wirraway
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:32 am

Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:29 am

Fri "The Australian"

Qantas seeks range
By Geoffrey Thomas
March 26, 2004

QANTAS is examining the world's longest range aircraft - the A340-500 - for opening new non-stop routes such as Sydney-Dallas and Perth-London.

An Airbus Industrie spokesman would not confirm the presentations, saying it was the manufacturer's policy not to confirm details of sales campaigns.

The four-engine A340-500 has essentially an identical cockpit and systems to the twin-engine A330 in service with Qantas, thereby minimising introduction costs.

Rolls-Royce is understood to be offering an attractive maintenance package to offset the costs of introducing a new engine to Qantas - the Trent 500. The A340-500 can carry 313 passengers 8650 nautical miles, which would enable Qantas to operate non-stop services from Sydney to Dallas, the headquarters of its alliance partner American Airlines.

From the west coast of Australia the A340-500 would be able to reach London non-stop from Perth and enable Qantas to counter the increased competition from Emirates, which is expected to increase its services from seven a week to 10 in October. Emirates will introduce the A340-500 to Melbourne from June 1, offering non-stop flights to Dubai, and will also increase services to that city to 10 a week by August.

Last year, Richard Branson looked at operating from London to Perth non-stop using two A340-500s that had been deferred by Air Canada as a result of financial difficulties.

Virgin Atlantic was concerned about the size of the business class market for the service, although it was buoyed by the fact that Western Australia is home to Australia's second largest English-born population.

Boeing is also pitching its 777-200LR to Qantas.

The latest variant of the Boeing jet will fly early next year and promises an even greater range/payload capability than the A340-500.

============================================

 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:42 am

Virgin Atlantic was concerned about the size of the business class market for the service

Exactly.This is not SIN-LAX by any means.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:07 am

Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
bartond
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 6:59 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:22 am

Good article. I haven't heard much on the SYD-DFW route lately. I guess QF is still looking at it, which is good to hear. I'd piss my pants if I saw a QF plane coming into DFW a few times a week, even.

Who does everyone think is the frontrunner for QF's ultra long range business - Airbus with the A345 or Boeing with the 777LR? Should be interesting - QF already has the A330s but also has a good number of Boeing aircraft (744s), too. What, if any, similarities are there between the 744 and the 772s as far as mechanics, engineering, etc.? This seems to be important to airlines contemplating the purchase of new aircraft.

QF to DFW
 
UA744KSFO
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:55 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:32 am

I know that DFW is an AA hub, but does it really need a nonstop to SYD? I think that it might be more beneficial to fly SYD-ORD (another huge AA hub) and maybe even SYD-JFK (if the aircraft has the range) and avoid the current stop in LAX. As far as PER-LHR, that would be awesome, but I'm still hoping that an aircraft will someday be developed that can do the SYD-LHR route non-stop!
 
LUV4JFK
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:46 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:47 am

Non-stop eastbound, very possible with light loads for the 345 & 777LR. Non-stop westbound, no way in hell is that going to happen, even with the 777LR.

LUV4JFK
 Big thumbs up
John F. Kennedy International Airport: Where America Greets The World.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:59 am

Non-stop eastbound, very possible with light loads for the 345 & 777LR

The A345 cannot perform either segment nonstop with any conceivable payload.

The 772LR is expected to be able to perform the eastbound, but not the westbound yearround.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:36 am

ConcordeBoy quit being such a homer and Boeing honk. I know in your mind nothing will ever be better than the super-duper Airbus killer 777LR. LAX-SIN is actually a longer sector length than SYD-DFW, not only that, but the headwinds would usually be less on DFW-SYD than on a LAX-SIN sector.
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
 
wirraway
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:32 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:39 am

Great circle mapper has:

SYD-DFW = 7454 NM

A340-500 = 8650 NM

So the Airbus will easily do the eastbound ok. The B777 should do both
ways if the A340 can't.

Wirraway
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:40 am

He was talking about SYD-LHR.

N
 
wirraway
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:32 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:58 am

Jcs17
You are right SIN-DFW 8436 NM, the A340-500 will walk it both ways
SYD-DFW-SYD.

Wirraway
 
S12PPL
Posts: 3603
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:26 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:34 am

UA744KSFO:
There is a plane....the A380 Smile Even though I'm against the A380....I think it's the plane for LHR-SYD non-stop. That's one of the non-stops Airbus used in the hype it started for the plane.
Next Flights: 12/31 AS804 PDX-MCO 2/3 AS19 MCO-SEA QX2545 SEA-PDX
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:36 am

LAX-SIN is actually a longer sector length than SYD-DFW

He was talking about SYD-LHR


Actually, if either of you morons ever paid attention... you'd realize I was talking about JFK-SYD  Laugh out loud
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
AA623BDLSJU
Posts: 345
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:41 am

Ooh, someone got dissed by ConcordeBoy!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:14 am

Actually, if either of you morons ever paid attention... you'd realize I was talking about JFK-SYD

Perhaps if you had better thought out posts, ConcordeGirl, we'd not need to pay such cautious attention to understand you.

N
 
Horus
Posts: 5131
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:30 am

Isn't it abit weird that Boeing has been using this exact route, SYD-DFW, for nearly 5 years now to promote the range capabilities of their ultra long range 777s. mmm...
EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
 
PUDFW
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:45 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:42 am

Qantas has long been wanting to get into DFW. Before 9/11 they planned flying AKL to DFW with a connection to SYD with the 747-400ER. In fact that seemed to be one of the main reasons behind buying that aircraft. However Qantas chose to go into ORD with a connection to LAX-SYD.

Bottom line though Qantas would rather serve DFW directly from SYD. One of the main reasons Qantas has stayed away so far, even with a rebounding economy, is that the current facilities at DFW are awful. However in less than a year now that will all change as Terminal D opens. Qantas wants to be there when it does or shortly thereafter. Thus the A345 works for that because the model is currently in production. The 777LR is not yet done and wont enter service until 2006. So unless Qantas wants to wait another year for this plane they will go with the A345. Honestly it probably makes more sense because of the commonality between that and the A333.

Some of you have questioned why DFW. First off its American's biggest hub and it always will be. Its only going to get bigger with Terminal D and American taking 19 gates there. Which means they will have over 80 gates at DFW. Thats huge. And with those 80 gates they will have over 700 daily departures. More connecting traffic goes through DFW than anywhere else on American's network. Internationally it is a logical place for connections from South America with American's extensive network in that region. Also Europeans would have another viable option instead of going through Asia.

Also DFW is a logical point to jump off from to go to Australia, more logical than OHare which is too far north (and out of range) That said it would be like one of the longest flights in the world and take over 15 hours.

I am pretty sure Qantas has taken a long look at the traffic of US citizens to Australia and sees that a lot of them come from the Eastern US. Thus its a lot easier to connect in DFW than LAX in my opinion. I could see this service being a daily one at some point.

Anyway to review, both international and domestic connections, new facilities (the best in the world I might add) LAX overcrowding and American Airlines are all huge reasons why Qantas will add DFW to the map.

Bartond - yeah I agree with you, when I see the Red kangaroo flying into DFW I am going to piss my pants too.

PUDFW
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:00 am

Perhaps if you had better thought out posts, ConcordeGirl, we'd not need to pay such cautious attention to understand you.

Compensating are we dear Piggy?  Big grin




The 777LR is not yet done and wont enter service until 2006.

No airline plans to launch it until then, but it can be made available to customers as early as July 2005 if requested.




more logical than OHare which is too far north (and out of range)

ORD is not out of range from SYD



Also Europeans would have another viable option instead of going through Asia.

Lately, most Euros would rather experience a sub-cranial bore than a transfer via the USA.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:28 am


Wasn't Qantas part of the "working together" team for the 777? It would be a major coup if Boeing signed Qantas for the -200LR and New Zealand for the -300ER. Maybe shared maintainance facilities?

I would l-o-v-e to see Qantas here in Dallas.

Regards,
DFW
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:33 am

Wasn't Qantas part of the "working together" team for the 777?

Yes... the only major participant yet to order.

(LH also contributed loosely to the program however)
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:40 am

Its interesting that the DFW-SYD route is a hot topic again.....before 9/11 and the financial downturn, the introudction of nonstop service between these 2 cities was very much discussed.

Way back than (seems like 100 years ago, doesnt it?), there was a rumor that AA would fly the route with its 777s (AA was looking at the LR version or the -100ER verison that was dropped by Boeing).....many thought that AA and not QF would fly the DFW-SYD service.

Later, QF was looking at the DFW-AA), New Zealand">AKL-SYD route, to be flown with 747-400ER aircraft, but determined it was not a good move......QF/AA wants to offer onestop service to Sydney from US east coast/US gulf coast/US midwest cities.....thus, adding AA), New Zealand">AKL to the itinerary is a non-starter.

So we are back to DFW-SYD nonstop with QF - which aircraft? A335 or B777-200LR. I am going with Boeing. Why? Boeing and Qantas have a long relationship that both want to protect. QF is the only member of the 777 working together design team yet to purchase a 777. I think that the 777LR will have a bit more range than the A345, and for this route they need every mile, and, I do not think that the commonality between the A330 and A345 fleets is such a big deal.....a new engine type must be introduced in any case and QF has seemed to become very comfortable with GE powered aircraft. Just my guess, may the best plane win.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:13 am

QF/AA wants to offer onestop service to Sydney from US east coast/US gulf coast/US midwest cities

They essentially already do, to most major markets.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:16 am

Exactly, ConcordeBoy.......one stop service is now available to MAJOR markets, but a DFW-SYD nonstop would allow AA/QF to offer onestop service to Australia from secondary markets thru out the US as well......there are far more connection possibilites on AA at DFW than offered at LAX.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8934
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:32 am

I agree with Dutchjet; DFW has a very central location, which makes it as ideal for Florida as it does for the north east. JFK would stay, but we all know that JFK isn't the best for connections (and AA would have a seizure if QF decided to do business with JetBlue!)

The A340-500 makes a lot of sense to me. Ultimately, I think there will be n/s from Australia to the UK and the 345 may well be the aircraft to do this. However, I think this issue has been dismissed too easily in the past. I think we can all agree that SYD-LHR, n/s, is a non runner, so there's going to have to be an en route stop; most airlines make this SIN, BKK or KUL (VS is an exception, OK), but the route from Asia to Europe - over India, the Middle East and/or Russia is very busy. Surely, if it were possible, it would make more sense to fly that route via PER? You'd have the Indian Ocean all to yourself and even when you hit Europe, you'd be away from the main Asia - Europe route.

Bear in mind that this didn't work for Branson, because he wouldn't have rights between PER and SYD (although DJ would!). QF, on the other hand would have rights all the way and of course, with a nonstop, QF would steal a march on the likes of EK (which it would love!), SQ, TG, MH etc.

It's still slightly outside the 345's range, but give it time and perhaps a little tweaking and it will be a possibility. In the meantime, the 345 will allow frequencies to be increased on some 744 routes, such as JNB, maybe bring on new routes (like DFW). There's a lot it could do for QF.

However, I still think QF could use its 332s more effectively; just flying them to Asia and back doesn't seem to stretch them enough and QF could take on the likes of EK more effectively if it were to launch some flights from BKK to Europe; the 332 would be ideal for this. Cities like MAN, DUB, AMS, ZRH and one or two others, unsuitable for 744s, could be added.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:57 am

>However, I still think QF could use its 332s more effectively; just flying them >to Asia and back doesn't seem to stretch them enough and QF could take on >the likes of EK more effectively if it were to launch some flights from BKK to >Europe; the 332 would be ideal for this. Cities like MAN, DUB, AMS, ZRH and >one or two others, unsuitable for 744s, could be added.

Are the A332 suitabley equipted to do this? You cannot assume they are! QF B763 CANNOT operate to Europe from SE Asia because they are not equipted for it. One reason is that they have the small pax oxygen system and as such cannot meet ETOPS requirements over the Himalayers (they cannot fly high enough, long enough and still let the pax breath!) ETOPS does not just apply over water!

Sure they could operate around the mountains, but a what cost? I doubt the A332 were suitabley equipted to fly to Europe as there were no plans to do so when they were ordered.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
anstar
Posts: 2862
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:03 am

Are there any other airlines that have been on 'working together teams' for aircraft that didnt end up purchasing them?

It seems foolish to think just because someone had input into the creation of something that they SHOULD buy it?

I still think the 777 has missed its chance with QF and it will be the A345 that we see witht he roo on the tail
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:04 am

One reason is that they have the small pax oxygen system and as such cannot meet ETOPS requirements over the Himalayers

Source? I've never heard of this...

...that, and you rarely hear of twinjets being allowed over the Himalayas at all.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Ken777
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:38 am

The older you get the more painful long hauls are. For me the easiest way to go to SYD is to fly to LAX, spend the night and catch QF8 at noon the next day - arriving around 10 pm. You have to be brave to fly form the east coast and catch a connecting flight to SYD - unless you can really sleep on a plane.

DFW-LAX might work very well if they can keep the flight times to a reasonable level. The problem can be seasonal winds. I have had a LAX-AKL QF flight (747-400) stop for fuel in Fiji, with UA flight pulling up 20 minutes later. I would take that flight if the departure and flight times were reasonable, but then I only have a 2 hour flight (TUL-DFW) to catch it.

PER-LHR-PER is also a good ns as QF can feed the flight from SYD & MEL, plus bring in domestic pax. The domestic flights I have taken between PER and SYD/MEL have all been full, or nearly full. Their domestic loads would make the feeder flights profitable and Australia is very good at managing domestic traffic through their international terminals. The PER international terminal is small (5 or 6 gates) and would be very easy for connecting to a PER-LHR flight.

As for the plane selected, I've enjoyed the Airbus flights I've been on (especially CX), but need a Boeing plane for any overnight flight as they are the only ones (to date) that have electrical wall outlets that I can plug my autopap into so I can sleep - another problem with growing old.

LHR-SYD NS? QF did it once with the 747-400. No freight (except 1 football), no checked luggage and 21 hours in the air. No effort to make it on a westbound flight either. Unless they install Pullman compartments on a 380 it would be pretty rough!
 
VH-BZF
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:24 am

I predicted this a few weeks ago in a post on Airliners.net , great to see that my post was not all hot air!

Also in regards to the A330-200's, I was told that the flooring is not strong enough to support the sky beds that QF are putting into the A330-300's. The cost to strengthen the flooring on EBA,EBB,EBC & EBD is around AUD4million, give or take a million! So QF may well keep the -200's flying on city flyer routes and some selected regional routes (possibly AKL/CHC from Mel & Syd & my guess would be CGK from Per, Syd & Mel?) with a modified domestic Business class config?

I would have thought that QF would have ensured the A332's were delivered with a stong enough floor?

That's life - Cheers BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:37 am

Also in regards to the A330-200's, I was told that the flooring is not strong enough to support the sky beds that QF are putting into the A330-300's.

If I'm not mistaken, the 332s are not slated to receive the SkyBed.

It seems backwards to me, perhaps someone from Oz can explain a bit better.

I'm also curious if they'll be uprating the engines on the 332s and 333s for the longer hauls like NRT and whatnot.

N

[Edited 2004-03-26 00:38:15]
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:52 am


I wouldn't be over extrapolating conclusions from this article. Just because Airbus was down here showing QF the A340-500 doesn't mean they are going to order it. The same way as just because Boeing is pitching the 777LR to QF it doesn't mean they are going to buy that one either.

SYD-JFK direct???? What are you people nuts!!!!! They only fly 3 times a week as it is why on earth would they spend all that money on a new plane to do it when they have just bought new 747-400ER's for SYD/MEL-LAX and can easily extend them through from LAX??? You wouldn't!!!!!

SYD-DFW was been rumoured for years but there has been no substantive action. Until you have a plane with the capacity of the 747 that can fly it economically dont look for QF to fly it. QF would also be poaching traffic from its 747's to LAX on this route as well. Again I can't see any case to justify spending the money on new planes when QF has just bought new 747's for the SYD-LAX route.

Plus QF has its investment in its product, expansion of international services, expansion of Australian, launch of Jetstar, delivery of A330's, pre payments for its A380's, payments for its new 737-800's, modernisation of its regional fleet etc etc. So management already have plenty on their plate without the A340-500.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:58 am

..that, and you rarely hear of twinjets being allowed over the Himalayas at all.

Just curious, but if twins cannot fly over the Himalayas what route do Singapore 772ER take between SIN-MAN? A direct route alone is 6810nm, leaving only 900nm of safe/usable range. So I would imagine it would be complicated to fly non-stop, east-bound/west-bound, all-year flights if they were forced to fly a non-direct route. Anyone know?

It seems foolish to think just because someone had input into the creation of something that they SHOULD buy it?

Well, if a manufacture specifically tailors an aircraft to an airline's requirements, I think it would be foolish if they didn't buy it. Not that it has hurt the 777, but Boeing could have courted another airline in Qantas place. Did Qantas have a bad experience with the design team?

---

Thinking long-term, what are Qantas' plans for the 747? If they intended to slowly phase them out when the A380 arrives, the 777-300ER could fly all the routes the 747-400ER fly, and a -300ER fleet would share much in common with a -200LR fleet.

Does anyone think the Air New Zealand A340/777 order could influence Qantas in terms of maintenance facilities, ext?

Regards
DFW
 
Guest

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 9:17 am

They will only need 6 planes max for SYD-DFW and LHR-PER unless they want to fly to FRA and CDG or whatever, so they will be looking for commonality
with current planes.

345's adv

345's require similar maintenance and crew to the 330's

the trents will be similar to the 380's

345's are larger than 772's

345's are listed US$40 cheaper than 772's

345's are available now

772 LR adv

They are lighter

They have a 500nm longer range

330's currently operate with GE's


I would argue the 345 would be the most appropriate plane of the 2
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 9:25 am

345's are larger than 772's

Too bad their relative pax capacity and payload will actually be more limited... not to mention a huge empty weight



345's are listed US$40 cheaper than 772's

A340s are generally cheaper to acquire than 777s, *but* (particularly if history is any indication) have a significantly lower resale value as well.



345's are available now

Which is only significant should QF plan to operate them before July 2005.




....not so clearcut, is it?  Big grin






[Edited 2004-03-26 01:28:02]
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 9:38 am


"They will only need 6 planes max for SYD-DFW and LHR-PER unless they want to fly to FRA and CDG or whatever, so they will be looking for commonality with current planes."

So with all the current programs that QF has they are going to buy 6 new planes to fly to DFW to take PAX from their LAX services and to fly from THE most isolated capital city on earth to LHR with an uncertain premium market????

I THINK NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It doesn't matter how much they cost, it ain't going to happen

"A340s are generally cheaper to acquire than 777s, *but* (particularly if history is any indication) have a significantly lower resale value as well."

Exactly right and which airlines would need the A340 as part of their fleet if QF did sell them???? Name me an airline that isn't currently bankrupt/"restructuring" that would want them.


 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:04 am

I would love to see Qantas place an order for the A340-500 to operate this NEW Sydney-Dallas route...

Go A345  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Guest

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:27 am

So with all the current programs that QF has they are going to buy 6 new planes to fly to DFW

when did I say that

"They will only need 6 planes max for SYD-DFW and LHR-PER."

3 planes per route would offer a daily service on a plane which would probably be configured to 200

I was merely laying down the pro's and con's of each aircraft choice.

unless QANTUS are going to buy other 777's, ie 772ers or 773's, it would be bloody ridiculous having tiny 777lr's amongst a fleet of a345 compatible airbusses. Its the obvious choice to go for airbus in my mind.
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3936
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:34 am

The comments regarding Perth and the fact that Virgin were uncertain about premium markets to London tend to overlook the fact that Virgin Atlantic don't have a presence in Australia at this time.

As such it's an entirely different marketing slant than what would happen at Qantas - who have been flying to London for years and have a massive domestic network within Australia.

I happen to think that passengers would probably rather do SYD - PER - LHR than stop over in Singapore. Even thinking about it (as a resident of Sydney), it sounds more direct than going via Singapore. As such, I think Qantas has a case for it.

Additionally, wouldn't it be cheaper to operate for Qantas as Perth is a local base? Landing fees would be cheaper than Singapore, everything else is closer to home and it's all in $A which would save the cost of foreign currency being involved. So I think the case is even stronger.

Next up, I think the arguement for Dallas due to the American Airlines partnership is a good one - especially regarding the new terminal and the amount of connections via American Airlines in that city.

Finally, a guess. Historically, I have been a fan of the Boeing range of aircraft over Airbus, solely because I think the Boeing product is better looking (aren't I shallow!).

In this case, I believe Qantas would be mad to order the 777. Why introduce a new type with little commonality to anything else in the fleet when you can get the A340 which fits into the fleet perfectly?

Cheers,

Trent  Smile

P.S. ConcordeBoy, you are hereby a respected user of mine. Okay, so my RR rating of '0' doesn't do much for you, but it doesn't lessen the respect!  Smile
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
tsentsan
Posts: 1921
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:48 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:46 am

One reason is that they have the small pax oxygen system and as such cannot meet ETOPS requirements over the Himalayers

Source? I've never heard of this...

...that, and you rarely hear of twinjets being allowed over the Himalayas at all.


I heard something to this effect before... Apparently the SIA SQx B777s have oxygen systems that are unable to support over-Himalayas operations and thats why they are not-allowed to perform any route that goes over that mountain range. Can anybody confirm that?

THanks
TT
NO URLS in signature
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:05 am


"3 planes per route would offer a daily service on a plane which would probably be configured to 200"

So you want them to buy less planes then. So instead of buying 6, you buy 3 or 4 to introduce services. It doesn't change the fact that they stick out like a sore thumb in the QF fleet. QF long haul is 747 territory and has been since the 707's left the fleet. The A380 will supplement/replace the 747 classics and that will be that.

A Perth-LHR service DOES have an uncertain premium market. The QF domestic services to Perth dont really give an indication about how much premium traffic would transfer to LHR bound flights direct. Not to mention that make the A340 profitable enough to fly the distance you would have to have a very high % of the pax being premium just like SQ does. Perth can't support that kind of service. It simply doesn't have the business and first class passenger pull that Sydney has. Personally, as a former Perth boy until 2 years ago, I would love to see the service but its just not going to happen.

"Additionally, wouldn't it be cheaper to operate for Qantas as Perth is a local base? Landing fees would be cheaper than Singapore, everything else is closer to home and it's all in $A which would save the cost of foreign currency being involved."

You can't substitute the hub at Singapore for one in Perth. If you run the A340 through Perth successfully then you will pinch the premium traffic from the Singapore hub and you will make it unprofitable. Filling up the economy class section of a plane pays the bills, but it doesn't make for profits. QF wouldn't want to pull services because the demand for cheap fares would still be there, but they wouldn't make money out of backpapers and holiday makers on the 747's either. Damned if you, damned if you dont so they wont. They will leave things unchanged. Thats why they are buying A380's because their planning is still for a South East Asian stopover.

"Next up, I think the arguement for Dallas due to the American Airlines partnership is a good one - especially regarding the new terminal and the amount of connections via American Airlines in that city."

You have the same problem here. How does QF replace the premium traffic lost from its LAX services??? How does it keep the route profitable without reducing services??? Until they can come up with a 747 sized aircraft with the appropriate range I dont think this route will happen.
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3936
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:29 am

SydScott, with respect -

Your entire argument seems to be - "If QF fly here, they will lose pax here!"

Ever heard of developing new routes and new markets?

You are correct in that nothing could replace Singapore - though it'd be interesting to see figures on where QF pax terminating there are going, as opposed to all the onward Euro traffic.

There is nothing to say that opening up Dallas and going to Europe via Perth is going to work. There is nothing to say that it's not going to work either. I'm sure the good people at Qantas know what they're doing - after all, they've been doing very well for many years!

 Smile

Cheers,

Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
Qantasclub
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 2:48 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:30 am

I agree with Sydscott on this one.

PER-LHR will never happen because even though it is a fairly wealthy city (highest per capita concentration of millionaires), it's small population size of just over 1 million will not support enough business traffic to sustain such a high cost daily service. And why would you transit through PER over SIN which is a much bigger and important airhub with infinitely better connections.

The key to the whole Dallas question is: What percentage of QF passengers trasit through to other US cities from LAX and what percentage get off. The way I see it, it's just swapping one hub for another. LA and California has HUGE pull for Aussies, both from a tourism and business point of view, especially given this country's close links with the movie industry in LA. The trek to Anaheim and Disneyland is a standard Aussie family holiday thing to do. Dallas is just not in the same league and despite the fact that I hate LAX as an airport, I would much rather transit through there than through Dallas, a huge airport in the middle of nowhere.

Long Haul is the only way to go
 
Guest

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:45 am

So what's your problem, you seem to be arguing with everything for the sake of arguing.

So you want them to buy less planes then. So instead of buying 6, you buy 3 or 4 to introduce services.


no, I said you buy 3 for LHR-PER and 3 for SYD-DFW

It doesn't change the fact that they stick out like a sore thumb in the QF fleet.


hoorah, you have finally grasped one of the points I was trying to raise.
If you read my posts carefully you will notice I said, that as there is a limited number of ULR routes, the ULR fleet is going to be small. This is why it makes sense to to go with an aircraft which is compatible with the current fleet like 345's which will compliment the 380 and 330's.
 
PER744
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 11:38 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:04 pm

Factoes for consideration far as PER-LHR is concerned (both positive and negative):

* A large proportion of Western Australians were born in the UK, or their parents were.

* Flying direct would mean arriving quicker, but quite a lot of people enjoy having a 1-2 day stopover in Singapore along the way somewhere

* Flying SYD-PER-LHR instead of SYD-SIN-LHR presents a service consistency problem. SYD-SIN and SIN-LHR are both intl, and therefore both intl service. SYD-PER is domestic, and therefore domestic service. Although the food and overall service is of intl standard, the J class seating is not, and there is no F. And don't forget that the premium cabins are where a large amount of the money comes from.
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3936
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:14 pm

Perhaps I am silly, but wouldn't it be assumed that if they were to open up SYD-PER-LHR that the aircraft would be an A345 the entire way, thus negating the problems of the J and F cabins?  Smile

Isn't the same aircraft used if you're flying SYD-SIN-LHR ?

Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:39 pm


"Your entire argument seems to be - "If QF fly here, they will lose pax here!"

Ever heard of developing new routes and new markets?"

Have you ever heard of Qantas developing new markets BEFORE another carrier has??? I mean the only reason they started SYD-LAX was because Pan Am did. QF has always been a reactive airline rather than a pro-active one.

"hoorah, you have finally grasped one of the points I was trying to raise.
If you read my posts carefully you will notice I said, that as there is a limited number of ULR routes, the ULR fleet is going to be small. This is why it makes sense to to go with an aircraft which is compatible with the current fleet like 345's which will compliment the 380 and 330's."

I grasped your argument from the start but you have failed to grasp mine. Give me 1 good reason why QF would buy NEW aircraft to fly these routes when they have perfectly adequate 747-400's to keep flying the way they are??? Why should this be a capital expenditute priority for Qantas given the number of other projects it has on??? Answer me that!!!!! Also answer me why QF, or a leasing company, would buy them when if the routes fail they have very little use in QF's network and, in all likelihood, a very poor resale potential.

"Isn't the same aircraft used if you're flying SYD-SIN-LHR ?"

Not necessarily although QF did on the SYD-PER-Johannesburg flights.

"So what's your problem, you seem to be arguing with everything for the sake of arguing."

No I'm arguing because I dont see it happening anytime soon or unless someone else, like Virgin, does it first. What I'd like to see rarely has anything to do with the reality of QF's management.

"A large proportion of Western Australians were born in the UK, or their parents were."

PER744 you make 3 very valid points. The question is how many of these people are going to pay for a first or business class seat to go back to England to see the relatives???? I would have thought very few.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8544
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:47 pm

The way I see it, it's just swapping one hub for another. LA and California has HUGE pull for Aussies, both from a tourism and business point of view, especially given this country's close links with the movie industry in LA. The trek to Anaheim and Disneyland is a standard Aussie family holiday thing to do.

What if this is a hub split? As in, trade 4 flights into LAX for 2 into LAX and 2 into DFW? DFW basically cuts the distance a connecting flight must travel across the continental U.S. by about half, meaning all east coast Aussie traffic could go through DFW while all west coast Aussie traffic could go through LAX.

DFW is a much less crowded airport than LAX and the new international terminal would be perfect for Qanats. Not to mention, DFW has extensive 777 servicing equipment and AA's maintainance base as well.

I would much rather transit through there than through Dallas, a huge airport in the middle of nowhere.

Hehe.. Texas is the 2nd largest state with over 20 million people.  Big grin It's also the highest exporter in the United States, in your face California, and home of some of the biggest corperations in the world. But not Boeing  Sad I'd say it is in the middle of somewhere.

there is a limited number of ULR routes, the ULR fleet is going to be small. This is why it makes sense to to go with an aircraft which is compatible with the current fleet like 345's which will compliment the 380 and 330's

Count the airlines that opperate the A330 and 777 together. I can think of Air France, Cathay, Malaysian, and Emirates. Why opperate an inferior aircraft for the sake of commonality? These airlines don't, and they are making pleanty of profit. Commonality saves expense, but why sacrafice payload, range, and fuel burn... the aspects that generate revenue? And who says the 777 fleet would be small? Qantas has a good number of 747-300 that will need replacment in the next decade, and the best aircraft for that job is the 777-300ER.

With Air New Zealand considering an order for the 777-300ER, a joint maintance facility in AUK would just about take care of maintance. And as I already said, DFW, the airport where the ULR aircraft would fly to, is better equipt to service a 777 than an A340.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:48 pm

Apparently the SIA SQx B777s have oxygen systems that are unable to support over-Himalayas operations and thats why they are not-allowed to perform any route that goes over that mountain range.

Trans-Himalayan operations are generally outside ETOPS, even for the 777. It has more to do with being unable to sustain sufficient altitude to clear the terrain with an engine out.

N
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:57 pm


"What if this is a hub split? As in, trade 4 flights into LAX for 2 into LAX and 2 into DFW? DFW basically cuts the distance a connecting flight must travel across the continental U.S. by about half, meaning all east coast Aussie traffic could go through DFW while all west coast Aussie traffic could go through LAX.

DFW is a much less crowded airport than LAX and the new international terminal would be perfect for Qantas. Not to mention, DFW has extensive 777 servicing equipment and AA's maintainance base as well."

The problem is that the A340-500 will only carry premium passengers and very few economy. If you take half the premium pax away from LAX you essentially cut your profits in half. QF may as well give the routes to AO to do. But if QF waits until they have an aircraft the size of the 747 that is capable of the range then your strategy is exactly the right one. Hub your passengers travelling to the East Coast in DFW and the West Coast in LAX. The A340-500 and 777LR are the wrong planes for this.
 
Qantasclub
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 2:48 pm

RE: Qantas Seeks Range For Sydney-Dallas

Fri Mar 26, 2004 1:09 pm


Hehe.. Texas is the 2nd largest state with over 20 million people. It's also the highest exporter in the United States, in your face California, and home of some of the biggest corperations in the world. But not Boeing I'd say it is in the middle of somewhere.

If there is enough business traffic between the 2 cities, then the route may be viable but you will not get Australian tourists choosing to hub at Dalls over LAX for the forseeable future. Just ask anyone here if the've been to texas and you'll get a no 95% of the time whereas most people who have ever been to the US will have done the LA/California thing
Long Haul is the only way to go

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 7seven7nz, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], CXB77L, flyguy89, flyingclrs727, haydenschool, hummingbird, itisi, masseybrown, mernest, OslPhlWasChi, PatrickZ80, PlanesNTrains, wrcairline, xyzzy01 and 227 guests