Cathay Pacific

[User001]

For some reason CX is showing 2 daily from 21st Nov.

CX216/219 and CX357/358.

One leaves 1130 the other 1155 but the CX216/219 stops again at the end of the winter season.

 

[Dobbo]

Retiming? Filling error? Or setting the route up for some future plan?

 

[ethanegcc]

I think there is a change of the flight number. CX's website only shows one flight per day but with the amended flight numbers (CX216/219) as below:
View attachment 5729
Google Flights shows both services.
Amadeus shows CX216/219 as daily except Sunday and CX358/359 on Sundays. The anomaly is of course that Wed 29th and Sun 03rd aren't currently scheduled to have a flight as daily service starts on the 4th.View attachment 5730

I suppose we will have to wait and see, but definitely something afoot.

As for the flight numbers 216/219. 217 and 218 are available... future-proofing?

 

[User001]

Both flights were certainly showing on CX website on 8th Jan

 

[Dobbo]

Both flights were certainly showing on CX website on 8th Jan

Showing up on skyscanner (see below).

View attachment 5731

The timings (30 mins apart) don't really fit with a double daily operation. It looks like a retiming of the "morning" flight if I can use that term.

However, the apparent renumbering does suggest something afoot in the mid/long term. I am reluctant to get to far ahead given that we are still at 5x weekly and daily is a few months away, but this does bode well for future increases (even if not double daily).

 

[ethanegcc]

Well the potential is there. 90% load factors, growing demand etc.

I think in W18 we could see something along the lines of:

CX 216 MAN 1130 HKG 0705 +1 D
CX 217 MAN 1930 HKG 1455 +1 Mon, Thur, Sat

CX 219 HKG 0105 MAN 0605 D
CX 218 HKG 0905 MAN 1505 Mon, Thur, Sat

Is that unrealistically optimistic?

 

[Chilly Dog]

It would seem that they're mid update - this is all very odd!

- Where two daily flights are loaded MAN to HKG (and as stated above they're both fully bookable) there is often only one HKG to MAN the day before - so I'm not sure where the second 'plane is coming from! (and it's not a transatlantic tag, I checked!)
- Non-consecutive flight numbers 216/219. No other European city has that.
- If it's just a flight number change, why is it only for MAN? The other cities given CX3xx codes have not been changed - LGW, MAD, DUS.

As it happens I'm in HKG right now and was told by someone in the know that MAN was not due an increase beyond daily just last weekend...they could of course be wrong...time will tell.

 

[Dobbo]

Yes, certainly an update to the morning flight - but what does it all mean?

The non sequential numbering is the most interesting point, and it does indicate a more than daily frequency is in CX's thinking.

Having said that, that the numbering has completely changed away from the 300's may be indicative of something - albeit I don't know enough to comment.

All good speculation!

 

[Dobbo]

Seems part of the explanation is safety. There is a CX257 that uses similar airspace to CX357.

Also, the "2" code is apparently traditionally European.

Doesn't explain the non-sequential nature, which doesn't close the speculation.

 

[Chilly Dog]

As referred to above, a CX employee on another forum has cleared up that this is about flight number reassignment.

[Non-sequential is still super odd, though. I wondered if 217 & 218 clash with Heathrow flights too, but seems that would not be an issue as LHR has 237 and 257....hmmm].

While the timetable is still a mess from MAN to HKG, it looks like the transition is finished for the Winter period Nov to Mar on the inbound HKG to MAN. Showing the flight going to daily in early Dec as we know, except for 25Dec, 27Feb and 6Mar where no flights operate.

 

[Dobbo]

From routeslonline. Despite suffering a 1H 2017 net loss of $262 million, CX remain committed to increasing frequency on its most popular routes.

Could MAN be one of those?

http://www.routesonline.com/news/29...c-plans-to-fight-back-with-network-expansion/

 

[EGCC_MAN]

If Cathay Pacific decides to increase capacity on HKG-MAN, they have the option of reintroducing the larger B77W into the mix before increasing frequency beyond daily. This would add approximately 60 seats per flight or 420 return seats per week if they chose to do so. The B77W remains a popular choice on Cathay's European routes, so deploying this type would be a logical next step in raising capacity. Despite the kudos which a newly-delivered type brings from a PR perspective the B77W remains a great option for long-haul. Super cargo uplift capability as well as a high-capacity cabin. A very under-appreciated aircraft IMO.

 

[User001]

Well, a week since the GDS change, and both CX216/219 and CX357/358 remain bookable.

While its clearly a flight number change, I don't buy the excuse that it's to do with safety and conflicting with CX257/258. I would hope the highly trained and large aptitude ATCO's can differentiate between a 2 and a 3, there are lots and lots of similar flight numbers around the world that survive quite happily. As a MAN example, we have EK21/22 and EY21/22 which no doubt cross each other somewhere over Europe on a daily basis.

It also doesn't explain why they went for CX216/219 rather than CX216/217 or CX218/219 to correspond. To me it does seem they have left a gap to add in a 2nd daily at some point. As said, not a full 14 weekly to begin with, but either 9 or 10 weekly, possibly Mon/Sat 2 daily as they tend to be the stronger booking days.

 

[David_itl]

They could easily amend callsign to alphanumeric if it really was an ATC issue (and surely this would have been known about since December 2014). After all Etihad have gone down that route for their services.

 

[Dobbo]

As noted, CX could introduce the B77W as a first step. However, I don't know how practical this would be on 2/3 of the weekly rotations? Perhaps the A35K when that is in the CX fleet?

To me, CX aiming for double daily would be a massive vote of confidence. Even a 10/11 weekly would be a phenomenal level of growth when you consider the service did not exist in November 2014 (less than 3 years ago).

 

[rutamkrd]

I suspect it won't be double daily any time soon however they may be planning a split scheduled of some days a lunch time departure and some days an evening departure using the missing flight numbers.

 

[Chilly Dog]

Whilst I am reliably assured that MAN is not getting more than daily service in the coming Winter schedule, CX's antics in the GDS do raise some doubt....

Arguments against:
- only one daily flight loaded inbound HKG-MAN
- only LHR and CDG are more than daily ex EU
- common sense

Arguments for:
- GDS shows 2 x flights MAN-HKG roughly Dec to Mar (and has now for several weeks)
- encouraging load factors
- swift move from 4 weekly to daily
- odd non-sequential flight numbers

Previously, CX showed both flights MAN-HKG, but CX216 (the "new" flight) was zero'd out - i.e. it wasn't bookable.

But now, as of today, both flights are bookable again.

01FEB18-28FEB18 MTWTFSS MANCHESTER /HONG KONG
02FEB 25FEB 1234567 MAN HKG 1130# 0705 CX 216 359*C
26FEB 1.34567 MAN HKG 1130# 0705 CX 216 359*C
..3...7 MAN HKG 1155# 0730 CX 358 359*C
28FEB 1..456. MAN HKG 1155# 0730 CX 358 359*C
02FEB 26FEB 12.456. MAN HKG 1155# 0730 CX 358 359*C

1 MAN HKG 1130#0705 CX 216 J9 C9 D9 I8 W9 R9 E5 Y9 B9 H9 359 C*E
«B» K9 M9 L9 V9 S9 N9 Q9 O5
2 MAN HKG 1155#0730 CX 358 J9 C9 D9 I9 W9 R9 E9 Y9 B9 H9 359 C*E
«B» K9 M9 L9 V9 S9 N9 Q9 O9

Discuss.... ; )

 

[User001]

It is a bit bizzare how the CX358 hasn't been taken off sale.

Also, CX are usually quite good in implementing changes for the whole booking cutoff, which is currently August 2018. Therefore it's a bit odd that it currently reverts back to CX357/358 in March, and not keeping the CX216/219 Ag this time.

 

[Scottie Dog]

As User001 has said this is very unusual. Many thanks Chilly Dog for raising the fact that both flights are again on sale. We still have a long time to go until the Summer 2018 slot allocations are released - last year it was the last week of November if I remember correctly.

 

[Aceshigh]

Could they be shifting the LGW aircraft up here ?