A333 on HKG-CAN! Isn't it insane?!
Oct 26, 2018, 9:49 am
#16
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: HKG
Programs: CX, BA
Posts: 69
This has been for years.....
Oct 26, 2018, 10:34 am
#17
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: Lowly CX & IHG
Posts: 382
Other fellows have probably mentioned all the possible reasons. To summarise it could be (1) it does get full; (2) fleet availability; (3) slot availability at both HKG, CAN and the airspace itself
Oct 26, 2018, 10:51 am
#18
Join Date: Sep 2018
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 136
I think the OP's point is that no other (European) airline operates a wide body on a route as short as 84 miles.
He's got a point, the ones I can think of that come remotely close are:
LHR-AMS BA 767 231mi
LHR-EDI BA 767 331mi
He's got a point, the ones I can think of that come remotely close are:
LHR-AMS BA 767 231mi
LHR-EDI BA 767 331mi
Oct 26, 2018, 11:28 am
#19
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: YVR, KUL
Programs: AC, MH, BA, AF-KL
Posts: 2,904
Even world-class airlines such as Finnair use propellers to fly short-haul, and their short-haul can go as far as Helsinki to central Europe!
Oct 26, 2018, 11:45 am
#20
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Usually seat 1A, home:Tallinn
Programs: LH -- HON Circle **, IHG Spire Elite, Hilton Diamond, 1865 Voyager
Posts: 470
At least with business class if compare to ALL Gulf and Asian carriers and also LH or LO from Europe, by my pereonal experience Finnair is just BIG JOKE.
Oct 26, 2018, 3:22 pm
#22
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: MPC,CA,MU,AF
Posts: 8,171
There are transit passengers from/to many long-haul flights. My wife did that a while back. As J flight to CAN was about USD37xx and to HKG was about USD5xxx back in August, she flew to CAN to meet friends before returning to HKG to see family. They probably need a larger aircraft for passengers in PRD or those like my wife.
Oct 26, 2018, 6:53 pm
#23
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: CRK MNL
Programs: CX Gold
Posts: 1,287
If you regularly fly that route (HKG<>CAN) then you should be happy about it.
Oct 26, 2018, 7:38 pm
#24
Join Date: May 2010
Location: YLMQ
Programs: QF Gold, WY Gold
Posts: 682
It simply isn’t in the CX business model to operate anything other than its specified widebody aircraft. The flight is likely cost effective and practical for them.
Purchasing a fleet of regional aircraft, operating them and utilising valuable slots may not be a sensible option.
Purchasing a fleet of regional aircraft, operating them and utilising valuable slots may not be a sensible option.
Oct 26, 2018, 8:05 pm
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: RDU
Programs: AA LT Gold, DL SM, HY Disc, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 12,507
Back in the day, United used to fly their first ORD-MKE-ORD with a DC10-30. That's 67 miles, although to get into the arrival patterns at ORD it's more like 120 as you have to head out over the lake and come back.
Why? Because the plane was a LAX-ORD redeye getting in at 4:30am, and not needed until a ORD-SFO-ICN that left at 8. So a 5:15am to MKE and a 6:15am back got it away from the gates.
Why? Because the plane was a LAX-ORD redeye getting in at 4:30am, and not needed until a ORD-SFO-ICN that left at 8. So a 5:15am to MKE and a 6:15am back got it away from the gates.
Oct 26, 2018, 8:42 pm
#26
Join Date: Jan 2006
Programs: AAdvantage Asia Miles Air China
Posts: 870
It simply isn’t in the CX business model to operate anything other than its specified widebody aircraft. The flight is likely cost effective and practical for them.Purchasing a fleet of regional aircraft, operating them and utilising valuable slots may not be a sensible option.
Oct 26, 2018, 9:03 pm
#27
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: LTN
Programs: Aeroflot Bonus, British Airways Executive Club
Posts: 463
SVO-LHR can be considered medium haul already so it isn't unreasonable using wide bodies (sorry I didn't consider this extreme in intra-Europe, I mainly fly to Northern and Eastern Europe, sometimes Central Europe, and never been to Western Europe, and every route I've taken are narrow bodies, including propellers).
The intra-Europe route I have taken using propeller was HEL-VNO, connecting the CAPITALS of two sovereign states, and this isn't so short, much longer than HKG-CAN!
Oct 26, 2018, 9:08 pm
#28
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Economy, mostly :(
Programs: Skywards Gold
Posts: 7,801
SVO-LHR can be considered medium haul already so it isn't unreasonable using wide bodies (sorry I didn't consider this extreme in intra-Europe, I mainly fly to Northern and Eastern Europe, sometimes Central Europe, and never been to Western Europe, and every route I've taken are narrow bodies, including propellers).
The intra-Europe route I have taken using propeller was HEL-VNO, connecting the CAPITALS of two sovereign states, and this isn't so short, much longer than HKG-CAN!
The intra-Europe route I have taken using propeller was HEL-VNO, connecting the CAPITALS of two sovereign states, and this isn't so short, much longer than HKG-CAN!
Oct 26, 2018, 9:18 pm
#29
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 42,040
Who cares if they are capitals? And, why are you bothered by the fact that KA offers a product that the market clearly demands?
Oct 26, 2018, 9:19 pm
#30
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ...
Programs: CX DM / SQ PPS / VN Platinum
Posts: 1,078
How DARE CX run a wide body on a short route between 2 normal cities when the Finns (and others) run prop planes between CAPITAL CITIES of different countries.
I really wonder where does CX get the cojones to so something so outrageous.
This is bizarre thread.
I really wonder where does CX get the cojones to so something so outrageous.
This is bizarre thread.