jimyvr

MIA is a candidate, along with 2 non-oneWorld hub cities in the US being specifically mentioned for North America, along with "etc".


only 2 are specifically mentioned, again, along with "etc".

Any cities are possible, but I'd like to think that CX has higher interests on thosespecifically mentioned destinations.

Cathay Boy

I still think CX will make a killing in the Greater NYC area if they would open up EWR. I fully expect them to sustain 5x daily in JFK and 2x daily in EWR.

Mrtnw

It's everybody against Cathay Boy here for EWR. Still consider consolidation at JFK and opening other ports to be a higher priority than having a second NYC port.

ChrisLi

I will see EWR happening if, and only if, they are planning 6th JFK .... in that case a split operation of 4 JFK 2 EWR may make sense

jimyvr

That's a risky move.

stupidhead

Well flying Unitinental (I know, Star Alliance is the enemy here) is always an option....and they'll throw in a stop at Guam to boot.

Cathay Boy

SQ doesn't think so. So have many other airlines that serve both JFK and EWR. I guess they saw something...

kaka

its just like serving tokyo at HND and NRT. i actually think it would work.

Cathay Boy

Again people are missing the point of the argument. It's more about expansion into new markets rather than just diversify existing markets. Just like SHA/PVG, HND/NRT, a super-major metropolitan like the Great New York City area (which includes Connecticut to the north, and Jersey to the west, and to certain extend Eastern Pennsylvania) have many potential pax that, I would suggest, would jump on the CX planes if CX actually flies to EWR.

FlyerTalker688786

EWR is like another city for many New Yorkers. Unlike NRT or PVG are widely accepted as local airport. Whereas JFK would provide endless transit opportunities for CX with AA, in EWR it is more like a destination airport where limited transit flow can be provided.

EWR is very risky for CX. Imagine if flights are cancelled in EWR, all the passengers have to wait for another day until they can go as there is no alternative available other than go to JFK to fly via LHR/LAX/NRT etc to HKG.

EWR is a perfect choice for you as individual, but i doubt it is a good choice for an airline like CX which emphasis on aviability of the routes it operates.

To many travellers, they prefer there are 5 daily to JFK rather than 4 daily JFK and 1 EWR.

Cathay Boy

Don't know where you get this info. EWR has market itself to be an alternate and speedier way into Manhattan, and connections from EWR into NYC couldn't be any easier and a lot faster than any transportation from JFK to downtown NY. Most people that lives around EWR are ex-NYC residents that fled there away from high taxes of NYC. The mass transit, trains, ferries, highways, are so vast and interconnected that EWR can integrate into NYC tomorrow and not missed a beat.

Again this statement makes no sense when you consider the amount of traffic EWR has, do you really think tons of people fly to EWR everyday to go to Newark, NJ (or any parts of NJ for that matter?) Like I said, EWR is run by Port Authority, the same entity that runs La Guadia and JFK. EWR has long market itself to be the faster, easier, airport to go right to mid-town/downtown Manhattan.

How about the simple fact that tons of people originate from Greater NYC Metropolitan area and simply want to go home? JFK is not like HKG that most pax are transit pax.

Oh, so there's no risk of this in any other ports that only has 1x daily, such as ORD? I don't get this argument at all.

Again this argument is your argument, not mine. My argument is not something that benefits me, but like I said many airlines have see the great market potential for flying both EWR and JFK, including SQ. I guess SQ is just doing it for me personally as well?

Like I said many times before, there are tons of flyers in New Jersey, Philadelphia, and Eastern Pennsylvania that travels to East Asia on a regular basis, and they are only settling for CO or BR because of availability. And they despise traveling to JFK with the added driving time plus potential traffic. If CX would open EWR, it would be instant success in luring new pax, not just shifting JFK pax to EWR.

Mrtnw

This will comfort CX and make them put all their analysis aside.
Everybody has their own preference. For Cathay Boy having CX at EWR is important, I can live with the JFK options and would like to see more and more flexibility there. I'm not saying EWR will not happen, don't have a crystal bowl, but I would like to see some other ports instead.

CrazyJ82

I suspect the new ORD flight will help to capture a lot of that traffic (and I'm speaking here as someone who travels frequently to the mid-Atlantic). I've found the flight is well-timed for connections from PHL, BWI, DCA and a lot of other airports in the area. Could those pax drive or take Amtrak to EWR if CX operated there? Probably. But now they can do a shorter drive from home to one of those airports, get AA to worry about carting their luggage as soon as they check in instead of having to lug bags all over train stations, and be on one ticket in case there's bad weather along the way.

I've been hauling myself up to JFK instead of connecting through ORD on UA or using CO from EWR because the in-flight experience is a lot better and the status I earn is helpful for the bulk of my flying, which is ex-HKG. I'd argue the availability of a non-stop is less important than having good connecting flights simply because if you live more than an hour's drive from the airport, you have to "connect" somehow anyway, whether via a longer drive or a train. The biggest drawback to the JFK flight hasn't been the airport's location per se but the fact that it was always hard-to-impossible to connect on AA to the mid-Atlantic. ORD will fix a lot of that. Even if it's not a great airport to travel through, that matters less for someone who'd be looking at a hassle to get to JFK or EWR anyway.

letsflythere

DFW and MIA is not possible without payload restriction because the range stated by Boeing and Airbus for their aircrafts are based on still air and without cargo. One could imagine the strong headwind on the west bound. Nevertheless, DFW becomes real hot in the summer that the engine performance of 77W and again, have to restrict load.

For JNB, actually 77W is not the best aircraft, again due to high altitude of JNB and the fact that 77W is a twin not a quad. I hope CX could either route the S.America via CPT or Europe.

That said, I would love to see CX goes to Calgary, Montreal, Manchester (one-stop), Zurich, Madrid, Cape Town, Male of Maldive, Anchorage, Berlin, Munich, Stockholm, Budapest, Lima, Sao Paulo, St. Petersburg with 5th freedom to somewhere. ^^

letsflythere

Forgot to mention! Wasnt that CX terminated the BOM - DXB last year or two due to severe competition by Emirates and Indian airlines?
Can CX deploy this slot and 5th freedom to reach East Africa? It would be damn good and pretty shortcut too without routing via BKK!