|
Originally Posted by CXfanatic
(Post 34972227)
It looks like SFO is going 77W all the way till the end of March, and most of the time with the exception of 892/893 is a 77K. After the end of March, it reverts back to an A359. Hopefully that's a typo for now. 870/879 for sure are using the 77K, which I have flown on that route and is always packed.
LAX on the other hand is continuing with the 77W on one of their flights only. YVR we haven't seen any changes on that; the former 77W routes have always been SFO, LAX (still can be), YVR, YYZ, and JFK (sometimes). There is a possibility I may be flying this Spring to BLR for a relative's wedding and may take CX. Hopefully it'll be a 77W, because I flew the A359 on SQ about a month ago and the comfort is a little more compromised than the 77W's (10-abreast I get is bad, but not as bad as the A359). Also, read an article about the discontinued routes and thankfully MAA isn't one of them, so I'm optimistic in due time, hopefully Summer or Fall it will come back; flights to MAA have always been packed on CX (they have used the 77K). |
Originally Posted by moondog
(Post 34972260)
I've never flown either in economy, but I thought the 359 had wider seats and the same 32" pitch. If so, how is it less comfortable?
In other words, some SQ A359 have 2013 Y-class seats (super comfortable, I flew them 6 years ago on the 77W, so can imagine the comfort is the same on the A359, I think?), but the newest A359 that SQ has has the 2017 Y-class seats, and those are used on long haul routes only (and those seats also exist on all regional flights, too). |
Originally Posted by CXfanatic
(Post 34972499)
I was on SQ and the seats I had were the 2017 Y, that replicates CX's seats on their 77W (Recaro, perhaps?). For some reason I found those seats and pitch & aisles slightly more comfortable on the 77W than on the A359. Even the aisles itself were quite cramped.
In other words, some SQ A359 have 2013 Y-class seats (super comfortable, I flew them 6 years ago on the 77W, so can imagine the comfort is the same on the A359, I think?), but the newest A359 that SQ has has the 2017 Y-class seats, and those are used on long haul routes only (and those seats also exist on all regional flights, too). 5.96/9 = 66 cm/pax v 6.20/10 = 62 cm/pax (including proportionate share of aisle space) So, if the aisles are more cramped on the 350, the seats must be considerably wider, right? I realize some seats are inherently more comfortable than others, but your space-based argument is flawed. |
Originally Posted by CXfanatic
(Post 34972227)
There is a possibility I may be flying this Spring to BLR for a relative's wedding and may take CX. Hopefully it'll be a 77W, because I flew the A359 on SQ about a month ago and the comfort is a little more compromised than the 77W's (10-abreast I get is bad, but not as bad as the A359).
If comparison is made on not-full-load, I see where you’re coming from; when full load, 777 has always been a torture chamber for my shoulders. |
Originally Posted by percysmith
(Post 34974242)
CXfanatic , are you comparing a not-full-load SQ A359 Y seat against a not-full-load CX 77W Y seat?
If comparison is made on not-full-load, I see where you’re coming from; when full load, 777 has always been a torture chamber for my shoulders. It's not only me who found the SQ A359 cramped, but also my parents in Y (my dad flew Premium Economy and it's much better). I won't necessarily say CX's 10-abreast 77W is as better than the A359 but only slightly but still a bit cramped. Maybe it's a fact that I have grown to get used to Boeing aircraft, especially the 77W knowing it's still decent. I flew during peak season recently and really realized the difference. If possible, I will try my hardest to avoid the A359, and if I can't, pay a little extra for Premium Economy. |
Noticed only a handful of long-haul routes are operated by the 77W even leading into the summer schedule. Is this due to a lack of aircraft and resource for 777 or does CX intend to permanently have majority of its longhaul routes operated by A350?
|
Originally Posted by GE90-115B
(Post 34988958)
Noticed only a handful of long-haul routes are operated by the 77W even leading into the summer schedule. Is this due to a lack of aircraft and resource for 777 or does CX intend to permanently have majority of its longhaul routes operated by A350?
But as long as the loads are what they are, it makes sense to make a full use of the smaller A350. They are not in storage and have been the workhorse of CX during covid. Many 77W are still in storage and will be used when pax demand increases. |
Originally Posted by brunos
(Post 34989130)
CX operates more than a handful of 77W.
But as long as the loads are what they are, it makes sense to make a full use of the smaller A350. They are not in storage and have been the workhorse of CX during covid. Many 77W are still in storage and will be used when pax demand increases. |
It was a KA route, and I don't know if it was only temporarily cancelled or permanently, but does HKG-DVO have any hopes of coming back on a CX Narrowbody? Or is is possible/likely it would go over to greater bay airlines?
|
Any word on when CX may firm up their schedules past March?
|
dw Currently up-dates at least once a month which I expect will continue until the airline is flying close 100% of its scheduled routes.
|
Booked CX's direct flight to Madrid during Easter, and received notification my flight on both ways got cancelled. Previously it was listed as 4 flights per week, but seems it changed to 1-2 flights per week only.....
They moved me to the direct flight depart a day earlier..... |
Hawaii
Did CX ever have nonstop service to HNL? If so, are there any indications that it will resume?
|
Originally Posted by Gerbs
(Post 34993614)
Did CX ever have nonstop service to HNL? If so, are there any indications that it will resume?
|
Will CX ever fly to RMQ with their A321neos? I know that the 2 ex-KA slots are probably given to UO instead of CX (same as some TPE, KHH and SIN slots), but I would try to avoid UO as much as possible
Also, did KA ever fly to CNX pre-covid? The route is now only flown by UO but I'm not sure whether KA did fly it in the past Anyways, interesting to see CX passing some short haul slots to UO for them to takeover KA/some original CX flights |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:04 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.