ANstar From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 4845 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3201 times:
Quoting United Airline (Reply 4): Seems that HKG-SYD is not doing as good as it should be. Perhaps a 2nd daily HKG-LHR flight will help.
I think it is doing better than it has in the past. I agree that a 2nd LHR-HKG flight would make sense. Perhaps they will hold ooff for a bit and introduce it when Virgin Blue start long haul. Ie DJ may start a BNE-HKG service which can also connect to the extra flight?
United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3153 times:
I can tell it's doing better when I was in SYD a few weeks ago.
I am sure even if they add another HKG-LHR flight it will always be full. Perhaps they should put a A 340-300 on the second flight? Or simply use a B 747-400 for the current flight which will increase capacity
8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1105 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2928 times:
So currently, is it the same plane flying from LHR-HKG as it is from HKG-SYD? So half the aircraft is used for passengers terminating in Hong Kong, and the other half is for passengers flying onward to Sydney?
Aussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1161 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2656 times:
The problem is on some days is most of the pax from SYD prefer to go to LHR than just to HKG. Problem lies in here is that not a lot of seats available on the HKG-LHR portion of the flight (due to the HKG originating pax). In the interim VS have undertaken a marketing campaign especially in a lot of leisure shows to get them to come to HKG on VS.
So as has been reported only using larger capacity on SYD-HKG-LHR or introduce a second service between HKG-LHR will solve the issue.
Swiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2408 times:
Question; at a given time, how many potential Virgin aircraft would be operating a part of this route at exactly the same time?
i.e one on LHR-HKG while another is still on HKG-SYD? Would there be more than two?
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5217 posts, RR: 6 Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2361 times:
Quoting Swiftski (Reply 14): Question; at a given time, how many potential Virgin aircraft would be operating a part of this route at exactly the same time?
There are always three aircraft operating VSs LHR-HKG-SYD-HKG-LHR service.
The aircraft that leaves LHR at 22:30(GMT) on Monday arrives SYD at 06:25(+10) on Wednesday, it leaves SYD on Wed at 14:35 and arrives back at LHR at 05:25(GMT) on Thursday. Therefore aircraft A leaves LHR on Monday, aircraft B leaves on Tuesday and aircraft C leaves on Wednesday. Aircraft A returns on Thursday in time to operate the Thursday service to SYD.
[Note:These are nominal "aircraft" not real aircraft. The real aircraft returning from SYD might do a flight somewhere, eg VS3 to JFK at 09:30 and not get back until the following morning]
This highlites on of the reasons Oz-Europe flight are expensive to operate, you need three, over a hundred million dollar, aircraft to operate each daily service.
8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1105 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2263 times:
Was the original LHR-HKG flight not doing that well then loads wise, if they decided to carry it on to SYD? Surely by carrying it on to SYD, it has allowed less people to be booked on the original LHR-HKG flight?
But surely now that the original single flight a day to HKG now goes onto SYD, it means that half the passengers on the aircraft are destined for HKG and the other half for SYD, meaning that the original flight to HKG (before it went on to SYD) is now not able to be filled up with HKG passengers to its full potential?
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5217 posts, RR: 6 Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1900 times:
Quoting 8herveg (Reply 18): But surely now that the original single flight a day to HKG now goes onto SYD, it means that half the passengers on the aircraft are destined for HKG and the other half for SYD, meaning that the original flight to HKG (before it went on to SYD) is now not able to be filled up with HKG passengers to its full potential?
Well probabley not half, but that is the right general idea.
The SYD service was not launched because of problems with HKG, it was launched because SRB wanted to serve Oz and no other reason. It was in spite of the problems it caused between HKG & LHR. The 2nd LHR-HKG service was always planned to cover this, but it didn't happen. Why? My guesses: since VS launched HKG-SYD both QF & NZ have launched daily HKG-LHR services from MEL/AKL respectively. Also VS still has capacity limitations with the A346 & A380 problems. I supect you will see a 2nd daily VS service LHR-HKG in due course.
On the next obvious question of why use HKG enroute to SYD, the only choices were NRT, Shanghai, BOM or Del. I don't think the UK has fifth freedom rights from China, NRT is very slot constrained & I don't know if they have 5th freedom and even if theydo Japan - Oz traffic is dominated by low yield group tour business, other traffic is quite thin. The two Indian cities are alternatives, but SYD-HKG traffic is stronger than SYD - India traffic. So all in all it looks like HKG was the best/less risk intermediate stop between LHR & SYD for VS.
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 2091 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1823 times:
Visa rules at Shanghai allow people on certain passports to have a 48 hour transit stop at Shanghai.
SRB has mentioned BKK and MEL as being of interest to VS. Since BA has withdrawn from MEL, that does give 7 weekly frequencies that would be available to a UK based airline. VS could test the water by operating some LHR-HKG-MEL flights, and they could use BKK as a transit stop. Or, as Virgin Blue builds up their international network, there could be an agreement where VirginBlue operates all the flights between Asia and Australasia.
Reported that VS wants to start some flights from US to Milan, Madrid and Zurich. If Australia and EU ever reach an Open Skies agreement, VS and others could do some flights from Continental Europe to Asia, to connect onto flights to Australia. Now that Qantas has given up on Rome, perhaps a VS service LHR-MXP/FCO-HKG to connect with HKG-SYD/MEL flights would work for VS.
Apart from Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, problem with any asian hubs is that the hubs themselves are huge destinations themselves. If you start Heathrow Bangkok Melbourne, unless you don't sell any seats to terminate at Bangkok, you won't get any through passengers into Oz. You have to have a terminator service to ease demand and spare capacity for the second segment.
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 2091 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1690 times:
BKK is not such a big destination out of Oz. In the 80s ( yes, a long time ago) before QF started flying through there to London QF operated two 767-200 flights a week, and some years they did not operate to Thailand at all.
Now BA and QF operate through BKK between UK and Australia, so it works as a transit point for them. When Air Asia longhaul gets going, they have said that their business will be flying people from Australia or from Europe to Asian resort destinations - through traffic will be a secondary interest for them.
I think BKK and Thailand would still be a good transit point for VS because they could sell Thai holidays and stopovers to both the Australian and UK markets. VS and Virgin Blue can work together to offer several different transit points between UK and Oz/NZ.
25 Gemuser: QF started operating thru BKK to London in 1949 & their aircraft in 1938. In the 1980s they operated SYD-SIN-BKK-FRA. It may have been off & on from
26 Qantas744ER: Could be a problem going back west for their 744's since their have a MTOW of 377,000 Kgs. opposed to the 744's max. MTOW of 396,000Kgs. Operators ca