The previous generation is noticeable. The seats in the ones I have been on this year are (literally) falling apart. And it might just be me but infisn the 333 ones a little narrower. Not that the 333s are terrible but they do need an update and I would take the 350s over a 333.

Don't you recall the impact HX had on markets in which competed pre-Covid? Adding supply always affects incumbents.

All the discussion is about J, but A330 in Y have a great benefit for a couple in Y to be 2x4x2, so lots of pair seats.

HKG-BNE they finally loaded new night flight for NS25. this time is 5 weekly additional. I wished they scheduled earlier departures. New return flight allows for better connection onwards to Europe from Brisbane.
CX 165HKG
05/29/25 12:40 AMBNE
05/29/25 11:05 AM359
M,T,W,Th,Sa

Return is
CX 150BNE
07/12/25 12:35 PMHKG
07/12/25 7:30 PM359
M,T,W,Th,Sa


Note that for NW24 schedule used to be 3 weekly night flights
CX 1530HKG
02/17/25 11:20 PMBNE
02/18/25 9:55 AM77W
Su,M,Th

UO to launch Sendai flights within the year

Source: some guy on behalf of R. Lam via email

Any news on Mainland markets that KA abandoned (e.g. KWL, NNG, CSX)? I know many of you guys love to whine about UO, but i strongly prefer them to anything involving SZX.

In the same email, they announced that CX is returning to BRU! Great news!

For those three, I think they were abandoned due to high-speed rail:(

Given that CX maintains twice daily flights to CAN, I would think high-speed rail (HSR) alone does not explain it. Probably still the lack of international demands from these cities is also a reason.

KMG too. KA used to have a daily A330(?) service. Now it's just down to MU at 12 weekly flights.

The CAN route i think is to steal china southern passengers, plus Cathay flies much more long haul destinations than CZ so it makes sense. Mainland China is such an important market to both CX and UO so perhaps these places would resume soon, or there really isn't any international demand

From AeroRoutes (Chinese):

UO, GBA and CX have gained approval from CAAC to start the following routes to/from Mainland China, the list of destinations that have received approval but have not yet started service are as follows:
UO: Nantong, Chaoshan Jieyang, Changzhou, Xuzhou, Yiwu, Xishuangbanna (from 27/10/2024); Guangzhou, Urumuqi (from 01/12/2024)
GBA: Haikou, Hohhot, Harbin, Kunming, Xining
CX: Urumuqi (from 31/03/2025)

I understand that gaining approval =/= starting flights to these destinations, but this may offer some hints regarding new routes that these airlines are about to begin
Interesting that most of these cities are third-tier cities. Also quite interesting to see UO gaining approval to start flights to CAN -- to my understanding the load factors on HKG-CAN have been quite pleasing with all the transit passengers, but would passengers be willing to do one leg on UO metal instead of CX metal?
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...68112dafa5.jpg

Source: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1EicuBwSjw/

If UO can operate 1 slot ex-CAN more, that would be more competitive.
Right now, CX983 is too late for an early morning bank departure for transit ex-HKG, and CX988 is too early for the late evening bank for intra-Asia transit to CAN. (Skypier to ZhongShan last departure 20:20)

But to serve those 2 purposes UO need to park a plane at CAN overnight? Like ex-HKG 23:00 and ex-CAN 08:00?
I would rather CX/UO operate 1 more pair of flights in between the current 2 pairs for morning Europe/US transit (now CX982 departs too early) and evening to before 00:30 Europe/AU/NZ transit (now CX989 arrives too late, basically miss the whole night departure peak), for example, ex-HKG 14:00 and ex-CAN 16:30

With so many spare A330s, I would imagine that CX would do the flight instead of UO? It's interesting though