China Airlines to fly Airbus A350 on Sydney-Taipei route

Not only looks good but clearly among the best PY design out there today.  It also has the most spacious PY specs of all 350 operators(only LH matches CI) being significantly more generous than even SQ and CX.

As stated in the article, TPE-SYD/BNE total wkly capacity by CI increase fm 11 wkly to 21 wkly as below:

TPE-SYD - Current=7w, Dec17=14w

TPE-BNE - Current=4w, Dec17=7w

I suspect CI is positioning itself as a high quality, value for money alternative somewhere between where CX and CZ currently sit on both Europe and more importantly Asia where CI/AE have comparable footprint now to CX/KA in terms of destinations in China, as well as Japan and Korea in second tier cities which is superior in coverage to CX/KA and doesn't require backtracking as can be the case with KE/OZ.

MEL-CHC definitely has been a seasonal service on CI system timetable for yrs.

I know that but on CI timetable it is not showing the additional changes (BNE daily, SYD double daily A350 and SYD-AKL) past 25 March 2018.

But does not preclude revision to CI timetable later on this yr...especially when the article reported all the changes won't happen until 7mths fm now during the traditional peak travel period(i.e. easy to fill extra seats even when those  inventories won't show up on CI sales channels until a few mths fm now). 

It's not uncommon for airlines to announce future frequency/equipment changes well ahead of actually tweaking/updating their IT systems/websites to reflect on their booking timetables(e.g. QF announced PER-LHR frequency mths before website/timetable was updated to reflect its availability for sale).

I'm not surprised @ all considering:

1. TPE-SYD is likely a larger biz/premium mkt than TPE-BNE.

2. N.E.Asia-TPE-SYD is clearly a larger biz/premium mkt than N.E.Asia-TPE-BNE......think CI routes like Wuhan/Qingdao/Nagoya-TPE-SYD where there're little to no nonstop alternative for biz travelers.

3. In CI fleet, 359 has a more appropriate J/PY product to capture biz/premium demand than their 333(No PY).

4. TPE-SYD is also likely a larger cargo mkt than TPE-BNE.

5. 359 can easily carry a full belly cargo load+full pax while 333 cannot on TPE-SYD.

"..we have a larger Taiwanese population here."

No doubt about that.  However, I doubt such population size @ BNE is 2x larger than SYD.  On the other hand, BNE-TPE mkt does hv 2x more competitor than SYD-TPE mkt.....

"CI is the only airline servicing SYD-TPE so they have the monopoly.."

And dictating the fare level in SYD-TPE.

"compare to BNE where BR also servicing the route."

And CI cannot dictate fare level in that mkt due to BR.

" By coming to BNE first they will have the advantage of offering a more superior product than BR."

True, but will that advantage translates into higher avg fare earning for CI than for BR @ BNE-TPE where CI cannot dictate fare level?  Some pax will possibly pay more for CI's superiority but others will chase the lower fare @ BR especially in Y class....not the case in SYD-TPE where all pax hv no alternative.  This is critical because CI's 350 product is far newer & clearly cost more to provide than BR regardless of which route to deploy.

I'm not saying CI will never deploy 350 on TPE-BNE but per normal econ logic, CI will prioritize expensive brand new 350 asset for 1 route where CI will hv a better chance to accurately predict Rev$ than for another route where CI hv to consider BR fare movements.

"CI still intends to service AKL and CHC as there is a decent market for passengers wanting to fly to Taiwan."

There is for traveling between AKL and Taiwan but it doesn't mean BNE/SYD-AKL by CI must continue.  Canceling AKL-BNE/SYD-TPE in exchange for AKL-TPE nonstop sounds like a more attractive option for those pax and consolidating those traffic currently splitted across AKL-BNE and AKL-SYD into a single AKL-TPE route seems like a sustainable scale to initially support perhaps 4x wkly.  In addition, it opens up 1-stop routings via TPE between AKL and the entire N.E.Asian CI network covering so many Tier2 cities across Japan and China....AKL-TPE nonstop won't be only about pax wanting to fly between Taiwan and NZ.

I always believe CI want to do AKL-TPE because tags/5th freedom ops are costly(e.g. tie-up aircraft asset for too long for a given distance)+very low yield(bi-laterally restricted uncompetitive frequency....that's why we see amazing CI fare on Trans-Tasman).  They couldn't do it for yrs because for that mkt size, their 744/77W hv far too many seats, 343 fuel burn would kill them(Now all gone fm CI fleet) and 333 simply do not hv such range capability.  359 @ CI addresses all those legacy issues re AKL-TPE nonstop.

CHC-Taiwan on the other hand will always stay as a tag fm AU  because of its leisure traffic-heavy nature.

"CI realises the A330 is no longer sufficient when the competition is offering far superior products."

Perhaps on a few other CI routes but clearly not TPE-BNE where their only competitor offers practically the same product std fm nose to tail and on exactly the same aircraft type....I'm surprised your "close contacts in Taiwan who are in the know" are unaware of this.

Seems we are both on the same page. There are many very Sydney/Melbourne centric people here. Chinese wont fly to Taipei due to restrictions if the try to fly cross straight. So the main destination is Taiwan itself. CI probably has a better position on the market share at the moment, but that could easily come down due to BR's recent interest in expanding in Australia.

I do know this flight as i take it 5/6times per year.

Just to add on what Kao said, this thread makes it sound like BR will bring their B777 by the end of 2018 to BNE. CI has to go A350 by early /mid 2018 to head this threat off and maintain the avantage...

https://www.executivetraveller.com/community/view/13/5813/eva-air-to-brisbane

@tris06:

Yes, of course.  BR fleet planning is based on what some folks here said they should do....interesting way to conduct corp strategic planning.

Not sure if U're aware that 2yrs ago, BR ordered+leased 787 x24 with the 1st frame joining BR fleet fm mid-2018.....must be a new idea for U that besides the 333, 77W won't be BR's only option for TPE-BNE.

"CI has to go A350 by early /mid 2018 to head this threat off."

Assuming your prediction re BR swapping 333 for 77W on TPE-BNE <<by the end of 2018>> is correct, why CI need to deploy 359 on the same route 9-12mths earlier than BR's swap?

Are U aware that CI fleet won't hv a lot of 359s to play with for the nex 18mths mainly due to Airbus production delay(Affecting all 350 customers) and there're plenty of CI intercon routes(i.e. not TPE-BNE) where the 359 is the only CI machine with less than 310seats(i.e. not 77W/744) AND sufficient payload/range(i.e. not 333) to cover them?

A bit earlier U claimed A here:

"Eva has the advantage by having a 5 star....and a better safety...."

And now U claimed B here:

"CI probably has a better position on the market share..."

Pls make up your mind about which 1 U think is ahead in the TPE-BNE mkt.  U can't hv it both ways.

Why not just fly non-stop? CA, CZ and MU fly nonstop to AKL from Mainland China.

"Taiwan being just 24 million will really struggle with loads putting an A350 direct to AKL."

That's because U think CI can source traffic only fm connections with mainland China and Taiwan itself to support TPE-AKL.

Combined total population for metro Tokyo+Seoul alone is already beyond 63 million(i.e. 2.5x larger than the entire  Taiwanese population) and CI already link them with TPE hub 5x daily.

"Why not just fly non-stop?"

I believe either CI or BR eventually will.  Unlike TPE-BNE, 359 is the only econ-viable type in CI fleet for TPE-AKL(789 or 78J in BR's case).

Contrary to the belief of some folks here, TPE-AKL will not only be about Taiwanese community in AKL area.  It'll also be about 6th freedom traffic fm 2 geog sources flying to AKL via TPE:

1.  CI currently link 13 cities in Japan+Korea @ least daily(7 cities hv 2x daily or more) with TPE hub...all can potentially feed TPE-AKL.  To fill 50% seats on a 359 heading to AKL, CI only need an avg of 12pax fm each of those cities.  In contrast, only 2 nonstop routes exist between New Zealand and Japan/Korea operated by NZ and KE respectively.

2.  Europe to AKL 1-stop via TPE hub.  Routing will be among the shortest(Certainly shorter than flying via Gulf or S.E.Asia hubs) while avoiding the terminally congested Mainland Chinese hubs.  In addition to the current TPE-FRA, CI already planned to add more European cities nonstop to TPE.

"CA, CZ and MU fly nonstop to AKL from Mainland China."

And U'll noticed that all 3 fly AKL only fm their largest hubs and that's precisely the biggest problem for them to attract any significant volume of 6th freedom traffic for AKL unlike CI @ TPE:  PEK and PVG(CAN is slightly better) are infamous for flight delays and missed int'l-to-int'l connections there are rampant.  Artificially, domestic-to-AKL connections @ these hubs are more secure as domestic frequencies are far greater and therefore possible for domestic pax to comply with extremely long MCT(Min Connection Time) mandated by CA /CZ /MU.

As a result, all 3 will continue to rely almost exclusively on China-outbound demand to sustain their AKL routes.

You will get the Express Departure card at the check-in counter when heading to Taiwan and to arrive in Australia(MEL, BNE or SYD), flight attendant will issue Express Arrival Card after the plane takes off.