Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Can QF Base A Plane At LAX For SYD-LAX-JFK?  
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2364 posts, RR: 3
Posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5023 times:

Can QF base a plane at LAX for SYD-LAX-JFK?

For example, rather than flying a half or 3/4 empty 747 from LAX to JFK, can they base an A330 at LAX, and fly it over to JFK everyday with pax coming in from SYD or elsewhere?

Also, forgive me, but if the loads on the LAX-JFK sector are high, and warrant a 747, wouldn't it be better to base one of their old 747-300s at LAX to do the daily flight?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAirvan00 From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 748 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5003 times:

They have sometimes 6 744's (sometimes 2 A380's) sitting all day at LAX. So one of them going over to JFK is no problem. Maybe they should be sending them to other places as well instead of cluttering up the parking area. (Althought I understand some Mx is done in LAX)
QF don't have any more 743.


User currently offlineAznCSA4QF744ER From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 690 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4916 times:



Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 1):
(Althought I understand some Mx is done in LAX)

 checkmark   bigthumbsup 

Sometimes you can see two B744's in the old TWA hanger at the same time.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4868 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4887 times:



Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 1):
QF don't have any more 743.

Correction, QF have 3 B743 aircraft... Last remaining B743 aircraft will be retired by years end which is less than 8 hours from now... Big grin

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4881 times:



Quoting Kaitak744 (Thread starter):
For example, rather than flying a half or 3/4 empty 747 from LAX to JFK, can they base an A330 at LAX, and fly it over to JFK everyday with pax coming in from SYD or elsewhere?

Also, forgive me, but if the loads on the LAX-JFK sector are high, and warrant a 747, wouldn't it be better to base one of their old 747-300s at LAX to do the daily flight?

Sorry, but I'm not quite understanding what you're saying and I might be misunderstanding. If you say the loads LAX-JFK are high and warrant a 747, how does that correlate with your previous comment of flying a half or 3/4 empty 747?


User currently offlineTG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4859 times:

The loads have never been particularly high.. it is common to have under 100 pax.
Where this flight breaks even and profits is in the cargo carried.



-
User currently offlineAirvan00 From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 748 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4838 times:



Quoting EK413 (Reply 3):
Correction, QF have 3 B743 aircraft... Last remaining B743 aircraft will be retired by years end which is less than 8 hours from now...

Picky Picky  Big grin Well only 2 left in Oz i think, and they won't be doing any scheduled flights in the next 7hr 45 min .. Happy New Year to u 2  champagne 


User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2364 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4736 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 4):
Sorry, but I'm not quite understanding what you're saying and I might be misunderstanding. If you say the loads LAX-JFK are high and warrant a 747, how does that correlate with your previous comment of flying a half or 3/4 empty 747?

I said that because I wasn't sure if the loads were in the half full ball park or in the completely full ball park. Sorry about that, I wasn't clear.

But:

Quoting TG992 (Reply 5):
The loads have never been particularly high.. it is common to have under 100 pax.
Where this flight breaks even and profits is in the cargo carried.

There is the answer.


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

it would probably be more expensive to base a sole 330 in LAX than fly to JFK 1/2 full on a 744. Also they would have to get the 330 back to SYD or else it would be isolated...wasnt QF looking at flying LAX-AKL with a 330 at one point?

User currently offlineVhqpa From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 1456 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 4393 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):
wasnt QF looking at flying LAX-AKL with a 330 at one point?

They did use the 332 for a couple of months before the 743 joined the 744 on the route now with the 743's withdrawn it is currently operating as a 332 on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays and as a 744 on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays untill 16JAN when it goes back to 744 daily.




Vhq



"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
User currently offlineAvt007 From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4272 times:

Would they be allowed by the FAA? By changing aircraft, they are effectively flying a domestic route within the United States, even if they only took the pax from SYD.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24891 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4245 times:



Quoting Avt007 (Reply 10):
Would they be allowed by the FAA? By changing aircraft, they are effectively flying a domestic route within the United States, even if they only took the pax from SYD.

I don't think that's a problem since they can't sell domestic traffic.


User currently offlinePER744 From Australia, joined Mar 2003, 405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3830 times:

I thought a major reason for the LAX-JFK flight was cargo? (I'm sure I remember reading that even if there were zero passengers the cargo revenue would make the route profitable)

User currently offlineAvt007 From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

I'd still be surprised if they were allowed to operate a separate aircraft on that leg. I have nothing to back that up, just a hunch.

User currently offlineVikingA346 From Sweden, joined Oct 2006, 515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2716 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 11):
I don't think that's a problem since they can't sell domestic traffic.

Although they can't sell domestic traffic - can airline employees still non-rev on LAX-JFK or vice versa without a ticket for the Australia sector?
With the Australia sector it's fine, right?



...you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you shall return
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2647 times:



Quoting VikingA346 (Reply 14):
can airline employees still non-rev on LAX-JFK or vice versa without a ticket for the Australia sector?

I wouldn't think so, but how many QF employees would even want to? Maybe ones from the LAX maintenance base.

Quoting Kaitak744 (Thread starter):
Also, forgive me, but if the loads on the LAX-JFK sector are high, and warrant a 747, wouldn't it be better to base one of their old 747-300s at LAX to do the daily flight?

Besides the problems that others have mentioned, getting the crew there would be a problem. You could have done it when the 743 was flying AKL-LAX, but where's the advantage?

If an A332 could have taken the cargo load, it could have worked when it was flying AKL-LAX.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Can QF Base A Plane At LAX For SYD-LAX-JFK?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Location Of Transmitter At LAX posted Fri May 30 2008 16:56:05 by HeyWhaTheHay
AC Spare Aircraft At LAX? posted Fri Mar 7 2008 17:16:17 by Bicoastal
Why Are There Always So Many QF744s Parked At LAX? posted Tue Feb 12 2008 04:12:23 by SKAirbus
Why No Papi On W/B Rwys At LAX? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 06:58:06 by Adipasqu
What Is It? Strange Jig Or Structure At LAX posted Sun May 15 2005 02:22:12 by Flyabunch
NZ2 744 Birdstrike At LAX - Question posted Wed Jun 9 2004 00:34:38 by NZblue
Bizarre DL 757 Takeoff At LAX posted Thu Aug 22 2002 13:01:58 by QANTAS747-438
"The Box" At LAX posted Sun Feb 18 2001 20:25:56 by Modesto2
Can The 777 Cruise At Mach 0.85? posted Mon Feb 25 2008 17:10:44 by Iloveboeing
How Many Times Can A Pilot Fly A Plane In 1 Day? posted Fri Aug 5 2005 08:42:26 by Palladium

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format