Rumors over the past month have said Qantas wants to serve DFW nonstop fron SYD by 2005; this will provide better connections to their OneWorld partners. I'm skeptical (a) of the market for this flight and (b) whether a 744 can travel this distance. Any input?

I thought one of the intended 744ER routes was SYD-Auckland-DFW to feed the AA hub. Has this been canned now?

My question is, why do they still have Qantas logos and signage on the building of Terminal B if there is currently no Qantas operated flights to/from Dallas? Is this just a temporary placeholder or were there flights in the past to or from Terminal B?

Johnny, did you see the Qantas logo at DFW recently? I've never seen a Qantas logo there but that doesn't mean it's not there. I rarely go to terminal B (I usually fly American internationally).

I've talked to a gazillion people about this and the airport was evidently in negotiations with Qantas for a flight from AA), New Zealand">AKL-DFW with I think a 744. I think that AA), New Zealand">AKL-DFW distance is almost pushing it so SYD-DFW would not really work with a 744. That's what I heard, atleast. If they got a 772NG they could do it. As far as the market goes, I would think there are some business pax opportunities and a crapload of connections via AA. Enough to support maybe 3-4x weekly maybe..? I dunno.

These talks were suspended months ago and I haven't heard anything with any validity to it ever since. There's no way they'll do it before the new terminal comes about. I don't think there's even really room for a 744 in terminal B. Even if there is room, they'd have to time it right to where the QF 744 wouldn't be there around 2-4pm on any day, when the LH A343 and BA 772 are taking up all that space.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE for QF to come to DFW a.s.a.p., but it might be a while.

God I wish they would come. But they chose ORD over DFW. Maybe when terminal F (Int Terminal) opens we will get them.

Qantas typically has signage posted in airports to which it has a major codeshare service with American Airlines. There has been a Qantas sign hanging in Boston for years at the American Airlines ticket counter. I think there is supposed to be a designated line for QF codeshare check-in, but I doubt that's really the case.

I'd be very surprised if Qantas opened a service to Dallas, but Qantas signage may continue to advertise their codeshare service.

Incidentally, I believe that Air New Zealand actually served Dallas at one time, as did Thai.

As did Northwest Orient, Mexicana... the list goes on.

So QF chose ORD over DFW? That's an even longer haul, isn't it?

Also, Air New Zealand and Thai did serve DFW at one time, but I think these airlines stopped at LAX before heading over the Pacific. Can anyone confirm?

And I think AA61hvy is right -- QF would definitely come after the completion of Terminal D (which will be a premier international gateway, in my opinion).

They stopped at SFO or LAX before comming to DFW.. but none the less.

AA61hvy- just to give you a little update, our new international terminal will be international terminal D, not F. Terminal F was to be a new domestic terminal, but I think the project, though the bal was already rolling, has been put on hold indefinitely, what with AA transforming to their new 'rolling hub' strategy. And, with Conti consolidating with NW and DL in E (yuck- I hate terminal E) There should be no shortage of gates. PARTICULARLY when we take into account that domestic flights will also be operated out of the new international terminal D.

In response to this post, SYD-DFW would be no sweat for the 747-4ER. That was one of the design goals for Qantas.

Hope they come on out here!

R

SYD-DFW would be pushing it for even the 744ER... they weight restrict SYD-LAX on the 744 and the ER only has a 500 nm range boost.

They were going to fly AKL-DFW, but decided on SYD-LAX-ORD instead. They then discarded plans for that too.

N

Inspite of the generally accepted word that Qantas picked ORD over DFW, I just heard from a friend working at DFW that he was hearing rumors of Qantas still coming ... to the extent of them even looking to hire people at DFW. I guess time will tell.

SYD-DFW would be no sweat for the 747-4ER.

Actually, it'd be far more than a sweat... in fact, it'd require severe payload restriction to even operate (let alone operate profitably!)

Ssides,

The route will be SYD-LAX-ORD.

ORD is the better hub for them to fly to since AA's ops are a bit larger here. AA doesn't have as many routes out of DFW than they have out of ORD.

That does make sense, Telekberry -- I also think AA has some opportunities at ORD with UA in its troubles. I don't think there's any question that ORD's business market would be better for QF than DFW -- although I do believe that DFW is still on the move.

All --

The QF signage at DFW Terminal B was there since AA opened up operations there about 3-1/2 years ago. QF has codeshare service on select AA operated flights between DFW-LAX. QF used to have a separate check-in counter, staffed by AA agents, but with a QF rep there to ensure that the customers had all the correct tags (premium pax tags, transfer tags for conx within Australia, etc.) on the checked baggage. The QF rep also would ensure that the premium pax received their pass to the QF lounge in LAX, as well as all int'l docs were correct before boarding. It was a very cool operation. Alas, financial hardships at QF forced them to take the QF reps out of DFW about 2(?) years ago. The QF signage has been moved over to Terminal A since AA saw fit to give Term B gates to Eagle for their RJ operation last winter.

Ssides, just wondering where you got your info that AA has a larger operation at ORD than at DFW? At last count, there are still more AA flights (and I believe Eagle flights, also) at DFW than at ORD. The only advantage that ORD has over DFW is more departures to Europe than from DFW. However, DFW has the Latin/South American flights that ORD does not.


-J

Actually, I think Tekelberry said that ORD's AA operation was larger than DFW. I actually think you are correct; I've always been told that DFW is AA's largest hub.

Actually, it could be that AA and AA Eagle's combined operations at DFW are largest; just counting AA's, ORD may be larger.

ORD is the better hub for them to fly to since AA's ops are a bit larger here

In your sweetest dreams maybe  

AA's operations at DFW are considerably larger than their ops at ORD

A SYD-DFW flight, operated by AA or QF has been rumored for many years....it was said that the route would be opened just as soon as there was an aircraft that could operate the route in both directions, on a year round basis, without any serious capacity restrictions. Most discussions (rumors) centered around AA operating the flight with an ultra-long range version of the 777 (either the 777LR or the once proposed 771).......at a certain point, the focus changed and the SYD-DFW route would be operated by QF, it was said that the 747-400ER would operate the service, but with a stop in Auckland in both directions. According to what I have heard (and it is all rumor and discussion), QF determined that the AA), New Zealand">AKL stopover would add very few pax and the stopover would take the "glamour and appeal" out of the flight as the total travel time between DFW and SYD would improve very little over the existing DFW-LAX/LAX-SYD routing and one-stop service to Australia from a multitude of smaller central, southern and east coast cities via DFW would still not be available, thus, QF dropped the DFW plan and decided on contiuing service into ORD, where there is more O&D traffic...especially after their JFK sevice (via LAX) was a surprising success.

A bold prediction (yes, I'm a native Texan so that's where this comes from): Assuming available aircraft, QF will serve both DFW and IAH nonstop from SYD by 2015.

In your sweetest dreams maybe

AA's operations at DFW are considerably larger than their ops at ORD

Bah...I'm wrong again.

It could be that they chose ORD to drive people away from UA and encourage them to fly AA/QF since AA (codeshare) and UA are the only airlines flying to Australia/New Zealand. It would be a direct flight without transfering at LAX or SFO while with UA you would probably have to transfer.

[Edited 2003-07-24 00:30:55]

Fact is, AA (along with American Eagle) serve more destinations via ORD than they do via DFW.

Really... and when did this occur?

I'm currently looking at AA's last printed schedule, and unless ORD has made up some serious ground in the last year and three months..... I doubt it serves more destinations than DFW.

DFW would be an outstanding destination for QF, well-located for connecting pax (and allowing them to bypass the sh*thole of clearing customs at LAX). Also better than ORD from the perspective of weather and its impact on schedules.

Butting heads directky with UAL at ORD? Makes no sense (and UAL's in it for the long haul).

QF would be wise to do it, equipment willing. Lewt's hope that they do.

I believe now that Qantas shares T4 with AA, passengers don't have to use the international terminal's crappy customs area, but I could be mistaken....

Right on, Sccutler ... I've cleared customs at ATL, ORD, IAH, IAD, LAX and MIA, and none of them come close to DFW's customs facilities. It's huge and ready to accomodate thousands of people at one time. I have no doubt that the consolidated facility in Terminal D will be even better.

I dont' remember the numbers exactly but when STL gets cut in half DFW will have something like 170-80 more AA flights per day than ORD.

I still say a nonstop flight to DFW would be a great spot to further QF's US operations sometime in the future. Right now every single flight goes through LAX which, evidently is so congested and inefficient for connections that it makes it a whipping to connect through there. But, it's got the monopoly right now. 30 flights per week with QF? Wow.

Now JR (or should I call you Mr. Ewing?), who is this friend that continues to hear about Qantas coming to DFW? Does he hear that on the job or DID he hear that months and months ago when the project was still in the mix? Or, does he listen to us greedy little DFW fanatics that want really badly for QF to bring a 744 into our hometown airport build up the idea so much that he thinks it's true now? That's entirely possible. However, I do know that Qantas was running an ad in the Dallas Morning News Classifieds for a Sales/Marketing Rep. (or something like that) for Qantas. Now why would Dallas have or need a Qantas sales rep.? This was early on in the year but still, it was in black and white.

Butting heads directky with UAL at ORD? Makes no sense (and UAL's in it for the long haul).

It wouldn't be QF directly, the competition would be between UA and AA's codeshare. I don't see how competition makes no sense. But for a lot of the country, connecting through ORD for Australia can be a lot more convenient than flying all the way down south to DFW.

Qantas also had their own check-in at SFO up until 2001 I think. It was great, the AA check-in line would be huge with no wait at the QF counter.

As for the customs facility in T4 at LAX, I actually preferred customs at TBIT. It was quicker with less of a walk, now you get off the plane and go traipsing all thru corridors to finally get to a smaller facility. (And am I just blind, or are there no restrooms between the gate and after customs, I was absolutely dying to go when I got off my flight and had to hold it all thru customs and baggage claim)

I have exhaustively studied Boeing's range charts and come to this conclusion: if QF were to operate this route (which seems a few years away, at best) with a 744 ER, it would probably be routed through AKL. I don't think even the ER model of a 744 could make SYD-DFW non-stop.

However, the new 777 LR probably could make it. Has QF ordered any of these? Sorry, I'm not up to date on their recent dealings with Boeing.

However, the new 777 LR probably could make it. Has QF ordered any of these? Sorry, I'm not up to date on their recent dealings with Boeing.

QF is currently the only one of the "Working Together" airlines which has yet to order the 777.

The 772LR can reach all of QF's N. American destinations except JFK nonstop yearround. They have, for now however, chosen to use the A388 to hub all of their N. American operations via LAX rather than fly nonstop.

My personal belief is that it's only a matter of time until QF takes an interest in nonstop ultralonghauls again however.

Chicago is a much better destination than DFW. DFW only works for certain onward connections (ie to Miami and the Carribean), whereas Chicago is the third biggest city in the US, tonnes of O&D. Almost none at DFW.

And whoever said, Houston...well, I would expect to see QF at Miami or Seattle before Houston.

Back in the late 80's Thai Airways flew Tokyo/Seattle/Dallas. I took that flight and I can tell you the Seattle/Dallas leg was the emptiest 747 I've ever seen in my life. I was in business class and I'm not exaggerating when I say the flight attendants outnumbered the passengers.

Chicago is the third biggest city in the US, tonnes of O&D. Almost none at DFW

I guess that's why DFW is the 8th largest O&D airport in the world's busiest aviation market... right?  

Preach on, ConcordeBoy. DFW's O&D is growing like crazy; only 35% four years ago; today it's about 60-65%. Given the numbers here, one can no longer say that DFW is merely a connections airport.

As for Houston, the international business traffic in and out of IAH might surprise the average visitor. However, Houston has been long considered the second-best international business market in the country, outside of New York. I know this surprises some people, but Houston is a very international city. Virtually every major international oil company has its US HQ in Houston; it's provided for a variety of international carriers at IAH.

Nevertheless, it will be a while -- and maybe never -- before an airline like QF comes to either. Obviously, the real contest is between DFW and ORD due to AA's presence. IAH will probably never see QF service, unless QF suddenly decided to team with CO. ORD's business community may be a bit more developed, but with a larger number of AA operations at DFW, QF may decide it wants to come to Texas.

unless QF suddenly decided to team with CO

Technically... they already are partners... just not in the same alliance nor do they codeshare  

ConcordeBoy,

The 772LR can reach all of QF's N. American destinations except JFK nonstop yearround. They have, for now however, chosen to use the A388 to hub all of their N. American operations via LAX rather than fly nonstop.

The A380 Long Range that Airbus has announced will come out after the A380F could also fly the distance.

Qantas may buy a few of those since they will already operate the A380 by then.

Only speculation.

Air New Zealand operated their DFW services via Papeete, the aircraft then continued on to London Gatwick. It was stated at the time of their order for the dash 400 that the aircraft was needed for direct AKL DFW services. Services were however discontinued. Wonder how accurate press reports were if you say that the 400ER would be payload restricted on this service, as the earlier -400's would have been operating under quite a payload penalty then.

They aren't flying to ORD at all. The planned flight to ORD was going to be multiplexxed to provide a through flight number from SYD to ORD.

But my point is that they are not flying to ORD at all, yet the post I referenced says that they are.


MEL-LAX-ORD was to start on 31Mar03, it was then pushed back to mid-summer (15 July, I think). You are right that the service once again has been postponed, indefinitley it seems, but it's not the easiest thing ni the world to keep track with every little schedule change.

LOL! Great post Dave. This 32 year old would be all in favor of banning everyone under 18.

Or we could just keep talking about the subject at hand and if someone posts something wrong like before, just say "QF doesn't fly to ORD" instead of getting bent out of shape and ranting about it.

I will agree that there is little seemingly credible info. on a topic like this. Anyone really know anything about this route and whether or not it will really happen?

Brons2 and Bartond, my post was deleted by the censors - so much for that much vaunted Merkin right to free speech. Seems like it is a case of "If you don't agree with what someone is saying, delete what they said".

The fact remains that this site is almost universally regarded amongst those who frequent a number of boards - and I frequent nine of them - as being less than credible, due to the huge amount of inane drivel posted here. It is good for photos and news items, but the forums are practically useless as a source of information, since there are so many children posting pretending they are CEO's of major airlines, and have access to all the information (Singapore_Air is a good example of this).

Oh well, those who run Airliners have allowed the site to degenerate to a state where those with real info choose to go elsewhere. So be it, and it is one of the reasons why I chose not to renew my First Class membership - they have let it run down so much that it simply isn't worth it.

Dave

"LOL! Great post Dave. This 32 year old would be all in favor of banning everyone under 18."

Ok, i am a paying member who is 17, try not to go into areas i dont have much knowledge on, and absorb knowledge from more experienced users. I wouldnt call me a me a complete waste of time, i have flown around 60 times in my life, gone on long international trips, and always keep updated on news and the world around me. Saying eveyone under 18 is a complete and idiotic prejudice. I admit there are those who are annoying etc etc, but everyone under 18 is nothing more than a sterotype, and i dont appreciate it.

Thadocta- watch your step on the way out, then

JpetekYXMD80, I was not commenting on the ages of the posters, I was commenting on those who like to pretend that they are in positions of power within a carrier when they clearly have absolutely no idea what is going on. Such posters are generally children who are trying to bignote themselves, I have not passed a single bad word about younger posters.

I used to work for Qantas, I have qualified as a Gold FF the last two years since I left them for my new job, so I both use Qantas services regularly (so can appreciate the passengers viewpoint) whilst still having some contacts within QF who are willing to part with info. I am therefore in a unique position to know what is going on inside Qantas.

The basic thoughts behind my post which has been deleted by the censors (Hitler and Stalin would have loved them) was that there is so much inaccurate drivel posted on this board that the forums are regarded as nothing more than nuisance value. I tend to agree with this. A perfect example of this was someone who posts often about Qantas asking "Has Qantas ordered A380's?", something that anyone with even a scintilla of knowledge about Qantas would already know the answer to.

So I prefer to get my information elsewhere. I pop in here and try to correct some of the DISinformation which is posted, but it isn't always possible because there is so much of it (DISinformation, tha is).

Dave

Part posted by THADOCTA then deleted.
This thread is yet ANOTHER example of why Airliners.Net is universally recognised as a place to avoid - the number of complete and total inaccuracies in this thread alone is astounding.

"Qantas is flying MEL-LAX-ORD, not from SYD."

If it makes you happy I deleted the poster who said that Qantas were flying to ORD, it is better to suggest deletion of a post with incorrect information instead of typing a reply saying that this site should be avoided.

If a user is posting inaccuracies then use the suggest deletion button and we can look into it.

From Rule 3. Do not post a message on how you find a topic or user irrelevant, boring, childish or stupid. We don't just make up the rules as we go along the moderating team spent a fair bit of time on them to hopefully make things run more smoothly.

Okay everyone knows what to do now so let's get back on this subject.

I live in Dallas and love my hometown airport (DFW) and I hope that Qantas will start service here someday. If anyone can find out any good information on this route from a knowledeable source it would be much appreciated. I haven't heard any rumblings in the past few weeks about this topic but if anyone knows of anything going on, let's hear it.

I'd certainly like to see QF at my hometown field of DFW (although I'm moving back up to Chicago later this month, so either way I win... nyuk nyuk nyuk.) Hopefully the opening of the International Terminal D will attract some new international service to the airport, as well as lure back Japan Airlines and Air France.

At last - those of in middle America will be able to get Qantas timetables! Used to be I had to wait for the occasional trip to LAX, SFO or HNL. Hopefully they'll have them when the ORD service starts.

This is a hot topic, stirring QF at the moment.

QF will eventually fly SYD-DFW non stop but not at the current range even with the 747-400ER .The payload would still be restricted for the return journey. I think QF will wait until 2006/07 until QF gets its A380-800.

Qantas is gearing some its A380's for only 500 passengers less than the 550 seats Airbus say would suite a 3 class cabin.

Mind you there is nothing stopping QF from doing a SYD-DFW-LAX-SYD at the moment. QF does already have the traffic rights for SYD-DFW non stop anyway.

QF is already the largest non US carrier already operating into LAX, handles over 3500 passengers own it own planes plus the various codeshares with AA

While I'd love to see a QF A380 at DFW, I have significant questions about the market justifying that large of a plane. I think you'd need tons of connecting traffic on the codeshare. DFW is a large, growing market, but it's not LA, NY or Chicago.