Aussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1162 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3124 times:
As of March,
QF will have the following schedule to USA
SYD-LAX -18 services per week (up from 17)
SYD-HNL - 3 services per week (unchanged)
MEL-LAX - 7 services per week (unchanged)
AKL-LAX - 12 services per week (up from 10)
Well it was about time this has happened, QF is now at it's highest service frequency to the USA than ever before. However I was quite surprised no announcement of a DFW service or a BNE non stop service - despite them increasing their AKL frequency by 20%.
MoPac From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 215 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2452 times:
But are they ever gonna return to YVR or YYZ?
Ha! The nerve of some people!
Just what exactly has Canada been doing all this time? Let me guess... Not finding a "Lil' Sheriff in the Pacific". Well, that's just tough. OZ is ours fair and square. Canadians are just gonna have to take a connection, and it serves them right IMO.
I'm kidding... Sorry... I had to purge... The Eagles are losing
B727-200 From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1051 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2454 times:
I still think it will be a while before a carrier sets up BNE-LAX or BNE-SFO non-stop. The current carriers (QF and UA, with a little influence from NZ) rely on the business and first class passenger to generate the margin. This type of passenger would be hard to find on a BNE sector.
Having said this, longer ranged aircraft may provide the vehicle in the future to commence these sectors, which I will explane.
I would think a two-class configuration with only a smallish business class section is required on BNE-Westcoast USA. Less business and more economy equals more passengers. Lower business class content means the requirement for higher economy class load factors to cover margins. All this equals more passengers per service, which means more weight, and subsequently reduced range or payload per service (especially the westbound sector).
Furthermore, you would need a subfleet to operate this type of service (eg. long range in a two-class config - most airlines would configure long range aircraft in three classes).
Flyinghighboy From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 748 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2170 times:
"Auckland at least 4 including United and ANZ."
I thought UA doesn't fly to AA), New Zealand">AKL anymore??
"But are they ever gonna return to YVR or YYZ?"
I doubt in the near future, will they have the aircraft on hand to do this especially with the added frequency to the US but it would be great for QF to go back to Canada. I think their codeshare flights are suited for them for the time being.
"Any increase in flights to JFK? (as QFA108 passes over my house)"
None so far, I hope they do and bring it to daily (they did fly them daily at one stage?) For student flights to JFK with QF you have to catch the QF108, the AA codeshare brings up the price a fair bit. Well that is the quote I was give with STA.
"In the next five years, will Qantas ever consider a SYD-DEN or MEL-DEN?"
I think they'd try to pull their ORD flight off before even considering that. I doubt there is a market for Australia to DEN. UA may consider this so pax can avoid LAX.
Aussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1162 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2109 times:
The continuation to NYC services of QF 107/108 will be unchanged at 3 services per week (Friday, Sunday, Wednesday).
The ORD services I think have quietly been dropped, I think as they are not in any res system for all of 2004.
Good idea on the BNE services, I guess we may see a 2 class service using the new sleeper bed, when they start coming online in 2005. I think this route will be on a lets wait and see approach. Qantas were cautious about MEL to LAX and it is now doing very well.
QANTASpower From Australia, joined Aug 2002, 516 posts, RR: 7 Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2034 times:
I guess the reason why MEL to LAX is going well for Qantas is because United pulled out which halved the capacity. It seems to operate at very high loads in all 3 classes pretty much all year round ... then again all the US flights do.
Flyinghighboy From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 748 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1992 times:
What would be good is to see UA come back and just do a daily MEL-LAX flight and scrap the MEL-SYD they have.
If they have enough aircraft to do this as it would be a daily flight as well. it would reqire about 2 or 3? 744's.
UA isn't in a position to exapand too much, especially if it won't make money for them, even in the long term it makes money but in the short term it doesn, they can't afford that.