May 24, 2013, 7:54 pm
Last edit by: coolfish1103
Google doc for China Airlines & Starlux Airlines
- 2017 China Airlines Network
- A document for Tigerair Taiwan (LCC) will soon be made.
Things to note:
Information may not be up-to-date and is only served as advice. It's best for one to call the airline or check the official website. This thread will only cover carriers not having their own forums operated from Taiwan (not China). It's recommended to read some recent discussions in this page or this section of the forum as they might not yet be updated.
Please visit EVA FT forum for information regards to EVA Air.
Miles Buzz
China Airlines (CI) - 中華航空
Subsidiary: Mandarin Airlines (AE) - 華信航空
Fare Family
- China Airlines has followed the steps of EVA Air adopting new fare system where you are charged depending on the booking class you purchase. Have a read: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/othe...y-br-v-ci.html and https://www.china-airlines.com/tw/en...ts/fare-family
Future destinations
- CI plans to operate Seattle from 15JUL24.
Mileage Upgrade no longer applicable to cheap tickets
- From July 2, 2020
You may only upgrade via miles with booking codes Y, B, M, K, Q, T, V for Economy and W, U, A for Premium Economy on all sectors.
Far Eastern Air Transport (FE) - 遠東航空
Ceased operation as of December 13, 2019.
STARLUX Airlines (JX) - 星宇航空
Future destinations
- JX plans to operate Seattle from 17AUG24.
New Lounge at Terminal 2
- First Class Lounge available for First Class passengers only (if not opting for HuanYu Terminal).
Fleet:
13x A321neo
11x A330-900neo (4 currently in service)
10x A350-900 (5 currently in service)
International Airport Gateways
TPE Taipei Taoyuan International Airport - 桃園國際機場
- 2017 China Airlines Network
- A document for Tigerair Taiwan (LCC) will soon be made.
Things to note:
Information may not be up-to-date and is only served as advice. It's best for one to call the airline or check the official website. This thread will only cover carriers not having their own forums operated from Taiwan (not China). It's recommended to read some recent discussions in this page or this section of the forum as they might not yet be updated.
Please visit EVA FT forum for information regards to EVA Air.
Miles Buzz
China Airlines (CI) - 中華航空
Subsidiary: Mandarin Airlines (AE) - 華信航空
Fare Family
- China Airlines has followed the steps of EVA Air adopting new fare system where you are charged depending on the booking class you purchase. Have a read: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/othe...y-br-v-ci.html and https://www.china-airlines.com/tw/en...ts/fare-family
Future destinations
- CI plans to operate Seattle from 15JUL24.
Mileage Upgrade no longer applicable to cheap tickets
- From July 2, 2020
You may only upgrade via miles with booking codes Y, B, M, K, Q, T, V for Economy and W, U, A for Premium Economy on all sectors.
Far Eastern Air Transport (FE) - 遠東航空
Ceased operation as of December 13, 2019.
STARLUX Airlines (JX) - 星宇航空
Future destinations
- JX plans to operate Seattle from 17AUG24.
New Lounge at Terminal 2
- First Class Lounge available for First Class passengers only (if not opting for HuanYu Terminal).
Fleet:
13x A321neo
11x A330-900neo (4 currently in service)
10x A350-900 (5 currently in service)
International Airport Gateways
TPE Taipei Taoyuan International Airport - 桃園國際機場
Information for Airlines based in Taiwan
Sep 20, 2017, 7:30 am
#706
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
TPE-JFK is likely to be back to 5 weekly or even daily next summer, so I think keeping that as utilizing 2 daily is safer. TPE-FRA is still in the air going to 359 as someone indicated CI has swapped 77W back.
Technically it's possible for them to use A359 if they do not reduce the frequencies at LAX cause it's current rotation for crew is pretty much at it's maximum.
Monday CI 6 > Tuesday CI 7
Monday CI 8 > Wednesday CI 5
...and given 12 weekly some rotations will be CI 6 > 5 and CI 8 > 7.
If they reduce frequencies then likely ONT will be 77W.
...though if I were CI I would not reduce frequencies, instead I would substitute 359 on all TPE-LAX flights and then add 3-4 weekly flights to TPE-ONT as 359. The 4 planes utilizing this schedule would then come from YVR and SFO, with these destinations utilizing 77W instead.
TPE-LAX 12-14 weekly 359
TPE-ONT 3-4 weekly 359
TPE-YVR 7 weekly 77W
TPE-SFO 10-11 weekly 77W
ONT is not that far and going from LAX to ONT is likely going to be less traffic. If it's a night flight then likely they won't hit traffic at all going from ONT to hotel in LA.
Unlikely for ONT service to start end of this year cause it's all the facilities are not ready at all. I think the earliest we can expect is Lunar New Year in February.
Well still the plane is for long haul and should be utilized for long haul flights. What's the point having these frames flying short-haul flights where it's not economical to start with...
They can easily do SEA with a 77W and it's not that long compare to all other destinations.
Technically it's possible for them to use A359 if they do not reduce the frequencies at LAX cause it's current rotation for crew is pretty much at it's maximum.
Monday CI 6 > Tuesday CI 7
Monday CI 8 > Wednesday CI 5
...and given 12 weekly some rotations will be CI 6 > 5 and CI 8 > 7.
If they reduce frequencies then likely ONT will be 77W.
...though if I were CI I would not reduce frequencies, instead I would substitute 359 on all TPE-LAX flights and then add 3-4 weekly flights to TPE-ONT as 359. The 4 planes utilizing this schedule would then come from YVR and SFO, with these destinations utilizing 77W instead.
TPE-LAX 12-14 weekly 359
TPE-ONT 3-4 weekly 359
TPE-YVR 7 weekly 77W
TPE-SFO 10-11 weekly 77W
ONT is not that far and going from LAX to ONT is likely going to be less traffic. If it's a night flight then likely they won't hit traffic at all going from ONT to hotel in LA.
Unlikely for ONT service to start end of this year cause it's all the facilities are not ready at all. I think the earliest we can expect is Lunar New Year in February.
Well still the plane is for long haul and should be utilized for long haul flights. What's the point having these frames flying short-haul flights where it's not economical to start with...
They can easily do SEA with a 77W and it's not that long compare to all other destinations.
That's true but these planes could be utilized right now as you said on new routes or on routes over 8hrs which are not yet updated with the new Next generation cabins. However they seem happy for the moment to have 2-3 spare B777's flying around on short haul only, where the A350 does seem will be fully utilised on long haul flights even when all 14 planes are delivered.
I think if they really want to change LAX and ONT to all A350 planes like you said that would tie up a good 3 planes continuously. Then we have LHR which will take 1 plane up. SYD will take 2 planes as its going 2 daily (no idea if it will continue after February 2018.). Hawaii will likely take another frame up as well.
So they will need to free up 7 frames possibly 8 frames to do it. 3 or 4 frames will be released if SFO and YVR is changed to the B777.
So yes I can see it being possible by February/March 2018 assuming having 1 A350 back up as they should get 1 delivery around mid to late March looking at current A350 FAL. After that point there are only 3 more frames to be delivered in total. 2 by mid-year and the final frames seems to be around October 2018.
By that time surely all flights over 6hrs will have next generation cabins.
I am still of the opinion they really do need to order those 6 other options for gradual expansion and we still don't know the long term plans for the B777 frames when their lease comes up in 5/6 years time.
Sep 20, 2017, 9:34 am
#707
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SFO/SJC/OAK
Posts: 521
Assuming the A359 does end up working better for CI, wouldn't it make more sense for CI to get some A35Js instead of continuing with 77Ws?
Sep 20, 2017, 10:30 am
#708
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
Ideally they would be best ordering those 6 options maybe even a few more depending on how many years deliveries go out to.
Sep 20, 2017, 10:55 am
#709
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,897
I think if they really want to change LAX and ONT to all A350 planes like you said that would tie up a good 3 planes continuously. Then we have LHR which will take 1 plane up. SYD will take 2 planes as its going 2 daily (no idea if it will continue after February 2018.). Hawaii will likely take another frame up as well.
So they will need to free up 7 frames possibly 8 frames to do it. 3 or 4 frames will be released if SFO and YVR is changed to the B777.
So yes I can see it being possible by February/March 2018 assuming having 1 A350 back up as they should get 1 delivery around mid to late March looking at current A350 FAL. After that point there are only 3 more frames to be delivered in total. 2 by mid-year and the final frames seems to be around October 2018.
By that time surely all flights over 6hrs will have next generation cabins.
I am still of the opinion they really do need to order those 6 other options for gradual expansion and we still don't know the long term plans for the B777 frames when their lease comes up in 5/6 years time.
So they will need to free up 7 frames possibly 8 frames to do it. 3 or 4 frames will be released if SFO and YVR is changed to the B777.
So yes I can see it being possible by February/March 2018 assuming having 1 A350 back up as they should get 1 delivery around mid to late March looking at current A350 FAL. After that point there are only 3 more frames to be delivered in total. 2 by mid-year and the final frames seems to be around October 2018.
By that time surely all flights over 6hrs will have next generation cabins.
I am still of the opinion they really do need to order those 6 other options for gradual expansion and we still don't know the long term plans for the B777 frames when their lease comes up in 5/6 years time.
This is what's currently planned or in use for A359:
2x SYD
3x SFO+HNL
2x AMS+FCO
2x YVR
2x VIE+LGW
2 plane left, likely for BNE, MEL and another destination.
If they add another 6 frames into the fleet destinations such as SEA can be re-opened, and new destinations can be planned.
77W on the other hand is not well utilized:
3x LAX
2x JFK
2x FRA
3 planes left.
I think it makes more sense for CI to get A350-900 and 1000 along with Boeing 787-9/Airbus A330NEO for thin destinations like SJC or ONT.
Sep 20, 2017, 12:41 pm
#710
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LAX
Programs: AA Plat, DL, AS, UA, IHG Plat
Posts: 2,406
Do CI really need A35J if based on the current utilization that they don't even need that many 77W for long haul? A more sensible long term strategy is probably get more A359 and replace 77W as the lease expires and down-gauge FRA and JFK to lift up yield. And if LAX does become split ops with ONT, then I would down-gauge LAX as well.
In the meanwhile, there is very good reason for CI to keep 77W for short haul flights... it has lots of seats and CI is limited by the bi-lateral with China to a few flights a week to most destinations. Plus airports like PVG are slot restricted and that's not going to change anytime soon. So you need the biggest plane you can reasonably deploy on those routes.
I do agree that CI needs to take a look at something smaller than A359. Does A339 have the legs to reach US West coast from TPE?
In the meanwhile, there is very good reason for CI to keep 77W for short haul flights... it has lots of seats and CI is limited by the bi-lateral with China to a few flights a week to most destinations. Plus airports like PVG are slot restricted and that's not going to change anytime soon. So you need the biggest plane you can reasonably deploy on those routes.
I do agree that CI needs to take a look at something smaller than A359. Does A339 have the legs to reach US West coast from TPE?
Sep 20, 2017, 1:51 pm
#711
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SFO/SJC/OAK
Posts: 521
Sep 20, 2017, 8:51 pm
#712
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
Do CI really need A35J if based on the current utilization that they don't even need that many 77W for long haul? A more sensible long term strategy is probably get more A359 and replace 77W as the lease expires and down-gauge FRA and JFK to lift up yield. And if LAX does become split ops with ONT, then I would down-gauge LAX as well.
In the meanwhile, there is very good reason for CI to keep 77W for short haul flights... it has lots of seats and CI is limited by the bi-lateral with China to a few flights a week to most destinations. Plus airports like PVG are slot restricted and that's not going to change anytime soon. So you need the biggest plane you can reasonably deploy on those routes.
I do agree that CI needs to take a look at something smaller than A359. Does A339 have the legs to reach US West coast from TPE?
In the meanwhile, there is very good reason for CI to keep 77W for short haul flights... it has lots of seats and CI is limited by the bi-lateral with China to a few flights a week to most destinations. Plus airports like PVG are slot restricted and that's not going to change anytime soon. So you need the biggest plane you can reasonably deploy on those routes.
I do agree that CI needs to take a look at something smaller than A359. Does A339 have the legs to reach US West coast from TPE?
The newest MTOW (CEO A330-300) gives the plane a range of 11,750km.
With the NEO the engines on the A339 NEO, it should be using less fuel so that range will be extended to 12,130 km. Is that enough to get to the east coast of US with some buffer for winds?
Sep 20, 2017, 9:21 pm
#713
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,897
Do CI really need A35J if based on the current utilization that they don't even need that many 77W for long haul? A more sensible long term strategy is probably get more A359 and replace 77W as the lease expires and down-gauge FRA and JFK to lift up yield. And if LAX does become split ops with ONT, then I would down-gauge LAX as well.
In the meanwhile, there is very good reason for CI to keep 77W for short haul flights... it has lots of seats and CI is limited by the bi-lateral with China to a few flights a week to most destinations. Plus airports like PVG are slot restricted and that's not going to change anytime soon. So you need the biggest plane you can reasonably deploy on those routes.
They tried to sell Premium Economy with 77W on these destinations and what they end up in the end is bumping a bunch of customers from Economy to Premium Economy cause no one is buying Premium Economy.
I think all their regional routes utilizing 77W are not selling Premium Economy. Maybe I am wrong? For sure China is not.
I don't think A330-900NEO is what they are looking for cause that's too many seats still for these thin routes (SJC, ONT, AKL, MEL). 338 should be a good fit.
339 will not be able to reach the east coast. 338 can, but unsure if it's economic feasible (may turn into another A340 series?).
Sep 21, 2017, 10:26 am
#714
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,897
Apparently TPE-SYD will be reduced from 14 weekly shortly after the launch of the second flight so...
TPE-SYD cut to 12 weekly from Jan. 16, 10 weekly from Mar. 2.
TPE-VIE is increased to 5 weekly from Mar. 1 to Mar. 22.
TPE-BNE-AKL cut to 4 weekly in Mar. 1 to Mar. 24, some flights cancelled in Jan.
TPE-SYD cut to 12 weekly from Jan. 16, 10 weekly from Mar. 2.
TPE-VIE is increased to 5 weekly from Mar. 1 to Mar. 22.
TPE-BNE-AKL cut to 4 weekly in Mar. 1 to Mar. 24, some flights cancelled in Jan.
Last edited by coolfish1103; Sep 21, 2017 at 11:14 am
Sep 21, 2017, 11:51 am
#715
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LAX
Programs: AA Plat, DL, AS, UA, IHG Plat
Posts: 2,406
Well, the thing is that CI's 359 configuration has very little Premium Economy seats and for destinations in the US, you need more Premium Economy seats when your customers are not willing to shell out a Premium for the Business cabin. Business traffic is not very high in Taiwan and it's not going to be easy for them to sell lots of Business seats when they add another 359 in for LAX.
77W: 40J/62W/256Y 358 total
A359: 32J/31W/243Y 306 total
If CI down-gauge 2x 77W to 2x A359, they lose 16 J seats which is probably ok but they also lose 62 W seats which is a big problem.
So there is a reason for keeping 77W on US routes (and maybe eventually replace it with A350-1000 after the lease expires)
The thing is, 77W is proven to be too small for those slot-restricted China destinations (except Shanghai). Most of them now have 744 operating instead of 77W cause more seats are needed.
They tried to sell Premium Economy with 77W on these destinations and what they end up in the end is bumping a bunch of customers from Economy to Premium Economy cause no one is buying Premium Economy.
I think all their regional routes utilizing 77W are not selling Premium Economy. Maybe I am wrong? For sure China is not.
They tried to sell Premium Economy with 77W on these destinations and what they end up in the end is bumping a bunch of customers from Economy to Premium Economy cause no one is buying Premium Economy.
I think all their regional routes utilizing 77W are not selling Premium Economy. Maybe I am wrong? For sure China is not.
A330-900NEO will not be enough for ONT, and return from SJC is a stretch too. A330-800NEO is do able, though.
I don't think A330-900NEO is what they are looking for cause that's too many seats still for these thin routes (SJC, ONT, AKL, MEL). 338 should be a good fit.
339 will not be able to reach the east coast. 338 can, but unsure if it's economic feasible (may turn into another A340 series?).
I don't think A330-900NEO is what they are looking for cause that's too many seats still for these thin routes (SJC, ONT, AKL, MEL). 338 should be a good fit.
339 will not be able to reach the east coast. 338 can, but unsure if it's economic feasible (may turn into another A340 series?).
12J/20W/224Y 256 total
BR seems to have settled on 789 for those similar routes but that may be a little too big for CI (would be about 300 seats in CI's configuration - too close to A359)
Sep 21, 2017, 6:27 pm
#716
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
I am not sure these drops for TPE-BNE-AKL is related to demand issues.
I checked online (CI website) for January the whole month for HKG-BNE with a 1 week return and for the whole month the lowest price to be found was 10,300HKD (B class) including tax.
Business class (31,000HKD). For an short haul and mid haul flight that is very expensive.
And its the same for March 2018 all dates. So i doubt that is also due to lack of demand.
People are not going to pay 1,600/1,800 AUD for an economy ticket when competitors can all offer like 1,000 AUD or less.
And to think BR is going daily on this route. Then the talk is putting a B777 on this route in 2018, and thats without an AKL tag on.
I checked online (CI website) for January the whole month for HKG-BNE with a 1 week return and for the whole month the lowest price to be found was 10,300HKD (B class) including tax.
Business class (31,000HKD). For an short haul and mid haul flight that is very expensive.
And its the same for March 2018 all dates. So i doubt that is also due to lack of demand.
People are not going to pay 1,600/1,800 AUD for an economy ticket when competitors can all offer like 1,000 AUD or less.
And to think BR is going daily on this route. Then the talk is putting a B777 on this route in 2018, and thats without an AKL tag on.
Sep 21, 2017, 6:36 pm
#717
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
This is what i just dummy booked on EVA air's website for march compared to CI's 10,300HKG pricing.
Tuesday, March 06, 2018
09:50 Hong Kong(HKG)
10:20 +1 day Brisbane(BNE)
Total duration 22:30, 1 stop
Booking Class V
Fare type ECO WOW
Flight 2Wednesday, March 14, 2018 Wednesday, March 14, 2018
22:45 Brisbane(BNE)
10:05 +1 day Hong Kong(HKG)
Total duration 13:20, 1 stop
Booking Class V
Fare type ECO WOW
TOTAL
HKD3,722
Base Fare & Fuel Surcharge HKD2,690
Taxes and Charges HKD1,032
Nearly 7000HKD cheaper!!!
Tuesday, March 06, 2018
09:50 Hong Kong(HKG)
10:20 +1 day Brisbane(BNE)
Total duration 22:30, 1 stop
Booking Class V
Fare type ECO WOW
Flight 2Wednesday, March 14, 2018 Wednesday, March 14, 2018
22:45 Brisbane(BNE)
10:05 +1 day Hong Kong(HKG)
Total duration 13:20, 1 stop
Booking Class V
Fare type ECO WOW
TOTAL
HKD3,722
Base Fare & Fuel Surcharge HKD2,690
Taxes and Charges HKD1,032
Nearly 7000HKD cheaper!!!
Sep 24, 2017, 7:23 pm
#719
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
So AF is starting CDG-TPE next year
suppose CI is going to be codeshare on the flight ?
https://twitter.com/airplusnews/stat...41056771084288
suppose CI is going to be codeshare on the flight ?
https://twitter.com/airplusnews/stat...41056771084288
But BR does not make good money from this route and maybe even losing money sometimes.
A few years back BR cancelled flights to Paris CDG. And then started flights back up to avoid losing the rights to fly into CDG. CI has had its eyes on these rights for a while. It was even hoping extra flying rights would be allowed to let it compete against BR.
Getting AF back on this route will apply even more pressure considering both CI and AF are in the same alliance. My guess is CI will use the flight for codeshare and will hope in the long term BR will give up the route if losses mount.
Sep 24, 2017, 8:14 pm
#720
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,897
But BR does not make good money from this route and maybe even losing money sometimes.
A few years back BR cancelled flights to Paris CDG. And then started flights back up to avoid losing the rights to fly into CDG. CI has had its eyes on these rights for a while. It was even hoping extra flying rights would be allowed to let it compete against BR.
Getting AF back on this route will apply even more pressure considering both CI and AF are in the same alliance. My guess is CI will use the flight for codeshare and will hope in the long term BR will give up the route if losses mount.
A few years back BR cancelled flights to Paris CDG. And then started flights back up to avoid losing the rights to fly into CDG. CI has had its eyes on these rights for a while. It was even hoping extra flying rights would be allowed to let it compete against BR.
Getting AF back on this route will apply even more pressure considering both CI and AF are in the same alliance. My guess is CI will use the flight for codeshare and will hope in the long term BR will give up the route if losses mount.