Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
It's Official - QF To DFW And Drops SFO - Part 2  
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 11174 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

This is s continuation thread of Part 1 which can be found here: It's Official - QF To DFW And Drops SFO - Part 1


Please feel free to continue your discussion on this topic.


Rgds


SA7700

[Edited 2011-01-17 00:52:50]


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
122 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4824 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 11129 times:

I was excited to hear the news of QF operating to DFW but its certainly very sad to see QF dropping the SYD-SFO route BUT in saying that it makes logical sense considering QF will be operating into a major Oneworld hub in the US of A...

Well done QF and AA...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 11006 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EK413 (Reply 1):
I was excited to hear the news of QF operating to DFW but its certainly very sad to see QF dropping the SYD-SFO route BUT in saying that it makes logical sense considering QF will be operating into a major Oneworld hub in the US of A...

I assume SYD-SFO was mainly O&D driven, since AA has no big hub in SF. So the yields aren't certainly bad. Strange decision to close SFO in my opinion.

I guess the 787 will be the ideal bird to reopen the route one day or another...



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5485 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10965 times:

Quoting Braniff727Ultra:

No hubris here mate just well established fact. Yes, Texas is a strong and growing market, yes a lot of the growth has been at our expense but last time I checked, we still have almost twice as many people here and we are expected to have a population of almost 60 million by 2050 whilst Texas will just be approaching our present population of 39 million by 2050. There has to be somehthing for all those people to do besides sit on the beach all day; wouldn't you agree?

I'm not offering a doomsday scenario for California; by any measure, it has been the host to more, and more important, innovation than any other place in the world for quite a while.

Every success comes with a price. however, and for California, the price is that fewer and fewer people can afford to actually live there - and fewer businesses can justify the expense. Innovation lives in more places now, and the Golden State can no longer simply presume that it will have these high-value employers and jobs - they'll have to earn them.

If California and its leaders can find a way to adjust expectations and costs, they can maintain their traditional position at the top of the heap (so to speak); whether they can do so is an open question. I enjoyed my time there, wouldn't take for it (to use a Texas expression), but certainly would never consider moving back - at least, not to the southern part of the state. Northern part of the state, more appealing, but again, the stunning cost of so doing makes raising a family there in any kind of comfortable manner prohibitively costly.

Of course, I've no doubt that one will be able to say many of these same things in a discussion of Texas' metro areas and, say, Mississippi, in a decade's time. Ask the folks in Detroit about all that...



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlinekoruman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 10875 times:

No one seems to be mentioning how poor the case for this switch is.

In terms of Australia-USA traffic, the leisure Market and trade flows are remarkably similar, as follows:

1. Southern California Including LAX
2. Northern California including SFO
3. Hawaii
4. Other states in the western half of the continental USA
5. New York
6. The rest combined

All the first five markets were already covered. That basically leaves the likes of Chicago, Atlanta, Boston, DC and Florida as the only ports which will now enjoy better connections, yet the commercial and leisure traffic of all of those markets combined is less significant than the SFO market alone, and arguably even the HNL Market.

DFW looks important as a potentially improved gateway. But to be frank there is almost certainly more Billabong demand to HNL than there is Eli Lilley demand from IND to Australia.

No wonder Air New Zealand is going up to double daily wide bodies to Brisbane to connect to SFO, YVR and LAX. They are actually going to offer more to Australians outside SYD than Qantas is!


User currently offlineBraniff727Ultra From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 10795 times:

sccutler;

I can find no area of disagreement with your follow up to my last post. I and about 30+ million others around here fully agree that there are many things that need fixing, the cost of living & doing business is certainly at or near the top of that pile. I can also admitt that that cost of doing business here has & will most assuredly continue too be a factor for airlines to account for if deciding to add/subtract routes in their network when compared to other areas such as DFW.


User currently offlinebioyuki From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 10527 times:

To all the folks stating that the cost of doing business is high in the Bay Area, that's absolutely true. And that's the reason why airlines should fly here: there are tons of businesses flush with capital to pay for premium fares here. Every time I fly long haul out of SFO, F/C are always booked solid, especially with all of the capacity cuts over the last few years. It's become a joke among my friends that the best places to network are on flights these days as the premium cabins are always full of Google/Apple/Facebook/Yahoo/etc employees along with the biotech crowd.

Many non-Star carriers (BA/VS/JL/CX) send their most heavily premium configured aircraft to SFO and from what I've seen, haven't had problems selling out their premium cabins. I'm extremely, extremely surprised QF wasn't able to get the yields necessary to continue the route.



Next flight: UA 726/84 SFO-EWR-TLV
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4824 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 10222 times:

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 2):
I assume SYD-SFO was mainly O&D driven, since AA has no big hub in SF. So the yields aren't certainly bad. Strange decision to close SFO in my opinion.

I guess the 787 will be the ideal bird to reopen the route one day or another...

To be honest I still don't see why QF will drop the route, the loads have been pretty solid to SFO... I understand aircraft utilization probably accounts for the decision...
Curious why didn't QF consider adding onto the SFO route opting for a SYD-SFO-DFW....?

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8526 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 10213 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Considering the number of rumours that have been floating around suggesting that QF were going to drop the SYD-EZE flights I was surprised to see the aircraft for DFW coming from the cancellation of the SFO route instead. ( Yes , I know that SFO isn't a OW hub.... but still , there had been lots of rumours about axing EZE and up until a week or so back there didn't seem to be any rumours about cutting SFO )


Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4824 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 10160 times:

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 8):
Considering the number of rumours that have been floating around suggesting that QF were going to drop the SYD-EZE flights I was surprised to see the aircraft for DFW coming from the cancellation of the SFO route instead. ( Yes , I know that SFO isn't a OW hub.... but still , there had been lots of rumours about axing EZE and up until a week or so back there didn't seem to be any rumours about cutting SFO )

We both on the same boat... I did'nt see this coming at all...
I believe SFO will be back on the QF map BUT under the brand JQ... Just seems QF continues to axe routes in favour of JQ, however in saying that Alan Joyce has stated the relationship between QF/AA will strengthen further... Let's wait and see what else is installed...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1507 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9785 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting koruman (Reply 4):
They are actually going to offer more to Australians outside SYD than Qantas is!

Could not agree more---an unbelivably poor decision---Qantas has simply lost their strategic way

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):
To be honest I still don't see why QF will drop the route, the loads have been pretty solid to SFO... I understand aircraft utilization probably accounts for the decision...
Curious why didn't QF consider adding onto the SFO route opting for a SYD-SFO-DFW....?

The a/c utilization is not any isssue---LAX always has 747's sitting around and now SFO is axed----drives me crazy as Qantas has newer 747-400's sitting in the desert....Again hurry in other carriers to show how wrong Qantas is

Quoting bioyuki (Reply 6):

To all the folks stating that the cost of doing business is high in the Bay Area, that's absolutely true. And that's the reason why airlines should fly here: there are tons of businesses flush with capital to pay for premium fares here. Every time I fly long haul out of SFO, F/C are always booked solid, especially with all of the capacity cuts over the last few years. It's become a joke among my friends that the best places to network are on flights these days as the premium cabins are always full of Google/Apple/Facebook/Yahoo/etc employees along with the biotech crowd.

This is such a perfectly said piece----what a delight to read a post from someone who "gets it"----well done and let us hope that on may 16th there will be another way to get nonstop to Sydney other than United and their outdated equipment...


User currently offlinepsa1011 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9733 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting n471wn (Reply 10):
This is such a perfectly said piece----what a delight to read a post from someone who "gets it"----well done and let us hope that on may 16th there will be another way to get nonstop to Sydney other than United and their outdated equipment...

Maybe SQ is the answer. They fought for LAX-SYD a few years back, and now that AC already has a nonstop from YVR, it could be the best way to fill the void.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7481 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9687 times:

Quoting n471wn (Reply 10):
This is such a perfectly said piece----what a delight to read a post from someone who "gets it"----well done and let us hope that on may 16th there will be another way to get nonstop to Sydney other than United and their outdated equipment...

While I was surprised that QF dropped SFO (I would have thought a plane for the inevitable DFW service), QF has been struggling with SFO big time. At the end of the day, its not that big of a shock.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1507 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9613 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
QF has been struggling with SFO big time.

What do you mean by this? Do you mean struggling with high load factors and premium pricing? Perhaps your definition of struggle is that they QF thinks they can get SFO people to go thorugh LAX....easier for them to have only one West Coast station---they tried that before and it failed and it will fail again but hopefully another carrier will come in here and appreciate our business. We are worthy of Sydney non-stop......


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7481 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9585 times:

Quoting n471wn (Reply 13):
What do you mean by this? Do you mean struggling with high load factors and premium pricing? Perhaps your definition of struggle is that they QF thinks they can get SFO people to go thorugh LAX....easier for them to have only one West Coast station---they tried that before and it failed and it will fail again but hopefully another carrier will come in here and appreciate our business. We are worthy of Sydney non-stop......

I mean that it was struggling. QF couldnt make much (sometimes if any) money on it. I dont know why they couldnt, but they couldnt.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently onlinelegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2042 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9574 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
QF has been struggling with SFO big time. At the end of the day, its not that big of a shock.

Not according to this article.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-axes-...irect-sydney-san-francisco-flights


As stated, it was an operational move to connect with the AA hub. Sure top management stated it was a "leisure" route and they could not get the Higher paying clients. UA probably had most of the local companies wrapped up anyway.

As AA is focused on their corner stone route structure. QF is just flying into those "corner stone" cities to move their passengers around the Country.



John@SFO
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24732 posts, RR: 46
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9562 times:

Quoting n471wn (Reply 13):
We are worthy of Sydney non-stop......

You already have one - daily on United.

Quoting n471wn (Reply 13):
Do you mean struggling with high load factors and premium pricing?

At the end of the whether for lack of traffic, high enough yields, or a high cost structure, Qantas has been unable to make SFO work. We have to respect this.
Clearly if the station was a money spinner for them, they would not be walking away.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7481 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9550 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16):
At the end of the whether for lack of traffic, high enough yields, or a high cost structure, Qantas has been unable to make SFO work. We have to respect this.
Clearly if the station was a money spinner for them, they would not be walking away.

^^^This.

If SFO was a huge money maker or even a decent preformer, they wouldnt have switched to a market that is a huge risk at its expense.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently onlinelegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2042 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9519 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 17):
If SFO was a huge money maker or even a decent preformer, they wouldnt have switched to a market that is a huge risk at its expense.

It was a decent performer. They felt that could not grow at SFO and DFW offers AA connections that SFO could not provide. DFW is not a O&D airport. QF passengers, the vast majority of them, are going to be connecting through to another destination in the U.S..

Companies surrive on profit and I believe QF felt they can make a better profit with DFW. Time will see, IMO.



John@SFO
User currently offlineCragley From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9201 times:

Well I think it's great news.


I've already booked my flight to Dallas for May, AUD998 return including tax from Melbourne  


It's a steal!


From there I can pick up pretty much any US carrier to anywhere in the states.


And the best part is that I will be greeted with Texan hospitality  


No more hanging around a dirty terminal with no seating, standing for 2 hours waiting to board, lining up behind half of Asia at LA immigration!!


Thank you QF, and thank you DFW!!!


I can see DFW working well for pretty much every passenger travelling from Australia to the central or eastern states.
QF7 will arrive around 1pm which gives plenty of time for connecting flights.


The LA option will still suffice for west coast passengers.

It also means more availability on the LA routes from MEL/SYD/BNE as east coast passengers will most likely be on the DFW flight.


User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1507 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8981 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16):
You already have one - daily on United.

I would rather walk....


User currently offlinepsa1011 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8959 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16):
You already have one - daily on United.

Seriously. I would choose either NZ through AKL or HA through HNL.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8908 times:

Quoting legacyins (Reply 15):
As stated, it was an operational move to connect with the AA hub. Sure top management stated it was a "leisure" route and they could not get the Higher paying clients. UA probably had most of the local companies wrapped up anyway.

As AA is focused on their corner stone route structure. QF is just flying into those "corner stone" cities to move their passengers around the Country.

you can also argue QF has the corporate contracts from the SYD end locked up too

QF can justify it with "we have a limited fleet, so we've decided to put the plane to better use". But now with their stupid excuse their CEO just lost all credibility.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7481 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8883 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 22):
QF can justify it with "we have a limited fleet, so we've decided to put the plane to better use". But now with their stupid excuse their CEO just lost all credibility.

How was it a stupid excuse? They decided to move a plane from a route that wasnt preforming like they wanted to a station that will provide excellent connectivity. Thats a pretty solid reason to me. I dont know how it will end up doing, but it will probably be extremely successful.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1507 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8877 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 22):
But now with their stupid excuse their CEO just lost all credibility.

Agree---Qantas is now badly led---they simply have lost thier way----they were beating UAL at SFO in every way and they just walked away----they "snatched defeat out of the arms of victory"


25 LAXdude1023 : There is simply no way this could be true. In the real world, airlines dont walk away from routes they are banking money on or are handing other carr
26 gemuser : A world spanning airline drops one route, to start another and they are badly led and have lost their way and their CEO has lost all credibility!!! A
27 Post contains images IrishAyes : I think you're the one that lacks credibility. Once you're able to prove to all of us that SFO was indeed a money-minting route, then I'd give you mo
28 Post contains links PITrules : Now that AA has some 773ERs coming, which could do DFW-SYD nonstop, the decision to drop SFO and use a 744 at DFW makes even less sense than it did a
29 Airvan00 : The Qantas ready room on a cold wet Monday morning. I dunno about you lot, but I’m getting a bit bored with SFO. Anywhere else we could go? Well a l
30 Post contains links gemuser : According to http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/pf/pf_rc_losangeles.html and http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/pf/777_range_la.pdf t
31 koruman : After last night's news of the NZ stake in the Virgin Australia group it is probably all over for Qantas to North America anyway. Non-stop services t
32 n471wn : they did it to themselves---let us hope the competition shows them no mercy
33 Post contains links PITrules : According to these links, the 773ER has almost 300 nautical miles more range than the 744ER http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/pf/pf_lrproduc
34 LAXintl : Don't you think QF would know a bit more about their performance and if they were "beating" UA or not? If SF was a such a money spinner they would no
35 n471wn : A bit disengenuous given your moniker of LAXintl---I do hope you know that we SFO people avoid your facility at all costs.
36 LAXintl : Love or hate LAX that is fine. No skin off my back. I have no desire to sell you on LA or LAX. The point here is Qantas had a business decision to ma
37 escapehere : Good work QF. Now we just need a flight to ORD. Hopefully the 787s can make the distance.
38 gemuser : You ignored the bit about ETOPS, that alone would just about eat your 300 nm range advantage if in fact it exists. Australia's CASA is not going to a
39 LAXdude1023 : They dont have a joint venture. Each carrier is going to do whats best for them. What on earth are you talking about? QF is by far the largest carrie
40 mogandoCI : if he said "we can better deploy our resources" that's fine - it's his baseless attack of SFO that makes him sour grapes. Even if QF ever returns to
41 cws818 : It wasn't a baseless attack. It is entirely possible that SFO is a leisure market for QF; that does not mean that SFO is a leisure market in general,
42 MAH4546 : Not yet, but AA and Qantas filed with Australian authorities for a JV on Monday. A DOT application will surely follow, but no doubt AA/QF are waiting
43 Post contains links LAXintl : OK, let take that to be a fact. Now what is their propensity for travel, and to Australia specifically? Bottom line is the Bay Area is certainly not
44 SFOA380 : Relax gang...all of this LAX vs. SFO...California is the greatest state off all because of the SF Bay Area AND the LA Basin. The place would not be th
45 Post contains links and images PITrules : OK, here's your ETOPS, @ 207 min Looks like a nonstarter to me. And you've ignored the other two points I've made ;~) If so, sounds like a huge disadv
46 gemuser : AA have ETOPS 207? I doubt that CASA will agree to that for an absolute minimum of 2 years operation of the B77W, maybe longer (PS Australia has neve
47 PITrules : What is the extra nm if AA would be restricted to ETOPS 180? I'm not handy enough with the map to get it to draw to the edge of that limit, but it do
48 gemuser : It looks to me, by eye ball, to be around 200 nm. QF don't consider the B77W to have sufficient operating cost advantage to actually buy them, so I d
49 thegeek : Problem with that is that it would be nearly empty from SFO-DFW. But I like your thinking of a tag on. What about a 3pw LAX-DFW tag with the A332 fro
50 Post contains links and images MarcoPoloWorld : And here's another page describing the options: http://www.ausbt.com.au/best-options...&utm_campaign=related-articleright That's been my thought
51 MAH4546 : The 744ERs will be recieving the A380 J seats. I believe this process will be complete sometime within 18 months or so.
52 sccutler : So much of this discussion reminds me of why I don't much miss living in California. Oh, it's a great place and all that, but it's not the only place
53 The Coachman : Tags to DFW from LAX won't work - you can do that already - the whole point of this new service is to bypass LAX and offer 1 stop service to almost an
54 ZuluAlpha : Just to add fuel to the fire. I managed to obtain this information about loadings and seat availability **PASSENGER LOADING LIST** QF7/05Nov -CAB---LE
55 thegeek : The whole idea of the SYD-DFW-BNE-SYD flight is not so much to be profitable in the next 2 years or so, but to build up the market for a direct DFW s
56 ZuluAlpha : Correct ... 25 in the Y cabin, 2 in the PY cabin and 10 in the J cabin
57 jupiter2 : That's not exactly a big hit in payload, I expected more. I for one expect this route to be a hit long term, maybe not so much short term. Long term
58 PA515 : That's just pax. Freight would be the first casualty of a payload restriction. PA515
59 jupiter2 : Oh yer, I took that as a given, they'll take some freight, but it will only be express freight/mail. They have the main deck freighter to cover freig
60 qantas747 : This is just awesome news; its a shame they are not providing the same low prices through June and July- I really dislike High Season!!!! Hopefully Ju
61 Braniff727Ultra : The Qantas ready room on a cold wet Monday morning. I dunno about you lot, but I’m getting a bit bored with SFO. Anywhere else we could go? Well a
62 Braniff727Ultra : Just my humble thoughts here being a native son of Cali; but there has always been a huge ego war between LA & SF. Both are great places, love SFO
63 escapehere : Does anybody know if the 787 will be able to do SYD-ORD non-stop?
64 Post contains links koruman : That's the theory, but it is trapped in a hub and spoke paradigm, with a huge aircraft expected to receive feed at either end from other destinations
65 gemuser : No to minor problems SYD-ORD, ORD-SYD is another matter. Boeing.com quote 8200 nm for the 788 and 8500 nm for the 789. SYD - ORD is 8022 nm, (Great C
66 tayser : MEL-DFW is more likely with a 787 (similar ETOPS/EDTO diversions as SYD-DFW with a twin-jet) than SYD-ORD: 200nm closer and QF wouldn't be able to sus
67 escapehere : Really? I would have thought it'd be a dead-set certainty if they have the birds that can make the range. ORD would have a lot more O&D traffic t
68 travelR : I don't see JQ flying to SFO as they have stated they wanted to have another base in Asia and fly to southern Europe. They are a leisure carrier and
69 escapehere : I agree. QF lose so many potential European-bound passengers because they refuse to fly anywhere except LHR and Frankfurt. They think dumping passeng
70 tayser : frequency maybe so - but who's operating YYZ/YUL? American Eagle and their pissy little regional jets. DFW: mainline / 738s. according to AA's curren
71 gemuser : I really doubt it, QF don't work that way now days. Certainly more, but "a lot more" I have doubts. ORD will be a longer sector from Oz than DFW, the
72 escapehere : Hopefully they do that :P I just tried to book a QF flight to YUL for November via DFW and I can't do because of the connections. Instead I'd have to
73 gemuser : Do you really, really believe that? Sorry I call that a blinked view. LHR, FRA & CDG are the only cities that can support services directly from
74 escapehere : Using 744s and A380s, you're right, except of course according to QF even Paris can't support that. I was referring to the idea of QF using smaller p
75 jupiter2 : CDG works quitely beautifully for QF at the moment with AF, neither airline has the need to fly the whole route at present. Also by the logic that yo
76 gemuser : QF did make CDG work, but the French government kept them restricted to 3 flights a week, making it non viable. You can't blame QF for that one! You r
77 jfk777 : Qantas decision to switch teh flight to DFW has nothing to do with SFO as a gateway, it has to do with QF available airplanes and how to best deploy
78 Post contains links mariner : Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but I thought Mr. Joyce said exactly that: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/qan...cisco/story-fn6bn4mv-1225988599739
79 Post contains links thegeek : Not really on topic, but I would wonder about QF serving some of the other European destinations out of BKK or SIN with A330s. FCO & ATH are both
80 tayser : JQ29/30 haven't gone anywhere - still flying 3x weekly.
81 Post contains links tayser : No surprise in the timing of the announcement for this route change - have a look at the "G'day USA" event calendar: http://www.australia-week.com/cal
82 escapehere : I would love that, but can't see it ever happening. You practically fly right over Sydney in the process. Even the once much talked about PER-LHR loo
83 PITrules : PER-LAX is nowhere near Sydney. Perth as a city today is about the same population as BNE was when they regained service to LAX 5-6 years ago; so I w
84 escapehere : As someone who lives in Perth, and flies to Brisbane regularly as I was born there and have family there, I would have to respectfully disagree with
85 koruman : Wrong. London, Frankfurt and Paris are the only cities which can support a flight from SYDNEY, not AUSTRALIA. The whole point of using a single inter
86 LAXdude1023 : I imagine they will do a G'day Dallas event around the time the route starts. I know they have done them in other QF cities before.
87 gemuser : Picky, picky! That was exactly my point, LHR, FRA & CDG are the only European cities that can support direct service from Australia, WITHOUT an i
88 PITrules : I should have been more specific; I was referring to Virgin doing this route. I recall they stated their intent to do this when they ordered 787s. I
89 escapehere : Oh, I did hear about Virgin suggesting it a few years back, but I'm not sure how serious they really were about it. Haven't heard anything lately, so
90 thegeek : Indeed, and I also note they have now have a MEL-SIN flight. Clearly they feel that an extension to FCO or ATH isn't commercially viable with A332s.
91 Viscount724 : I doubt QF's cost structure would permit them to profitably compete with the likes of EK/QR (and other Asian carriers) to multiple points in Europe.
92 gemuser : No it wouldn't, but JQ's would, which is the point of all the Jetstars. Not QF but gives the QF Group a chance to compete. Gemuser
93 koruman : The aircraft exists, but Qantas choose not to buy it, and consequently it cannot make SFO work while Air NZ can. Rather like Air NZ uses Freedom Air
94 thegeek : Are you saying that it is not too late to implement your model? It would be a few years before the aircraft could be delivered, and it wouldn't be lo
95 Post contains images gemuser : The B787 exists? Not yet for airlines, it doesn't! QF have not ordered it? They have up to 100 odd under order, option & purchase rights! Suddenl
96 tayser : Flying to Canada via HNL? we currently have BNE-LAX, SYD-LAX, MEL-LAX all meet AA's LAX-YYZ. what's the point when you can already do it via LAX (and
97 koruman : No, the 777-200ER and LR exist, and would have made viable long-haul markets where volumes are only around 200-240 passengers per flight. There are a
98 thegeek : You're kidding right? Do you have a link for this quite wild claim? AIUI, loads of about 80% are about right in the industry. Any more and you need t
99 LAXdude1023 : That would have been the perfect plane for DFW-SYD.
100 koruman : 80% loads are fine for an airline like Qantas which can balance loads with yields from higher service classes. But Jetstar's Star Class seats sell fo
101 Airvan00 : Unless their operating costs are significantly lower.
102 ZuluAlpha : Thanks for the info on the promo's in Houston. Now I am after some help. Does anyone know what oil / mining companies are based in Houston, that have
103 thegeek : Thought that project wasn't going to proceed?
104 Post contains links tayser : Haliburton are Houston and Perth. apart from the companies which can be easily quoted (BHP/Rio/Cevron/ExxonMobil etc), there's the supporting organis
105 Viscount724 : When Canada-Australia services operated by HNL, it was very unpopular with business traffic. They much preferred to connect at LAX, possibly because
106 Post contains links PITrules : I've been thinking about this ETOPS aspect, and did a little digging. AA is already certified for ETOPS 180/207 on the 777. page 67 http://www.captai
107 thegeek : I'd go the other way. While AA already has 777s, it doesn't have GE-90s. What's the most important aspect for ETOPS? Engines of course. I'm not too s
108 PITrules : At issue is getting 207 min, not above 207. With 207 they can do DFW-SYD direct, according to the GC map. The engines, even though new to AA, are sti
109 gemuser : My understanding is that either ETOPS or ETOPS beyond 180 IS NOT an ICAO standard. If it is, then you are correct, but my understand is that it isn't
110 jupiter2 : The GE-90/77W combination is, as thegeek says, basically a whole new aircraft to AA. I don't know about the FAA, but there is no way CASA would allow
111 sccutler : Amusing - my niece has booked to fly on the QF DFW service, first flight. Something cool and new, that.
112 Post contains links tayser : more info on why QF dropped SFO and will start DFW: http://www.theage.com.au/travel/trav...gest-747-route-20110128-1a7py.html - gonig to market a "70
113 mogandoCI : If anyone has attempted to transfer INTL to DOM through a US gateway, 70 minutes is very much stretching it You land, taxi, dock, and offload (15 min
114 Post contains images legacyins : Thanks for the link. Kind of supports everyone's suspicion SFO was not performing. So, good bye QF, don't let the door hit you in the A** as you leav
115 macsog6 : From the Sydney Morning Hearld ~ In 2002-03, the airline took delivery of six 747-400ERs, a variety built specially for Qantas to operate the 12,748 k
116 Post contains images MarcoPoloWorld : But won't make it on the westbound.
117 macsog6 : From The Age in Melbourne ~ "In fact, the return service will stop in Brisbane on its way back because passengers will have to be offloaded to make t
118 Airvan00 : Another consideration is that it is scheduled into BNE at 0500, which in not possible in SYD. As had been pointed out, connections to the rest of Aus
119 koruman : I have spent enough of my life in queues waiting for US passport control that I can say categorically that I ain't going to be booking any 70 minute i
120 Airvan00 : It's quicker if you are going to Perth and probably a lot of other places.
121 mnik101 : QF has enough capacity for both SFO and DFW, with the 744s and A380s? SFO is a profitable route for them right? If it is, I really don't see the logic
122 sccutler : Koruman: I sort of expect that they've given a little thought to this... ...times change and (remarkably enough) Texas is a "mass market" by any defi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
It's Official - QF To DFW And Drops SFO - Part 1 posted Thu Jan 13 2011 15:16:54 by AlitaliaDC10
It's Official: IAG Is Up And Running posted Mon Nov 29 2010 10:45:16 by Talaier
It's Official: QR To Start DOH - GRU - EZE posted Wed Mar 10 2010 08:48:23 by ojas
It's Official: EgyptAir To Join Star Alliance posted Tue Oct 16 2007 07:55:40 by Semobeila
Official B6 To POP And SXM posted Thu Oct 11 2007 06:44:51 by B6MoneyGuyJFK
It's Official, AA To Move Into Term D 10/29 posted Tue Sep 27 2005 19:11:44 by Apodino
It's Official: Conviasa To BOG Starting May 02. posted Sun Apr 17 2005 01:49:53 by Luisde8cd
It's Official: AirTran To Charlotte posted Thu Feb 17 2005 22:14:14 by DCA-ROCguy
It's Official: Song To Fly JFK-LAX, SFO, SEA posted Thu Jan 27 2005 00:32:01 by Jetbluefan1
It's Official: AF To DTW 05/09 posted Fri Dec 10 2004 19:04:24 by Ord777