Daddy1 From Australia, joined Apr 2000, 57 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4191 times:
If SQ gets the go ahead to fly from Australia to the west coast of America, will Sydney be the hub they fly from, or maybe they will think different and take on say the mel - lax route...a penny for your thoughts please.daddy1
SunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3953 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3921 times:
Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 2): According to what I read in The Australian, IF they approve it, they will get BNE-LAX and MEL-LAX first, with SYD-LAX to come much later.
What equipment would they use MEL-LAX ? Westbound, the -300ER would probably give them the best percentage of max payload .
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3912 times:
Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 3): What equipment would they use MEL-LAX ? Westbound, the -300ER would probably give them the best percentage of max payload .
The -300ER would be fine for the route. It has plenty of range and more capacity than anything else in their fleet that would not have to take weight restrictions (with a 744, they would get killed on CASM by the QF 744ERs and A380s). Then again, if the A380 does meet range targets, they could use that as well
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 7707 posts, RR: 55 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3899 times:
No way are SQ (or anyone else) flying A380s from MEL or BNE to LAX. For one thing the flight there are back is so bloody long, 35 hours including ground time at the destination. You could do two SIN-SYD or SIN-NRTs in the same time frame. And the loads aren't even close to being there. 777 is the ticket. Although I didn't think SQ had much experience with long range twins, all their long flights (Europe, N America) are 747-400s. I thought the 777s were for SIN to Penang, Manila, Ho Chi Minh?
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3889 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 5): Although I didn't think SQ had much experience with long range twins, all their long flights (Europe, N America) are 747-400s. I thought the 777s were for SIN to Penang, Manila, Ho Chi Minh?
Not true at all. SIN-TPE-LAX has been a 772ER for quite a while now. Also, when SQ had 2 A345s in MX, they were running the SIN-LAX flights non-stop with the 772ER and stopping on the way back
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3833 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 5): Although I didn't think SQ had much experience with long range twins, all their long flights (Europe, N America) are 747-400s. I thought the 777s were for SIN to Penang, Manila, Ho Chi Minh?
nopes.....SQ flight#16 (earlier flight) flies SIN-ICN-SFO on a 777-200ER....
Tsentsan From Singapore, joined Jan 2002, 2016 posts, RR: 16 Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3821 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 5): Although I didn't think SQ had much experience with long range twins, all their long flights (Europe, N America) are 747-400s. I thought the 777s were for SIN to Penang, Manila, Ho Chi Minh?
In addition, SIA operates the B777 to some European cities Manchester, Athens, Copenhagen and Amsterdam, and soon to Moscow.
Other long range SIA 777 flights around the world include TPE-LAX as mentioned by N1120A and SIN-CHC. I believe the previously operated SIN-AMS-ORD and SIN-HKG-LAS routes were also long ranged.
Planemanofnz From New Zealand, joined Sep 2005, 1653 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3820 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 5): Although I didn't think SQ had much experience with long range twins, all their long flights (Europe, N America) are 747-400s. I thought the 777s were for SIN to Penang, Manila, Ho Chi Minh?
SIN-AMS
SIN-CPH
SIN-Rome
SIN-AKL
SIN-CHC
SIN-MAN
SIN-CPT
Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver all get 777's aswell.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3780 times:
Quoting Planemanofnz (Reply 9): Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver all get 777's aswell.
SFO and YVR do, but for the winter season, SQ sends an A345 to LAX..
Quoting Tsentsan (Reply 8): I believe the previously operated SIN-AMS-ORD and SIN-HKG-LAS routes were also long ranged.
that was on a 744 with AMS-ORD being very empty most of the time..I would like to see them start it again....maybe on a 777..maybe SIN-ICN-ORD would be good..
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3669 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 10): Quoting Planemanofnz (Reply 9):
Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver all get 777's aswell.
SFO and YVR do, but for the winter season, SQ sends an A345 to LAX..
No, SFO and LAX get all-year-round daily 747 and 777. LAX gets a 3rd flight (A340-500). The SFO 747 stops in HKG, the 777 in ICN. The LAX 747 stops in NRT, the 777 stops in TPE.
QANTAS077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, RR: 49 Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3636 times:
as mentioned in a post, i also mentioned this in another thread, SQ will fly from Brisbane and Melbourne, it won't be for a while until Sydney is granted to SQ...it was expected to come last month, the govt here keeps defering the decision.
a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3311 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 11):
No, SFO and LAX get all-year-round daily 747 and 777. LAX gets a 3rd flight (A340-500). The SFO 747 stops in HKG, the 777 in ICN. The LAX 747 stops in NRT, the 777 stops in TPE.
SFO=14 flights weekly.
LAX=21 flights weekly.
correct, i should have been more comprehensive in my comments....(note- I didn't say that SFO doesn't get the 747-was responding to if SFO/North America gets a 777).....but I should have included your comments..
6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3267 posts, RR: 22 Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 3281 times:
SQ will operate the B773ER if they are granted rights to the USA from Australia.
As for the timing of the service and ground time.... well, lets just wait and see.
just because QF has aircraft sitting on the ground for over 12 hours doesn't mean that SQ will.
They are too smart for that.
They will rotate aircraft coming in from SIN i suspect. Also, let's not assume they will fly to LAX.
eg:
SIN-SFO/LAX-MEL-SIN
5:00p SIN 2 7:25p SFO I SQ 2 1-Stop 773 18:25
or
5:05p SIN 2 7:20p LAX B SQ 30 1-Stop 773 18:15
QANTAS077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, RR: 49 Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3074 times:
looks increasingly like SQ won't get what it wants, and just as i thought, the hanging of Van Nguyen seems to have had an impact...as Howard said to Lee, 'there will be lasting resentment from our country' looks like those words are ringing true..
Government protects Qantas over US routes
From: By John Masanauskas
January 16, 2006
THE Federal Government looks set to protect Qantas and deny access to Singapore Airlines on lucrative US routes.
The Herald Sun understands that Singapore's controversial execution of Melbourne drug trafficker Van Tuong Nguyen has been a factor in the air rights issue.
Nguyen was hanged on December 2 despite pleas by Prime Minister John Howard.
Mr Howard, a strong supporter of Qantas, is also concerned about the prospect of job losses if Singapore is given direct flights across the Pacific.
Both airlines have been lobbying the Government, with the trans-Pacific issue to be decided in a broad review of national aviation policy.
Qantas and US carrier United Airlines are the only airlines with non-stop US flights on the routes.
TG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 11 Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2997 times:
I hope the news article is accurate. Call me biased since I'm an airline employee, but this step by Howard is a small step in the direction of protecting a large number of Australian jobs against the ever-present race to the lowest common denominator, the constant enviroment of nationalities undercutting each other, which if left unchecked will result in the complete destruction of the Australian middle class (which I understand is already under threat with Howard's recent labour law reforms).
Why should SQ grow into a worldwide giant at the cost of tens of thousands of local jobs, just so we can pay $20 less for our once-a-year air ticket? It just doesn't make sense..
Dalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2881 times:
There's always the likelihood that Virgin Blue will create a LH international arm to service these routes and Jetstar will use their 787s Trans-Pacific from 2008.
So, it's not like no SQ and no further competition.
Docpepz From Singapore, joined May 2001, 1938 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
So if SQ gets the rights to fly a daily service from Australia to the USA, tens of thousands of Australian jobs will be lost, Howard says. That's a lot of credit Howard is giving SQ!
Tens of thousands of Singaporean jobs have not been lost as a result of QF flying 24 times a week from Singapore to Europe. SQ hasn't bled as a result.
Just shows that the Australian government is willing to sacrifice trade over a convicted drug traffiker
If Australian workers were competitive and could stand on their own two feet, they wouldn't need their government to protect them. Instead they would look at restructuring their jobs and pay scales and upgrading their skills to enhance their competitiveness. Always remember that there are millions of hardworking people in China and India willing to do your job at a fraction of the cost with the same quality. That's what we're taught here in Singapore. No one owes you a living - if you won't do it, hundreds of thousands of others are waiting to do it!
In the larger scheme of things though it doesn't matter much to Singapore. Temasek Holdings, SQ's 56% shareholder has majority stakes in giant australian companies such as Optus, Australand and its huge property bank, SP Ausnet with its 100% ownership of Victoria's electricity transmissions network as well as ownership of prime real estate such as the Queen Victoria Building, Chifley Tower, One Martin Place, Shangri La Sydney, Westin Sydney and Melbourne and so on.
The above investments in Australia give Singapore revenue streams far larger than what a daily Sydney-Los Angeles service could provide Singapore. Far from destroying jobs, The Singapore Government through its stable of companies is the largest foreign investor in Australia, and directly responsible for tens of thousands of Australian jobs.
QANTASpower From Australia, joined Aug 2002, 516 posts, RR: 7 Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2655 times:
Well thanks for the lecture Mr Docpepz
Firstly Mr Howard has said no such thing. Get your facts right!
Also I would say the execution of that young Australian born Asian bloke for drug trafficing would not even be on Howard's mind when making a decision on this one. I for one couldn't care less that the dirty rotten drug cheat was hung. We have a big problem here in Australia with drug importation from Asia. A lot of Asian gangs here in Sydney are involved in the importation of heroin so one less criminal on the street might be a good thing. While the left wing media may have had the violins playing the majority of Aussies were not too concerned.
Also I find your comments on Australian workers being uncompetitive very offensive. I suggest you go and read up on the performance of the Australian economy over the past decade before you start lecturing us on on our work practices and accepting Chinese pay rates.
As for foreign investment in Australia, yes it is encouraged, as it is essential for our economy. But only the right kind and our Govt has the right to decide what is in our best interest so do us all a favour and butt out.
We don't need a majority Govt owned carrier simple coming in and cherry picking the most lucrative international air route out of this country and giving nothing in return.
SQ gets alot more out of Australia than QF gets out of stopping off in Singapore on the way to LHR. Remember that.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2605 times:
Quoting Docpepz (Reply 22): So if SQ gets the rights to fly a daily service from Australia to the USA, tens of thousands of Australian jobs will be lost, Howard says.
The reality is the opposite. Australians would both gain jobs from significantly increased tourism and benefit from the increased spending power that would come from lower airfares. Increasing competition would be bad for Qantas but good for Australia.
Quoting QANTASpower (Reply 23): SQ gets alot more out of Australia than QF gets out of stopping off in Singapore on the way to LHR.
Dubious.
25 Cloudyapple: The australian governemnt has to be insane to let Singapore in. I'd give it to Virgin Blue rather.
26 Aukahkay: From what I gather, the Australian government is unlikely to grant SQ the lucrative Australia-US route. The trans-Pacific route accounts for 25% of Qa
27 Daddy1: Thanks guys for your thoughts, if SQ dont get the go ahead from Canberra, would it be reasonable to think that the Singapore Gov. might put pressure o
28 BBD: In response to Daddy1: My opinion is that, if it came to a choice between SQ and maintaining Changi's position as a hub, the Singaporean government wo
29 Zvezda: It would seem more likely that Singapore would suspend QF's beyond rights until Australia reciprocate as promised.
30 Sllevin: Is there any data out there that defines exactly how much traffic QF gets from Singapore? Be interesting to know what the real value of SIN is to QF.
31 Airbazar: You wish. The fact that SQ has been a very succesfull airline for so many years WITHOUT offering OZ-US flights tells me they don't really need it to
32 AirCanada014: I think SQ would use SYD as their main hub and MEL as their secondary hub.
33 Simpilicity: Spot on. All this rubbish about protecting QF. They should get competitive like everyone else !!! I don't think you got it. From what we understand P
34 HKGKaiTak: Correct me if I'm wrong ... but what does Chinese workers have to do with SQ gaining rights to trans-Pacific rights from Australia? Still, I'd love t
35 6thfreedom: I doubt that QF would go to the expense to move its hub to BKK. Firstly, BKK is more expensive to operate to than SIN, and the move to KUL would mean
36 SunriseValley: After reading all that has been said thus far in this thread I must quote from a posting by Antares on Jan 2nd. that puts this whole matter into persp
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Apr 2000, 57 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4522 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3953 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined exactly 14 years ago today! 
, 7707 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Jan 2002, 2016 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2005, 1653 posts, 
From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, 
From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3267 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
