CX wants more capacity to Aus

[yohy?!]

Cathay wants more flights Down Under

The airline has hit its limit of 70 flights a week between Australia and Hong Kong, as allowed under bilateral air rights. Cathay flies to six destinations in Australia, including Sydney and Melbourne.

The CX juggernaut rolls on....might be the possibility of 77Ws and 747s on HKG-AUS sectors.

Maybe a return of F?...all in all good news, I do like the new CX cabins in all classes but a 333 is a 333 after all...

 

[anat0l]

I was thinking much the same thing. Use larger aircraft to get more seats using the same slots. Of course, the regulatory body may also have a limit on the number of seats.

Return of F would be good; would certainly mean more options for oneworld F out of Australia, especially for those who prefer traffic through HKG.

 

[Danger]

I see on Twitter today that CX will also announce next week a new destination in the US. It's out of Seattle, Boston, Miami and Newark.

 

[samh004]

While an increase in slots shouldn't be dependant on QF getting something, as they're not the only airline in Australia, but I hear the reason JQ HK isn't up and running yet is difficulties in getting approved in HK, thanks to CX, so perhaps they should stop objecting to the JQ juggernaut rolling on in their backyard, and then Australia can see about allowing more flights here.

Of course if everything I have said is off base, I'm sure someone will let me know, but I don't think CX should just get it's way while blocking others on their turf.

 

[yohy?!]

I see on Twitter today that CX will also announce next week a new destination in the US. It's out of Seattle, Boston, Miami and Newark.

Money is on EWR - they have had it in the pipeline for some time now

 

[yohy?!]

While an increase in slots shouldn't be dependant on QF getting something, as they're not the only airline in Australia, but I hear the reason JQ HK isn't up and running yet is difficulties in getting approved in HK, thanks to CX, so perhaps they should stop objecting to the JQ juggernaut rolling on in their backyard, and then Australia can see about allowing more flights here.

Of course if everything I have said is off base, I'm sure someone will let me know, but I don't think CX should just get it's way while blocking others on their turf.

JQ HK is incidental in the scuffle I think - more about CA (through CX holdings) VS MU playing out

 

[cosi]

but I don't think CX should just get it's way while blocking others on their turf.

Sam

What about routes like Perth where QF no longer operates?

 

[samh004]

Sam

What about routes like Perth where QF no longer operates?

This isn't a QF point. VA could fly that route if they wanted. I'm just saying its a bit rich wanting more slots while blocking an airline in their own backyard, afaik.

 

[cosi]

Sam

If CX want to increase capacity into Australia, especially to ports QF do not serve I belive they should not be restricted and instead encouraged.

Nobody knows what is happening in HK with Jetstar

 

[Fruitcake]

If CX want to increase capacity into Australia, especially to ports QF do not serve I belive they should not be restricted and instead encouraged.

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/av...egister_available_capacity_310713.pdf#page=30
Interestingly, CX is already unrestricted in adding capacity to ports not serviced by QF. The only restrictions are on SYD/PER/MEL/BNE-HKG (45 services per week).

So CX could open up CBR/TSV/OOL/AVV/DRW-HKG or increase frequencies on ADL/CNS-HKG without interference. All of which, other than ADL-HKG, are rather silly ideas, so I can see why they would prefer to see the major city frequency limit increased.

 

[mardy]

All of which, other than ADL-HKG, are rather silly ideas

OOL-HKG would be great! Scoot seem to be doing well with OOL-SIN, so it's not as silly as one might think...

 

[amaroo]

I was thinking much the same thing. Use larger aircraft to get more seats using the same slots. Of course, the regulatory body may also have a limit on the number of seats.

Return of F would be good; would certainly mean more options for oneworld F out of Australia, especially for those who prefer traffic through HKG.

That would be so cool.....

 

[craven morehead]

Bring it on !! I flew CX253 a few weeks back in "J" HKG to LHR - What a great product :mrgreen:

 

[markis10]

Money is on EWR - they have had it in the pipeline for some time now

LOL it's Seattle, can I have that money!

 

[markis10]

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/av...egister_available_capacity_310713.pdf#page=30
Interestingly, CX is already unrestricted in adding capacity to ports not serviced by QF. The only restrictions are on SYD/PER/MEL/BNE-HKG (45 services per week).

So CX could open up CBR/TSV/OOL/AVV/DRW-HKG or increase frequencies on ADL/CNS-HKG without interference. All of which, other than ADL-HKG, are rather silly ideas, so I can see why they would prefer to see the major city frequency limit increased.

People are confusing frequency with capacity, if CX need more capacity they just change the aircraft type.

 

[Danger]

Money is on EWR - they have had it in the pipeline for some time now

LOL it's Seattle, can I have that money!

It seems yohy?!'s money is in fact safe.

Cathay Pacific to Launch Hong Kong – Newark Service from March 2014 | Airline Route – Worldwide Airline Route Updates

 

[markis10]

It seems yohy?!'s money is in fact safe.

Cathay Pacific to Launch Hong Kong – Newark Service from March 2014 | Airline Route – Worldwide Airline Route Updates

Bugger, could have sworn it was Seartle from the hints!

 

[vitagen]

I would have thought Miami... enlighten me, Why fly to both JFK and Newark?

 

[yohy?!]

Bugger, could have sworn it was Seartle from the hints!

Sorry the big giveaway was the terminal signage that's been in EWR for over a year! (they planned to launch last year and pulled back)