Why CX does not fly Polar Route for HKG-YYZ?

[CathayPacific]

Does anyone know why Cathay does not use the Polar Routes for its HKG-YYZ service and instead opt for the traditional (and more time and fuel consuming for westbound flights) North Pacific Routings with tech stop at YVR?

A340-300 is capable of flying the Polar Routes and CX had demonstrated it a few years ago by flying a YYZ > HKG flight non-stop with A343. But after the route proving flight, CX did not proceed to make the schedule service non-stop.

Are there anyone here from CX? Colin Parker, would you know anything about this?

[Myblock]

Probably because it's more useful to give passengers in YVR the oppurtunity of these airplanes. Maybe they even get some YVR-YYZ business out of them. It could be they can't fill up a plane with strictly YYZ-HKG passengers so they stop in YVR for a full plane.

[CathayPacific]

MyBlock:

YVR is strictly a tech stop on CX's YYZ-HKG run. No passengers or cargo are taken onto the flight in YVR for both direction.

Actually the YYZ-HKG flights are nearly always full, even in low seasons like April or May.

[philb]

Don't know for sure but I can make an educated guess.

INS and direct routings over China and parts of Russia are subject to a number of governing parameters which include bilateral overflight agreements, availablity of radar cover and control facilities, availability of suitable diversionary airfields (not because of any restriction as per an ETOPS twin, more in terms of a "comfort" factor) and, most importantly, cost.

En route charges across Russia are expensive, moreso off designated airways and the saving in fuel probably doesn't cover the cost of the charges as the difference in great circle distance between the two routes is only around 670 miles.

Also, no doubt, Cathay has some deal on landing charges with YVR.