May 4, 2015, 8:46 pm
Last edit by: maortega15
This is a thread to discuss rumours / potential new routes for Cathay Pacific to fly to.
Current speculation:
Current speculation:
New route speculation for Cathay
Jul 20, 2019, 3:00 am
#1021
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 291
Never
The nearest they came was a diverted flight in August 2017
Medical emergency.
As I mentioned up thread HNl is a low yield tourist destination with not a lot of up front demand ex HKG and not a lot of freight
I am aware that this route has been considered many times and perhaps going forward itis one for the Dragon with a dense configuration 777
But I still believe it unlikely for CX.
The nearest they came was a diverted flight in August 2017
Medical emergency.
As I mentioned up thread HNl is a low yield tourist destination with not a lot of up front demand ex HKG and not a lot of freight
I am aware that this route has been considered many times and perhaps going forward itis one for the Dragon with a dense configuration 777
But I still believe it unlikely for CX.
Jul 20, 2019, 3:36 am
#1022
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: Marco Polo Club, KF
Posts: 208
Up until the point at which TK commenced HKG and the economic/political situation in Turkey started to turn, I couldn't understand why CX didn't serve IST. The IST bound business and Turkey tourism markets aside, it is a huge hub for North Africa, Caucasus and Central Asia (although the ME3 + FZ now serve many of these markets). But I guess that wouldn't count for much without some form of partnership with TK.
Jul 20, 2019, 7:13 am
#1023
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 123
Could a Moscow resumption be on the agenda, as Russians are traveling more now, tourism between Russia and China booming, CX competitors China southern and China eastern are absolutely smashing the Moscow market at the moment (4weekly Shenzhen moscow, 4 week Guangzhou moscow , 3 weekly Wuhan moscow and 4 weekly Urumqi moscow) China eastern ( 11 weekly Moscow Shanghai and 3 weekly Xian Moscow ) and Moscow is a pretty high income city..
Jul 20, 2019, 8:46 am
#1026
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TPE / HSZ
Programs: CX GO (=SPH), IHG Diamond Amb, Hertz 5*, Accor, Hilton, National
Posts: 6,436
IIRC, at one point, CX wanted to do HKG-DME-MAN, and the schedule was filed, seats were sold, before this arrangement was axed. In Dec. 2014, the non-stop MAN flight was launched.
Jul 20, 2019, 12:19 pm
#1027
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: PEK, AUS, WAS, HKG
Programs: CX Gold
Posts: 1,122
The crew may not be happy but any chance of starting/reviving KA routes to Northeast China like Harbin, Shenyang or Dalian (the latter two are now run by CA & CZ though)? Any demand for Guam/Saipan after UA axes the route? Also would be happy if Nha Trang & Ishigaki can be Asiamiles/Club Points accountable if HK Express is absorbed into the CX group. They planned to open the Asahikawa (Hokkaido) route, but it does not appear to be positive in the current context - is it that this will cannibalise CX's Sapporo flights?
Besides what have been said above, some previous sources (in this forum or elsewhere, or perhaps just hear-say) said Tehran, Kochi, Ahmedabad, Calgary, etc. were investigated. False news or confirmed to be not feasible?
Besides what have been said above, some previous sources (in this forum or elsewhere, or perhaps just hear-say) said Tehran, Kochi, Ahmedabad, Calgary, etc. were investigated. False news or confirmed to be not feasible?
Jul 20, 2019, 5:07 pm
#1028
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 123
CX first put its code on SU's HKG-SVO service, before dropping it and served DME itself from 2010 to 2015. I think the website simply didn't remove it. While I wouldn't be surprised if it gets relaunched, I don't think this is any indication.
IIRC, at one point, CX wanted to do HKG-DME-MAN, and the schedule was filed, seats were sold, before this arrangement was axed. In Dec. 2014, the non-stop MAN flight was launched.
IIRC, at one point, CX wanted to do HKG-DME-MAN, and the schedule was filed, seats were sold, before this arrangement was axed. In Dec. 2014, the non-stop MAN flight was launched.
Jul 20, 2019, 9:40 pm
#1029
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: TPE / HSZ
Programs: CX GO (=SPH), IHG Diamond Amb, Hertz 5*, Accor, Hilton, National
Posts: 6,436
Jul 21, 2019, 1:01 am
#1030
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 123
Interesting list. I've highlighted the ones that already have existing flights served by competitors with hubs at those airports so it's unlikely CX will pile in with more capacity. Not sure if your ranking is by order of priority but 3 of your top 4 are either *A or Skyteam hubs so I'd say those are also unlikely, but the passenger numbers are YUL are very good. QRC3288 provided some excellent insight into the possibility of MIA-(Asia) a few posts ago. Passenger growth at MIA been more or less flat in the last 3 years which is probably an indication of limited O&D demand rather than limited supply. I think there could be potential for #21 (HKG-HNL) but with the visa requirements of HK passport holders to a US destination, I'm not sure how much originating traffic this route would get. Not much of a business market either but very popular amongst Japanese tourists.
Jul 21, 2019, 10:10 pm
#1031
Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: CX Diamond, United MileagePlus Gold, Accor Platinum
Posts: 90
Relatively long working hours (particularly so if they have to serve turnaround), comparable to flights to those to Japan but less rewarding. Chinese from northeast provinces are friendly but many of them often speak relatively loud.
Jul 21, 2019, 10:34 pm
#1032
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: PEK, AUS, WAS, HKG
Programs: CX Gold
Posts: 1,122
I agree with your second point. However, why does the number of working hours matter? Aren't they paid by the number of hours they are working? Flights to Japan are closer, but they also earn less on those flights, right?
Jul 21, 2019, 10:53 pm
#1033
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
This example is CX specific, but I suspect similar Dynamics exist on KA.
While crew are paid hourly, they have a minimum # of guaranteed hours each month, usually 80. Because it's quite possible to be legally rostered a schedule with a schedule under 80 hours especially in the presence of ultra long haul flights and mandated rest days. (say two JFK round trips and 5 ultra short hauls round trips to TPE). Now, in this schedule example let's say your 5 ultra short hauls are to/from TPE, and the total flying hours are about 70 for the month. So you will be paid for 80 flying hours because 70<80.
Now, take the exact same schedule 2x to JFK, but say you have 3 ultra short hauls round trips, and 2 Beijing round trips instead of all 5 to TPE. These longer sectors to PEK will add about 5-6 hours of duty time total, but since 76 is still < 80, the crew is still paid the same.
there are many many other factors. And crew are indeed paid for additional air hours over 80 / month, and there are ground hours which have no minimum nor cap but only pay half the hourly rate as flying hours (and you generally get more ground hours by doing short flights, since each flight has a 80 minute briefing and 30 minute postflight period regardless of flight length. And there are tons of other ground hour "catches" and advantages / disadvantages which I won't get into built into airline contracts).
But this is just an example why it isn't as simple as you might suspect. It is quite possible and a fairly routine occurrence to get paid the same amount for crew yet have to fly a longer flight. It happens especially often in the end of the month once crews are more set on their flights. So for example I know I only hit 70 flying hours this month, and CX swaps my TPE turnaround for a DPS turnaround. I may have a reasonable incentive to call in sick since I will now work a 14 hour day for essentially nil economic advantage over what should've been a TPE turn taking half a day. At least, I'm thinking to myself "this is crap luck! And I'm not even getting paid a dime more than I would've gotten for working the TPE flight I was supposed to do!" You can see how incentives get a bit skewed.
Last edited by QRC3288; Jul 21, 2019 at 10:59 pm