QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:08 am

Welcome to the Australian Aviation Thread # 64. In the previous thread, the following points were discussed/raised:

* Virgin Australia announces it will suspend Brisbane-Hamilton (NZ) service from late October 2012
* Etihad announces daily services to Brisbane from February 2012
* China Southern announces seasonal services to Cairns, bringing Brisbane to daily as well
* Qantas confirms it will upgrade 16 of its 737-800s with a new product
* Skywest/Virgin Australia take delivery of their first ATR 72-600
* Melbourne Airport has recorded a 5% increase in total pax numbers during JUL (compared to JUL11)
* Qantas reveals details of its planned 767-300 refurbishments
* Qantas refreshes its website
* Singapore Airlines and A380s - Could they fly to Perth?
* Qantas and its Honolulu services
* Virgin Australia announced FY tax profit of $22.8m and a FY underlying PBT of $82.5m
* QantasLink announces it will refresh its 717 cabin and add more seats
* Emirates and Qantas partnership
* Qantas to introduce a chauffeur service for select pax (to mirror Emirates' offering)
* Qantas and Singapore service post APR13
* QantasLink announces Sydney-Gladstone Q400 flights in 2013 and regional NSW capacity increases
* Johannesburg to lose Qantas First Class offering from 01OCT12
* IASC approves extension of QF/SA JNB codeshare agreement through to end of 2014
* Australia - South Africa flights
* Australia - South America flights
* Sichuan Airlines announces new Melbourne to Chengdu flights, thrice weekly, commencing 2013
* Cathay Pacific makes minor flight number changes on some Brisbane services
* Aus BT reported SACL has scrapped plans to divide SYD airport into alliance based terminals
* First images of Melbourne new Southern Precinct have been released by architecture group Hassel
* EVA Air will end its codeshare agreement with Qantas on Brisbane-Taipei from March 2013
* Thai Airways announces it will deploy its A380s to Sydney in 2013
* Virgin Australia announces increases to Brisbane - Emerald, Rockhampton & Newcastle services

Australian Aviation Thread # 63
 
QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:19 am

* EVA Air will increase its twice-weekly Brisbane-Taipei services to thrice-weekly between 18DEC12 and 09JAN13. The flights will continue to arrive in the morning and depart at 2245L.

* Philippine Airlines has expressed interest in commencing flights to Darwin in 2013, however it hasn't been confirmed whether flights would originate in Manila or Davao.

Quote:
The VP Marketing Support however announced that PAL will start flying to Toronto with the new Boeing 777-300 ER. Two aircraft will be delivered this year with two other by next year. Among other new routes is a flight to Darwin which could start by early next year.
Source

Back in February it was reported that Philippine Airlines was interested in commencing direct flights between Davao, the business capital of southern Philippines and Darwin at an unspecified time in 2013. In July, Royal Orchard Airlines announced it would run a series of charter flights from Darwin to Cebu, Philippines in December 2012 and throughout 2013 using Qantas 737-800s.
 
QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:34 am

Virgin Australia releases its new campaign - "The romance is back"

Virgin Australia - The romance is back

Quote:
Now You're Flying

The romance is back.

A lot goes into making an amazing airline – and over the past year, we have done just that.

We’ve transformed the look and feel of our aircraft and airport terminals and introduced new wide-bodied Airbus A330 aircraft on flights from Sydney and Melbourne to Perth. We’ve launched Business Class on domestic routes and enhanced our Velocity Frequent Flyer program with new unique benefits and a Platinum membership tier.

We’ve created an international network of over 600 destinations worldwide with our partner airlines and introduced innovative services for our premium guests, including kerb-to-lounge Premium Entry at Sydney Airport, Priority Boarding and a Premium Valet service.

But one thing hasn’t changed. Our people – all eight thousand of them. They’re the ones that put the magic back into flying every day.

View our new commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/user/virginaustralia?feature=watch
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:45 am

Melbourne does need that rail link and badly, but for some unbelivable reason they just wont entertain the idea, these stupid politiions havent had to try and catch a plane around 6 oclock in the evening the Tullamarine Fwy is like a car park in the evening peek. One thing the Tulla HAS TO DO is redo the International Arivals hall comming back from Singapore's Changi Airport and Kula Lumper, wow talk about neat and very nice looking airports and your bags are already of the caracels and waiting for you to pick up, then come back to Melbourne the baggage collection and arivals hall once you get out of customs is an absolute dump.They have to gut that area and redo it.
 
tayser
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:49 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:15 am

 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2358
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:55 am

Qantas schedule changes post 31 March 2013:

ROUTE CHANGE FOR TRAVEL FROM 31 MARCH 2013
Sydney–Singapore–London and Melbourne–Singapore–London: Flights will operate via Dubai instead of Singapore, en route to London. Direct services to Singapore will remain but timings will improve.
Sydney–Singapore: Four new dedicated Singapore services per week, timed to better connect to onward flights within Asia.
Melbourne–Singapore: Dedicated Singapore service, seven times a week, timed to connect better to onward flights within Asia.
Singapore–London: Qantas services on this sector will cease. Qantas will codeshare on British Airways flights to provide connections via Singapore for travellers on Qantas services from Australia.

Full media release
I like artificial banana essence!
 
vhebb
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:36 am

Schedules have began to be loaded:

*Looks like the new MEL-SIN-MEL QF35/QF36 service will be a daily B744.

*A new direct 4x weekly A330 QF81/82 morning SYD-SIN-SYD service. The 3x weekly SYD-ADL-SIN-ADL-SYD still looks to be operating as well. Can't see any PM services yet.

Schedules are still a bit messy with changes still be updated....

Cheers
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2358
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:05 am

Also note that the services to Frankfurt will continue until October 2013 and that the current schedule changes do not, according to Qantas, require ACCC approval.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:05 am

July traffic stats are out.

SYD-DFW had 9363 for a minimum LF of 82%. Probably higher with blocked seats and if non-reconfigured planes were used.

What sort of dip stick is Alan Joyce, deferring the 13th and 14th A380s? How is he still the CEO?
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:11 am

Quoting vhebb (Reply 6):
*Looks like the new MEL-SIN-MEL QF35/QF36 service will be a daily B744.

It will be good to see QF 744s back in MEL   Apart from A380s, a couple of 777s and the UA 744 MEL is becoming an A330 only zone!!!
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:21 am

Quoting vhebb (Reply 6):
Sydney–Singapore: Four new dedicated Singapore services per week, timed to better connect to onward flights within Asia.

At first I wondered why only a 4x weekly SYD-SIN service was added, but it seems that SYD-SIN-FRA will not be re-reouted via DXB. I wonder why this was their conclusion? Not to mention the fact that it's death has been postponed despite being such a loss-maker (according to QF)
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:57 am

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 10):

I dont understand the FRA decision either... why keep the route going via SIN for only 6 months? Wont that just confuse people further? And for those 6 months, with all the EK services via DXB won't it just become more of a loss maker? I suspect more in this story...
 
cam747
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:25 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:11 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):
July traffic stats are out.

SYD-DFW had 9363 for a minimum LF of 82%. Probably higher with blocked seats and if non-reconfigured planes were used.

What sort of dip stick is Alan Joyce, deferring the 13th and 14th A380s? How is he still the CEO?

'Dip Stick'....nice.

I'm sure he didn't make the decision on his own, and I'm sure it wasn't made on a whim.

He has other factors to take into account such as return on capital, and where that capital to pay for the aircraft is going to come from.

I'd love to see QF international with a fleet for 50 A380's dominating the skies...but back in the real world, those aircraft need to be actually paid for with someone's money.
 
ZuluAlpha
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:22 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:11 am

Quoting vhebb (Reply 6):
Looks like the new MEL-SIN-MEL QF35/QF36 service will be a daily B744

I wonder with this daily 744 ex MEL, does the dedicated QF51/52 BNE SIN BNE will revert back to 330 eqp?
Flown on:_CRJ, CR& D10 DHT DH8, DH2, DH3, DH4, EMB, E45, E75, E90, F28 J32 M80 SH6 320, 32B, 332, 333, 380, 717, 732, 733, 734, 73H, 743, 744, 752 762, 763, 772, 77W
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:15 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):
LF of 82%

An 82% LF during what is probably the busiest time of the year is not that great. I wish DFW every success, I really do, but let's not jump the gun.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):
What sort of dip stick is Alan Joyce

The sort who has probably done more than any other in the past couple of decades to make international flying successful

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 11):
why keep the route going via SIN for only 6 months?

I'm guessing that the route has had a profitable summer, and they have therefore decided to keep it for one more. Just because I route works in July and August though doesn't mean that it's profitable year round.

I guess this means FRA will revert to QCA crew, which is good news. I think it is currently operated by QCUK, but with no more LHR-SIN flights I can't see how that can continue


Any news yet if QF51/52 will be retimed to a morning departure, and whether it will go 744 next year?
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:28 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
An 82% LF during what is probably the busiest time of the year is not that great.

Not bad at all for the first month of daily flying. Pax flying this route is sure to grow over time, unless some competition happens which doesn't seem very highly likely.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:31 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):
SYD-DFW had 9363 for a minimum LF of 82%.

For a route that is supposed to be a bobby dazzler - with all those forced American connections - I don't think that's anything to write home about.

It's okay, it hits the annual (all international) system average, but for all the stories of how popular the route is and the high loads, I would have expected a few points more.

mariner

[Edited 2012-10-03 21:43:48]
aeternum nauta
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:24 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 16):
For a route that is supposed to be a bobby dazzler - with all those forced American connections - I don't think that's anything to write home about.

If you assume 100% usage of old configuration 744ERs the LF is over 100%. I understand there are some load restrictions on the eastbound leg, although I didn't include them as I don't know the exact amount.

Aren't you ignoring that its the first month of flying it daily? Let's see how it grows over time.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
The sort who has probably done more than any other in the past couple of decades to make international flying successful

I guess history will eventually make its judgement on that one. I think he's well on his way to making QF a much smaller airline.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:27 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 17):
Aren't you ignoring that its the first month of flying it daily? Let's see how it grows over time.

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm going by the load factor you posted and used as a stick to beat Alan Joyce.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 17):
I think he's well on his way to making QF a much smaller airline.

A somewhat smaller airline, perhaps. And the problem with that is - ?

mariner

[Edited 2012-10-03 22:31:00]
aeternum nauta
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:40 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 18):
A somewhat smaller airline, perhaps. And the problem with that is - ?

Lower profit potential, less economies of scale and less network effect.

Of course, it is possible that it will be more profitable while being smaller. I'll believe that one when I see it.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:58 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 11):
I dont understand the FRA decision either... why keep the route going via SIN for only 6 months? Wont that just confuse people further? And for those 6 months, with all the EK services via DXB won't it just become more of a loss maker? I suspect more in this story...

EK codeshare on SIN-FRA? That'll irritate the Germans no end! Also seems to reflect a lack of available A330 capacity until JQ starts getting 787's mid next year which will allow the 744 to be pulled?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:59 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 19):
Of course, it is possible that it will be more profitable while being smaller. I'll believe that one when I see it.

It is arguably true that airlines can't shrink to profitability - if costs stay the same. If costs are reduced, there is no reason why it shouldn't happen.

On the network side, if FRA were making a decent return, I doubt it would be cancelled. If it isn't making money - why fly it? No one bitches and moans because Virgin dropped the money-losing (for it) JNB.

The aviation world - especially as it affects Australia - has changed quite dramatically, and Qantas has been under considerable assault. It doesn't affect Virgin Australia nearly so much because it is an international newcomer.

The way people travel has changed, too, embracing lower fares - and the places they travel to and from.

Something has to give. So I think the TWU submission to the ACCC is an appalling document (and I'm an old union man), which point blank refuses to admit that reality.

marner
aeternum nauta
 
QF762
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:10 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:31 am

Quoting allrite (Reply 7):
Also note that the services to Frankfurt will continue until October 2013

I would imagine this has been kept as they will need ACCC approval to change this/begin code-sharing with EK. Better to keep having passengers booking and paying (and then change them over once approval is granted) then lose them to potentially another carrier while they can't book with QF/EK yet. Better long-term net gain...?
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:48 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 21):
On the network side, if FRA were making a decent return, I doubt it would be cancelled. If it isn't making money - why fly it? No one bitches and moans because Virgin dropped the money-losing (for it) JNB.

I presume that it is losing money in the current environment. Is it a perennial loss maker? I understood it to be well utilised. I understood that the SFO flight generally made money but short term losses saw it cancelled; a troubling decision. Is this example any different? I don't have enough info.

Quoting mariner (Reply 21):
No one bitches and moans because Virgin dropped the money-losing (for it) JNB.

Perhaps because they believed that DJ could never turn a profit from it with the current EDTO interpretation.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1213
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:11 am

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 3):
Melbourne does need that rail link and badly, but for some unbelivable reason they just wont entertain the idea,

Because Melbourne Airport, which is run by the 'millionaires factory', makes too much money out of parking. Politcally dangerous to upset them too much. I stayed in the long term parking, it is now a minimum charge of five days. Bunch of greedy *******.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:13 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 23):
I presume that it is losing money in the current environment. Is it a perennial loss maker? I understood it to be well utilised.

I suppose when it started it may have done quite well, but again - the world has changed. Time was when Qantas served a bunch of European cities and they didn't drop 'em because they were profitable.

FRA may make a contribution to network. But unless it is providing a decent return, it is a cost to network and other stations have to work harder.

Same with:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 23):
I understood that the SFO flight generally made money but short term losses saw it cancelled; a troubling decision. Is this example any different? I don't have enough info.

It is incumbent on any manager to send the aircraft where they make the most profit for the airline, or at the very least, the greatest contribution to network

SFO may have been doing all right, but unquestionably there are better connections (with American) at DFW - contribution to network.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 23):
Perhaps because they believed that DJ could never turn a profit from it with the current EDTO interpretation.

The Virgin CEO who started it (who presumably understood EDTO) thought he could make a quid with JNB. Ooops.

mariner

[Edited 2012-10-04 00:19:05]
aeternum nauta
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:39 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 25):
SFO may have been doing all right, but unquestionably there are better connections (with American) at DFW - contribution to network.

Be that as it may, it's not the only place they could have gotten aircraft from.

Quoting mariner (Reply 25):
The Virgin CEO who started it (who presumably understood EDTO) thought he could make a quid with JNB. Ooops.

Perhaps so, but my read is that they were looking for somewhere to fly their aircraft to, rather than they thought there would be easy money in JNB.

Agree with the Oops bit.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:51 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
Be that as it may, it's not the only place they could have gotten aircraft from.

I don't understand the affection for SFO. Having lived there, it is quite a long way down my list of US cities to visit.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
Perhaps so, but my read is that they were looking for somewhere to fly their aircraft to, rather than they thought there would be easy money in JNB.

I know of very few airline CEO's who start routes they don't expect to make money, especially an expensive high profile, long distance route such as JNB.

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

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:54 am

Daily A380 services from Sydney and Melbourne to London Heathrow, via Dubai.
Singapore to Frankfurt services to operate until October 2013.
Eleven Sydney to Singapore services per week, four timed to better connect to onward flights within Asia.
Maintaining the same number of services to Singapore from Melbourne (retimed), Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth.

With Asia a critical part of our future, I’m also pleased to confirm that we’ll continue the refurbishment of our First Lounge in Hong Kong and the Business Lounge in Singapore.

Interesting to see HKG will continue to have F/C on offer... Could we see the 4 x weekly A380 service bumped up to 7 x weekly...?

British Airways Joint Services Agreement
While the Joint Services Agreement with British Airways is ending in March 2013, customers who want to travel to London via Singapore will be able to connect onto BA’s Singapore-London flights under a codeshare arrangement.

Has SIN been seen as a potential A380 destination once BA take delivery of the aircraft next year...?

EK413

[Edited 2012-10-04 01:58:02]
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:11 am

I have to 2nd the DFW decision as a good one. I've used it, a few times and I really like it despite it meaning the connection is to American. Why? it just works so well, it avoids the hell hole that is LAX (upgraded int terminal or not you still need to endure the domestic ones to get anywhere, and the transfers aren't fun). And outside UAL SFO isn't gonna give anybody any serious choice of connections. But DFW works... even for cities like SLC or DEN that actually involve a back track. It in one case for me was still faster! And while the majority of DFW is still in the 70s (though it is being upgraded) terminal D, where QF comes, and were the majority of AA's "big domestic' destinations depart from is new modern and clean. And if you had to go to a smaller destination, and you went to LAX, chances are you'd need to go to another hub first anyway. So a short trip into the older part of DFW is still a better experience. And it doesnt just offer USA either, it offers me cities as far away as Sao Paulo. Something SFO could never do. The fastest way to somewhere like CCS, or anywhere in central America. And if we go north, and deep into canada...we can go once again straight into the secondary cities avoiding the double connection. If the western part of the US isn't your destination, This is a much better flight, and something United isn't offering its PAX. Not ex Australia anyway. This was one of the recent better moves, even if it cost SFO its service.
 
vhebb
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:17 am

With QF soon to own 100% of AaE looks like the current fleet of B733Fs and 146s will be rebranded as Qantas Freight:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/busine...-debt/story-e6frg95x-1226486891514

Cheers
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:22 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 23):
I understood that the SFO flight generally made money but short term losses saw it cancelled; a troubling decision.

Actually it made money until the day it was closed (apparently). It was sacrificed (probably logically) for DFW which was seen to be of more benefit to the network and had better long-term profit opportunities.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
it's not the only place they could have gotten aircraft from.

Where? Don't even think about suggesting that they cut QF15/16, I guess QF107/8 might have worked (at least the SYD-LAX portion) but there is a lot more ex-Australia originating traffic to Los Angeles than San Francisco. JNB was water tight, FRA maybe?

Also there is the issue of possibly having too much capacity to the USA had they sought to run SFO and DFW at the same time
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:32 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 31):
Where?

What about NRT a few times a week? Fill it in with an A330, perhaps from QF87/88. Might need to shuffle some A332s and A333s for that, I guess.

Of course, there is also just not retiring a 744.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 31):
Also there is the issue of possibly having too much capacity to the USA had they sought to run SFO and DFW at the same time

That would make sense. Anyone know if this is the case?
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1213
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:42 am

Profits per car park at Melbourne and Sydney airports.

Melbourne Airport made an annual $87 million profit from car parking - $5115 on each spot. Each space in Sydney earned nearly $8000 a year, $5600 of which was gross profit.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/travel/trav...-20120925-26jgd.html#ixzz28KFoGJUS


[Edited 2012-10-04 03:43:24]
 
carryon
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:28 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:30 pm

Hello everyone! Avid reader of the Aus thread and contributor, I'm studying my Masters in Air Transport Management in Melbourne and currently writing my thesis on airline alliances. I'm researching future strategic direction of airline alliance partnerships, and the factors influencing this including passenger experiences and expectations.

I'm interested to hear from a.net'ers on your airline and alliance experiences as passengers: www.surveymonkey.com/s/airlinealliancesurvey

I greatly appreciate any and all help, thanks!  

[Edited 2012-10-04 05:31:06]

[Edited 2012-10-04 05:32:16]

[Edited 2012-10-04 05:32:40]
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:25 pm

Reports coming out that the SYD-SIN-FRA flight has made an emergency landing in DRW due to smoke in the cabin. All seems to be ok
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:00 am

LAN has just touched down in SYD any idea why the 7 hour delay...?

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 1763
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:46 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 27):
I don't understand the affection for SFO. Having lived there, it is quite a long way down my list of US cities to visit.

I'm guessing you lived in Oakland then. I'm sure SFO was pretty high on your must-see list before you moved there though...
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:13 am

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 37):
I'm guessing you lived in Oakland then. I'm sure SFO was pretty high on your must-see list before you moved there though...

Oakland? I've driven through it and found very few reasons to stop.

I lived downtown SF, I had a loft south of Market, partly because it's where my partner, a party animal, wanted to be.

I agree, the very first time I went to SF (about 1975) I thought it was terrific, but it is been diminishing returns ever since. When we actually lived there, I wanted to leave. So I did.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
qf002
Posts: 3084
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:14 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):
What sort of dip stick is Alan Joyce, deferring the 13th and 14th A380s? How is he still the CEO?

QF does not need the 13th and 14th A380's to run DFW with an A380. There is currently plenty of slack in the A380 fleet (which is covering reconfigurations at the moment, which end March or April next year), so it would be possible to fly DFW daily with the A380 if they ended the A380 service to HKG.

That looks increasingly unlikely if they are pressing on with the new HKG F lounge, but if they thought that they could make a killing with the A380 on this route then they would have no trouble finding them... That said, I doubt it's the right aircraft given the configuration.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
Any news yet if QF51/52 will be retimed to a morning departure, and whether it will go 744 next year?

I doubt it will be, given that the arrival into SIN is still earlier than the new MEL flights.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 38):
I agree, the very first time I went to SF (about 1975) I thought it was terrific, but it is been diminishing returns ever since. When we actually lived there, I wanted to leave. So I did.

Really? I lived at 15th and Roosevelt and had a great time there. Love going back and seeing friends. It's got all the great attributes of Sydney but is more laid back and compact.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 31):
Actually it made money until the day it was closed (apparently). It was sacrificed (probably logically) for DFW which was seen to be of more benefit to the network and had better long-term profit opportunities.

I actually though they should have kept both SFO and done DFW while they drew down LHR routes. That's where they could have got 744's from. I always found SFO much easier to connect onto AA flights to NYC, ORD or DFW or even onto Alaska flghts up and down the West Coast. If you weren't going to LA and wanted a nicer entrance experience to the US, SFO was the place to go.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 31):
Also there is the issue of possibly having too much capacity to the USA had they sought to run SFO and DFW at the same time

Yet they've now got the equivalent capacity into DFW and LAX between daily 744's and the A380's. It would have only taken 1 744 to have kept SFO going 3 per week to maintain it so realistically it wouldn't have cost QF too much.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:46 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 40):
Really? I lived at 15th and Roosevelt and had a great time there. Love going back and seeing friends. It's got all the great attributes of Sydney but is more laid back and compact.

Each to their own.

But discounting my views (it's business, it isn't personal) I was puzzled that people were so agitated that Qantas dropped SFO. The airline continues to serve California, at LAX.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:05 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 41):
But discounting my views (it's business, it isn't personal) I was puzzled that people were so agitated that Qantas dropped SFO. The airline continues to serve California, at LAX.

For Qantas, there are a couple of factors to consider;

1. In general people in Northern California don't connect at LAX. I'm sure you know it's Sydney vs Melbourne on a bigger scale.

2. When QF ditched SFO it basically ditched the business coming from there which includes Silicon Valley - Google, Apple, Facebook etc who's employees do travel quite regularly. That's not to say QF doesn't pick up Corporate traffic through LAX, it does, but Corporates in Northern California are going to pick United or NZ for their business travel to here to avoid the LAX connection. San Francisco is also still more of a banking and finance city than Los Angeles is with all of the Venture Capital and other firms funding Silicon Valley. QF is essentially missing out on that traffic as well.

That's why I think QF should have maintained their presence at SFO while they built DFW. If anything DFW is a LAX reliever and wouldn't compete with SFO flights.
 
smi0006
Posts: 831
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:10 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 32):
What about NRT a few times a week? Fill it in with an A330, perhaps from QF87/88. Might need to shuffle some A332s and A333s for that, I guess.

This could work especially if MEL-NRT was added as an A332 as well, shift the connecting traffic out of SYD. I am looking forward to more of their announcements in the next few weeks.

I think we will see a few more 744s being reconfigured and hang around a while longer. I also feel the A330s with be upgraded with improved products, potentially also W. But we will see!

Change is good!

[Edited 2012-10-04 23:21:23]
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:36 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 42):
1. In general people in Northern California don't connect at LAX. I'm sure you know it's Sydney vs Melbourne on a bigger scale.

I didn't find that, but again, each to their own.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 42):
2. When QF ditched SFO it basically ditched the business coming from there which includes Silicon Valley - Google, Apple, Facebook etc who's employees do travel quite regularly.

All you say may be true, but I take the view that the people at the airline have access to infinitely more information than I have - where people travel to, how they travel, how much they are prepared to pay - and the decision to start, or drop any city is not made lightly.

I'm sure the Silicon Valley people do travel, but I've never thought of it as a "mobile" industry - their nearest airport, SJC, struggles mightily, with no international service except Mexico, and much of the service it does have being intra-California, or the closest states.

Financiers? Sure. But how much to they travel to Australia?

Mostly, I do not believe that any airline can be all things to all people. There's more, but I'd just be repeating myself:

Quoting mariner (Reply 25):
It is incumbent on any manager to send the aircraft where they make the most profit for the airline, or at the very least, the greatest contribution to network

Much as I dislike the alliances, others use them, and there's no question in my mind that DFW is of much greater value to Qantas because of American/One World.

For the record, I don't like Dallas much either, but it isn't about me.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:49 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 39):
QF does not need the 13th and 14th A380's to run DFW with an A380.

That would require the retention of first class in some 744s or dropping first from the HKG route. It would also have no allowance for maintenance.

Once the reconfigs are finished, their A380 utilisation will be:
3 SYD-x-LHR
3 MEL-x-LHR
2 SYD-LAX
2 MEL-LAX
1 SYD-HKG
1 spare/maintenance
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:53 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 44):
I'm sure the Silicon Valley people do travel, but I've never thought of it as a "mobile" industry - their nearest airport, SJC, struggles mightily, with no international service except Mexico, and much of the service it does have being intra-California, or the closest states.

Apple employee's from here quite regularly travel back to Cupertino, especially when product announcements are imminent. Same for Google. Australian dotcom entreprenuers, there are quite a few of them out there, also look to the Venture Capital firms in the Valley for seed funding and the like so there is a surprising amount of traffic that goes back and forth. SJC, like Oakland, is more of a domestic reliever airport for SFO than anything else and that's especially the case with the United hub at SFO. It's more convenient for most Bay Area residents to get to SFO than what it is to get to SJC. That's not true of Oakland where BART makes it especially easy to get to and from which is why WN has such a large operation from there.

Quoting mariner (Reply 44):
Financiers? Sure. But how much to they travel to Australia?

It's not really the financiers that are doing the travelling, it's more the people who are seeking finance going over to present their cases. It's also the various due diligence, legal and banking reps of the financiers, (the one's doing the legwork), that are doing the travelling.

In relation to the Australian question, let me retort by asking how of Air New Zealands SFO pax, (daily 747-400), are staying in New Zealand vs connecting to Australia? There is no reason why QF couldn't have left SFO as is and made a 744 available for it but the fact is they didn't want to. The strategy, just like Americans, was to shrink down and deliver pax to alliance hubs. But the contradictions is that if it was profitable, and apparently it was, when the the bulk of its International ops weren't I'd have though it was obvious to leave it in place and draw down the routes that weren't profitable. So if anything the decision to ax SFO has actually cost QF money because assets were deployed on unprofitable routes in favour of one that was profitable.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:26 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 46):
Apple employee's from here quite regularly travel back to Cupertino, especially when product announcements are imminent.

I'm sure they do, I'm sure there is some traffic. The question is - how much and how much does it pay? And, repeating myself, I am sure that Qantas has more information about that then anyone here.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 46):
SJC, like Oakland, is more of a domestic reliever airport for SFO than anything else and that's especially the case with the United hub at SFO.

That may be true now - it hasn't always been the case. In 1988 American thought enough of SJC to have a focus city at there (with flights to Asia). That's gone. The bursting of the dot.com bubble and 9/11 changed a lot of things.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 46):
It's not really the financiers that are doing the travelling, it's more the people who are seeking finance going over to present their cases. It's also the various due diligence, legal and banking reps of the financiers, (the one's doing the legwork), that are doing the travelling.

We're just going round in circles. Yes, there may be some of that traffic. My experience tells me that a deal of that traffic will also include LAX - where there is a large Australian community (introductions) and infrastructure - but I accept that's not true of all of them.

Personally, I know very few people, some but not many, who only fly to one city when they go to the US (tourists going to Disneyland, maybe) and if they do it is likely to be Los Angeles, certainly in my business.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 46):
In relation to the Australian question, let me retort by asking how of Air New Zealands SFO pax, (daily 747-400), are staying in New Zealand vs connecting to Australia?

I imagine quite a few are going on. And, since I live here and have split loyalties, I'm quite glad of it, for Air NZ's sake.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 46):
But the contradictions is that if it was profitable, and apparently it was, when the the bulk of its International ops weren't I'd have though it was obvious to leave it in place and draw down the routes that weren't profitable.

I see that posted here a lot, but was it actually profitable? Or - more pertinently - how profitable was it?

mariner

[Edited 2012-10-05 00:51:32]
aeternum nauta
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:29 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 47):
I see that posted here a lot, but was it actually profitable? Or - more pertinently - how profitable was it?

If it's still profitable in hard times like at present shouldn't it be kept going for the upside if times improve?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18189
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 64

Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:35 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 48):
If it's still profitable in hard times like at present shouldn't it be kept going for the upside if times improve

Well, again, was it? I know it is common currency here but has Qantas actually said SFO was making money when they canned it - or, more relevantly, how much money?

I don't know, I've only seen that 'it wasn't a failure." You blokes seem to have all the answers. I really don't get this grief about SFO it didn't make much contribution to network.

mariner

[Edited 2012-10-05 00:56:40]
aeternum nauta

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, AirIndia, AsiaTravel, Baidu [Spider], blacksoviet, Bluebird191, bvseball, DocLightning, LAX772LR, rohel777, speedygonzales, transit, ttm, wstakl and 259 guests