pm

This route has often been tipped for Cathay Dragon, a shame to see the plug pulled entirely...

ernestnywang Apr 28, 2019 6:41 pm


Originally Posted by Jackolee (Post 31044855)

Surprised because in 2010 CX was even adding frequencies to CNS and BNE. Also surprised to learn that the Reef lounge is owned and operated by CX.

Jackolee Apr 28, 2019 7:13 pm

A chance for UO expansion after acquisition (if successful)?

Arbeysix Apr 28, 2019 7:40 pm

Something seems not quite right about this and I'm wondering if it is part of the broader strategy in play with QF or at least a re-think of how CX serves the ex-CNS freight market. The reason I say this is I understand belly freight, and in particular seafood/live seafood has been a key driver for CX operating this route over the years. So even if passenger yields were low (not sure about this) the route made eminent sense. So possibly CX is looking at a better freight solution (QF?) than the 330 can offer in parallel with rationalising the network. In relation to pax, I'm not sure if the rationale is to: (i) make way for KA or UO; (ii) free up valuable bilateral slots for other Aus routes; or (iii) drive traffic via BNE supported by new QF code share arrangements etc.

FlyPointyEnd Apr 28, 2019 8:06 pm


Originally Posted by Arbeysix (Post 31047007)
Something seems not quite right about this and I'm wondering if it is part of the broader strategy in play with QF or at least a re-think of how CX serves the ex-CNS freight market. The reason I say this is I understand belly freight, and in particular seafood/live seafood has been a key driver for CX operating this route over the years. So even if passenger yields were low (not sure about this) the route made eminent sense. So possibly CX is looking at a better freight solution (QF?) than the 330 can offer in parallel with rationalising the network. In relation to pax, I'm not sure if the rationale is to: (i) make way for KA or UO; (ii) free up valuable bilateral slots for other Aus routes; or (iii) drive traffic via BNE supported by new QF code share arrangements etc.

Or maybe they are waiting for KA's 321Neos to arrive, then maybe they can support the cargo with the aircraft.

QRC3288 Apr 28, 2019 8:36 pm


Originally Posted by Arbeysix (Post 31047007)
Something seems not quite right about this and I'm wondering if it is part of the broader strategy in play with QF or at least a re-think of how CX serves the ex-CNS freight market. The reason I say this is I understand belly freight, and in particular seafood/live seafood has been a key driver for CX operating this route over the years. So even if passenger yields were low (not sure about this) the route made eminent sense. So possibly CX is looking at a better freight solution (QF?) than the 330 can offer in parallel with rationalising the network. In relation to pax, I'm not sure if the rationale is to: (i) make way for KA or UO; (ii) free up valuable bilateral slots for other Aus routes; or (iii) drive traffic via BNE supported by new QF code share arrangements etc.


Originally Posted by FlyPointyEnd (Post 31047065)
Or maybe they are waiting for KA's 321Neos to arrive, then maybe they can support the cargo with the aircraft.

I don't have the information Arbysix does, but of the industry in general I know pax pays a helluva lot more than cargo, (with rare exceptions) almost no matter what you're hauling. You win a route on pax yield and the rest is gravy. A route like CNS which I suspect was thin on pax demand / yield mix, it is exasebated because you can't justify a bigger plane like 77W which has much more cargo space. So while cargo may have been a factor it is not going to justify sending a primarily passenger plane there just for that. Unless it is so amazing CX could send one of their cargo birds.

I'm sorry to see any decrease in the CX network. But my sense says there isn't some secret game here to suddenly launch with KA, or UO, or this is good news in disguise. I think it just means what is most obvious....yield didn't justify it. Bummer.

I also think this lends credibility to the folks thinking CX will dump some A330 frames to KA. CX mainline will have to have some type of capacity reduction if they're really going to ditch a bunch of planes off to KA, as I've seen some folks speculating. You can't just get rid of planes and expect the mainline network to stay the same.

smartstup Apr 28, 2019 11:07 pm

booked HKG CNS by Asia miles and CNS to HKG by avios in Nov. Very worry what will both company going to do

Isochronous Apr 29, 2019 12:25 am

Very depressing to hear this news. It can't be to do with the 70/weekly bilateral cap because CNS is considered a regional airport and thus exempt.

antebellum May 3, 2019 6:20 am

There's not enough J pax to keep this flight running. I'd say the J load was 55% on my flight. (Jan 2019)
This could also (hopefully temporary) fuel the award seat crisis further, where CX HKG-Australia J awards were constantly out of stock.

oldchinahand May 3, 2019 9:22 pm

This is a long shot but possibly CX having ditched Cairns will instead add HBA. The reasoning is that Hobart is an airport that has recently had a runway extension and renovation of the international terminal with both the state and federal governments desperately wanting to attract an Asian based airline to Tasmania. There is a significant high value perishable freight (fruit - seafood-meat- high end dairy etc) and this plays well to Cathays sophisticated freight handling and route network in Asia. There is strong tourist potential and probably government incentives. Currently there is zero international traffic through the renovated international terminal with all passengers and freight going via Qantas via the mainland.

derek2010 May 3, 2019 10:49 pm

Besides adding HBA, how about non stop to CBR?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:41 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.