New Destinations for CX
which of the following new destinations are good for CX to launch after launching HKG-ORD route?
1.HKG-Dallas, non-stop, B777-300ER (To better match AA main hub) 2.HKG-Munich, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To match Air Berlin's joining to Oneworld, and to compete with *A member - LH) 3.HKG-Manchester, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER 4.HKG-London (Gatwick), non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To add London Flights despite of lack of slots in Heathrow) Suggested Frequencies: 1,3&4.1xDaily 2.4xWeekly |
Originally Posted by derek2010
(Post 16524906)
which of the following new destinations are good for CX to launch after launching HKG-ORD route?
1.HKG-Dallas, non-stop, B777-300ER (To better match AA main hub) 2.HKG-Munich, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To match Air Berlin's joining to Oneworld, and to compete with *A member - LH) 3.HKG-Manchester, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER 4.HKG-London (Gatwick), non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To add London Flights despite of lack of slots in Heathrow) Suggested Frequencies: 1,3&4.1xDaily 2.4xWeekly 2, No it would be only either Berlin or Dusseldorf. 3, Manchester will not be non-stop. Will be with a stop in Moscow or Geneva. 4, Never. The facility in Gatwick is not uptodate. The extra cost is greater than add one Heathrow flight. |
Originally Posted by derek2010
(Post 16524906)
which of the following new destinations are good for CX to launch after launching HKG-ORD route?
1.HKG-Dallas, non-stop, B777-300ER (To better match AA main hub) 2.HKG-Munich, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To match Air Berlin's joining to Oneworld, and to compete with *A member - LH) 3.HKG-Manchester, non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER 4.HKG-London (Gatwick), non-stop, A340-300/B777-300ER (To add London Flights despite of lack of slots in Heathrow) Suggested Frequencies: 1,3&4.1xDaily 2.4xWeekly 1. HKG-EWR 2. HKG-PHL 3. HKG-ABE It's good to dream..... |
1. HKG - MAN via Moscow would probably be more attractive than via Geneva. Even if it was to go via Switzerland, I think CX would look at ZRH first. (Direct would be ideal but I don't think there's enough demand to justify daily rotation).
2. CX would not look at HKG - LGW. It would instead look at adding capacity into LHR, slot permitting. |
As Cathay Boy said, "as long as we're dreaming..."
LAX-LHR/LGW Then, maybe, we could avoid BA's exorbitant YQ fees and still get excellent F class service. |
Well, as long as we're dreaming from this end too:
HKG-SUB to be 2x daily PDX-HKG 3x a week? One can only hope.. ;) |
HKG-EZE-GRU
HKG-MFM LHR-JFK LCY-(Europe) Japan red-eyes |
Add Barcelona, Madrid, Zurich, Istanbul, Cairo, Cape Town. Maybe Dallas, Hyderabad, Las Vegas, Seattle but those are not really a priority for them.
|
1. HKG - WUX (Wuxi) At least one daily frequency, please.
2. ICN/GMP - PVG/SHA (-HKG?) Any solution would be acceptable to have Oneworld flights preferably on CX/KA metal between China and Korea. 3. Codeshares with Air Berlin on German domestic flights That's what I wish for Christmas. ;) |
Originally Posted by maortega15
(Post 16529031)
...Las Vegas...
1. Last time I went to Vegas, most of the dealers I saw and heard around Fremont Street were Cantonese speakers which means that at least some have a connection to southern China and probably make the odd trip from time to time. 2. There must be demand from the casinos themselves to move staff around. 3. Mainlanders who come down to gamble in Macau might also want to go on a North American gambling binge. 4. Chinese people, in general and stereotypically, love to gamble. |
Originally Posted by kaka
(Post 16528902)
HKG-EZE-GRU
HKG-AMS-GRU! |
Originally Posted by kaka
(Post 16528902)
HKG-EZE-GRU
HKG-MFM LHR-JFK LCY-(Europe) Japan red-eyes |
Originally Posted by N830MH
(Post 16529560)
No, because the entire 77W does not have enough range to reachable in EZE. Besides, I think CX will have to flying one-stop in SYD or AKL to get refuel the plane. Due to weight restrictions. The 77W cannot handle enough the fuel. Because it was more than 11458 mi and there is no ULH aircraft. I think CX will have stop in JNB to get refuel the plane is more convenient instead of going to SYD or AKL. It will much easier to flying one-stop in JNB to get refuel the plane. If there is a fifth freedom traffic rights through HKG-JNB-EZE.
pumping more ideas: SYD-JNB PEK/SHA-GMP/HND/KIX/TPE (KA) PEK/SHA-AMS/CDG/FRA/ZRH-LCY (Cathay Connect hub at LCY) also LCY-LIS/EDI/MAN/DUB/JFK |
Originally Posted by N830MH
(Post 16529560)
No, because the entire 77W does not have enough range to reachable in EZE. Besides, I think CX will have to flying one-stop in SYD or AKL to get refuel the plane. Due to weight restrictions. The 77W cannot handle enough the fuel. Because it was more than 11458 mi and there is no ULH aircraft. I think CX will have stop in JNB to get refuel the plane is more convenient instead of going to SYD or AKL. It will much easier to flying one-stop in JNB to get refuel the plane. If there is a fifth freedom traffic rights through HKG-JNB-EZE.
1. External fuel tanks 2. Mid-air refueling 3. Replace cabin with one giant fuel tank.. :D |
CX to dominate the world
LHR-JFK just nice to have, BA and AA already have sufficient OW coverage HKG-DFW then to South America, AMS-GRU only KL now JNB-GRU only SA now LAX-GRU only KE now together adding up to 7 frequencies And what about HKG-MEX and HKG-MIA (pushing the range of the 777-300ERs! |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:38 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.