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

Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:50 am

Welcome to the Australia Aviation Thread #68 in the midst of some big announcements.

Previously we discussed:

* Predictions for Melbourne
* Royal Brunei to keep MEL over BNE putting politics ahead of logic
* Virgin Australia moves to Sabre, replaces DJ with VA
* CZ reinstates PER-CAN, announces BNE
* JQ breakdown in HNL
* Issues with PER redevelopment
* JQ, QF and the 787 issues
* Additional 5 717s for QantasLink
* Weather related diversions
* Could QF base aircraft in Dubai for flights EK is constrained from flying?
* QF loses NZ ground handling contract to Toll Dnata
* QF removes its code from JQ domestic flights between major capitals
* Discussion of Qantas special liveries
* MH adding flights to BNE
* TransAsia rumoured to fly to Australia and NZ
* QF announces changes to Asian network, to cease FRA in April.

Happy flying.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 3:52 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 205):
So the new Asian strategy is deferred another 3 years and even that may be optimnistic given the 787-9s in 2016 are no certainty given the current dramas. Surely QF understands that SQ,CX and the Chinese carriers are not going to sit on their hands for 3 years. By 2016, there will be litlle of worth for QF to consider that is not already serviced.

Entirely agreed. If QF wants to resume services to India, Beijing and Seoul they'd better do it before 2016! It's also worthwhile noting that nowhere is there anything more ambitious for the 789. No resumption of SFO, FCO or a new service to a place like GRU. It's going to be really interesting to see what happens when;

- We know the outcome of the current Italy traffic rights. If QF loses 200 seats a week to Virgin the only way they can make it up is be commencing services. If they lose half of the remainder, 300 seats per week, again the only way to make it up is to actually fly it;
- The SAA codeshare finishes. The cynic in me thinks that QF will entirely abandon the PER-South Africa market and concentrate on SYD.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 205):
Truly bizarre ceasing PER-HKG!!! You can still earn FF points on CX but CX must be wrapped, Likewise SQ will gladly accept the ADL pax heading to Asia.

The cynic in me is waiting for the Jetstar announcement.........
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 4:21 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 1):
If QF wants to resume services to India, Beijing and Seoul they'd better do it before 2016!

Will they have the aircraft? I thought (could be wrong) the 787's weren't coming until 2016.

But I wonder if anything can be carved in granite with that aircraft and I'm wondering if there is a Plan B.

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

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 4:44 am

[quote=mariner,reply=2]Will they have the aircraft? I thought (could be wrong) the 787's weren't coming until 2016.

But I wonder if anything can be carved in granite with that aircraft and I'm wondering if there is a Plan B.

I think the Plan B is already in place - instead of the A332's coming from JQ back to Domestic, they go to International instead. The A332 has plenty of range to do India, China, Korea and most of the rest of the region from Australia while the 767's, with the IPADS etc, are more than adequate for the domestic trunk network. It may be less efficient to keep them around but if QF wants to do it, they've got the capability.

Otherwise, and I actually think this is a good idea, QF could obtain some 737-900ER's and use them on the East Coast trunk routes while they split the A332's coming from Jetstar between International and Domestic. The 4 JQ A332's with the lighter floors could come back to Domestic along with a couple of others while the balance are upgraded to A380 style and go International. That kills two birds with 1 stone while allowing QF to keep a simplified domestic fleet and retiring the 767's.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 4:48 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 3):
I think the Plan B is already in place - instead of the A332's coming from JQ back to Domestic, they go to International instead.

Sounds good to me.

I actually meant a slightly broader Plan B - a few more A330's - but I'll go with your versions of it, for now.  

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

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:56 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 4):
I actually meant a slightly broader Plan B - a few more A330's - but I'll go with your versions of it, for now

I'm entirely with you Mariner! I think a few more A330's couldn't hurt given the problems with the 787 program.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:11 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 5):
I think a few more A330's couldn't hurt given the problems with the 787 program.

Only problem is Airbus has no available slots on their A330 line in the short-term.

They could approach EK who is rumoured to be reducing their A332 fleet as new 77Ws arrive but these are RR powered, not GE powered like the existing QF fleet and VA's experience with the ex-EK A332s has not been a happy one!!
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
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:19 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 5):
I think a few more A330's couldn't hurt given the problems with the 787 program.

I think it is close to essential, but maybe I'm a tad more wary (cynical?) about the 787 deliveries than most.

Every time AJ sings the praises of the aircraft, I wonder when he'll wake up and smell the coffee. It can only change the game when it's flying - and it ain't.

I think the same of Air New Zealand and the only way I can explain it is with the analyst Richard Aboulafia's comment: "the drug-like rush of the 787."

It seems to be a tough addiction to break. As I said in the other thread, it is astonishing to me that the then management of Qantas, supposedly hard-headed business people, went doolalley and bet a large part of the farm on so much new technology - and didn't have a back-up plan.

mariner

[Edited 2013-02-03 22:28:26]
aeternum nauta
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:55 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 7):
Every time AJ sings the praises of the aircraft, I wonder when he'll wake up and smell the coffee. It can only change the game when it's flying - and it ain't.

I have a friend who is constantly singing the praises of how wonderful her husband is. One of my less than tolerant friends, admittedly when he was drunk, asked her if she kept repeating herself to convince us or to try and convince herself. I see Alan Joyce's comments about the 787 in the same light.  
Quoting tullamarine (Reply 6):
Only problem is Airbus has no available slots on their A330 line in the short-term.

Given QF is a substantial Airbus operator, if they needed them I'll bet Airbus could find them. I'd go as far to say that QF should cancel a couple of the A380's they have deferred and convert them to A330's. That works well for Airbus, who has orders now, and for QF taking A380's deferred to 2020 off of their order book. I doubt QF would take second hand aircraft that don't have commonality with the existing fleet.
 
User avatar
9MMPD
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:30 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 7:04 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 8):
I doubt QF would take second hand aircraft that don't have commonality with the existing fleet.

VH-OEB, VH-OEC, VH-OED, VH-ZXA, VH-ZXB, VH-ZXC, VH-ZXD, VH-ZXE, VH-ZXF & VH-ZXG.

There is precedent.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 7:26 am

Quoting 9MMPD (Reply 9):
There is precedent.

Let me re-phrase to "I doubt they would do it again". Considering they are getting rid of the ex BA 767's and 2 of the first 744's to be retired were bought second hand, and were apparently problematic to maintain, I'd say it's not an experiment that QF will want to repeat!
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:16 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 1):
Quoting tullamarine (Reply 205):
Truly bizarre ceasing PER-HKG!!! You can still earn FF points on CX but CX must be wrapped, Likewise SQ will gladly accept the ADL pax heading to Asia.

The cynic in me is waiting for the Jetstar announcement.........

Yes I tend to agree JQ are just waiting in the wings to take over these routes. It does amaze me how QF can just give up citys in its own back yard to the competition. Perth is a city on its own with a large ex pat english population over there most of the mining HQ's are located over there you would think there would be enough buisness for QF out of Perth alone. I am sure both SQ and CX must be rubbing their hands together. Why hasnt QF created an Indian Ocean network out of Perth? Holiday places like the Seychelles, Mauritius, Madagascar. If the codeshare with SAA ends operate Perth/Joburg, even the Maldives all from Perth I am sure they could make money some how all from Perth make Perth a West Coast hub.
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:10 am

Am I the only one who finds it absolutely hilarious that EK and SQ can manage to fill ginourmous Boeing 777 aircraft 3-4 x daily and offer 21-28 weekly flights to a single destination - while all QF will now offer PER passengers is a daily Singapore service? I thought we'd see an INCREASE in Asian flying, perhaps bringing DPS and CGK back to QF mainline, heck even the return of Tokyo to strengthen JQ Japan. Absolutely pathetic if you ask me. This is why I'm a proud Singapore Airlines frequent flier. Bright days ahead for all the Asian airlines flying into WA.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:29 am

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 12):
This is why I'm a proud Singapore Airlines frequent flier. Bright days ahead for all the Asian airlines flying into WA.

Why should Qantas offer more flights if you're so determined to fly with Singapore?

It's true of any airline - use it or lose it. You can't have it both ways.

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

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:41 am

There are 4 phases to be announced, today's was phase 1...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:49 am

Yeah well I bet the South Australians and West Australians dont think much of the 1st phase.
 
TN486
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:08 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:59 am

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 15):

LOL, well said sir.
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:02 am

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 15):

No need to shoot the messenger!

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:18 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 17):
No need to shoot the messenger!

LoL No you are very safe my friend no bullets here EK413  
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:27 am

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 18):

Quoting EK413 (Reply 17):
No need to shoot the messenger!

LoL No you are very safe my friend no bullets here EK413

Hopefully next 3 phases come with better news for South & West Australians...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:22 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 12):
Am I the only one who finds it absolutely hilarious that EK and SQ can manage to fill ginourmous Boeing 777 aircraft 3-4 x daily and offer 21-28 weekly flights to a single destination - while all QF will now offer PER passengers is a daily Singapore service? I thought we'd see an INCREASE in Asian flying, perhaps bringing DPS and CGK back to QF mainline, heck even the return of Tokyo to strengthen JQ Japan. Absolutely pathetic if you ask me. This is why I'm a proud Singapore Airlines frequent flier. Bright days ahead for all the Asian airlines flying into WA

No, its called a different business model. SQ, EK, CX etc are 'hub carriers' whereas QF is effectively a point to point carrier.

Lets take PER as an example. SQ flying into PER not only carries those flying direct from PER-SIN (i.e. O&D) but also connecting/transit traffic (e.g. those flying from PER who want to fly into Paris,London, Beijing, Mumbai, Tokyo, Zurich etc but connect in Singapore).
Even with the previous QF 'mini-hub' in SIN, QF's PER-SIN flight was effectively comprised of 2 categories of passengers (those going to LHR/FRA and connecting on the QF LHR/FRA services and those flying just into Singapore). Compare that with SQ, who can connect the PER traffic with their entire network in Asia/Sub-continent and Europe.

In terms of DPS/CGK going back to QF mainline, ain't going to happen. They are tourist/VFR markets and will never be high yielding enough to support a QF service.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:06 pm

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 20):
No, its called a different business model. SQ, EK, CX etc are 'hub carriers' whereas QF is effectively a point to point carrier.


And QF is the national carrier of Australia - Australia is not Sydney.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:23 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 21):
And QF is the national carrier of Australia - Australia is not Sydney.

It may be the national carrier but it's purpose is not to serve every city out of Australia, but it is to run an airline profitably. If that means certain markets/cities don't get served then so be it.

And let's not go down the route of QF is always so Sydney 'centric'. There's a good reason why Sydney gets most of the traffic, it's because that's where the greatest demand is. One only needs to look at the number and frequency (and size of airplane) of all the other airlines that fly into SYD vs MEL/BNE/ADL/PER and it's no coincidence that QF is not the only airline which focuses the majority of their ops at SYD.

If the other capital cities could support direct services (i.e. make money and generate a return), then QF would be operating those. QF not operating certain services is not because they're brain dead but rather the route isn't sustainable.

**Btw, Yes I am from Sydney and I'm not trying to turn this into a mine is bigger than your's contest.

[Edited 2013-02-04 05:26:44]
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 4:06 pm

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
One only needs to look at the number and frequency (and size of airplane) of all the other airlines that fly into SYD vs MEL/BNE/ADL/PER and it's no coincidence that QF is not the only airline which focuses the majority of their ops at SYD.
SQ and EK's frequency to PER and SYD pretty much match, obviously SYD gets the A380's but, in EK's case, that's simply because PER's management is ludacris.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
If the other capital cities could support direct services (i.e. make money and generate a return), then QF would be operating those. QF not operating certain services is not because they're brain dead but rather the route isn't sustainable.

The twice daily PER-SIN rotation has been profitable. Many occasions I have booked a PER-SIN flight only to find that both flights are sold out and QF wants to route me via Sydney (ha-ha). Sure, a generous amount of feed will be lost with SIN-LHR/FRA leaving, but if Alan Joyce knows how to run an airline and isn't talking smack (who am I kidding), new demand should be generated through an increase in cooperation with QF's Asian partners and a better schedule alignment. This proposed "Asian expansion" is complete BS for WA, like always. I highly doubt we'll see any new destinations added in the next "four phases" either. I'm not demanding QF operate flights to every Asian capital, but HKG three times a week is a vital route, unless they want to pass even more of their traffic to CX.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 22):
**Btw, Yes I am from Sydney and I'm not trying to turn this into a mine is bigger than your's contest.

Oh don't worry, us in the West have Qatar!   

No disrespect to you, but I don't think you understand simply because you have the luxury of Qantas' extensive and expansive hub at your doorstep. Saying PER cannot sustain anything more than a flimsy A330 to Singapore makes no logical sense when almost every other established airline in PER has doubled or even tripled their capacity within the last 12-24 months. Yes, EK and SQ capture alot of connecting traffic, but there is significant O&D demand for Singapore (it's one of Australia's most travelled international routes) and Hong Kong. Qantas' cuts to the PER network have not gone unnoticed, many people over here believe QF is utterly useless and overpriced with their two (and in many cases, three) stop journies to anywhere in Europe but LHR. I used to be very patriotic about my flag carrier, but AJ seriously needs to go. Pronto.

[Edited 2013-02-04 08:08:23]

[Edited 2013-02-04 08:11:17]
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:03 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 23):
Saying PER cannot sustain anything more than a flimsy A330 to Singapore makes no logical sense when almost every other established airline in PER has doubled or even tripled their capacity within the last 12-24 months.

And there you have the answer - or a large part of it.

Australians have been flocking to the ME/Asian carriers (for whatever reason and price may be the biggest) but then complain if Qantas cuts service.

I'm not sure why "use it or lose it" is so hard to understand. If you want more Qantas at PER you have to use it.

All the airline can do is offer - it can't actually force people to part with their money.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4301
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:44 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 21):

And QF is the national carrier of Australia - Australia is not Sydney.

Would you like to prove that?
QF ceased being the "National Carrier" in the 1990s when the government sold it. Its now just another profit driven company. It does not owe anybody & anywhere services that it perceives as not profitable or not profitable enough.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:56 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
I'm not sure why "use it or lose it" is so hard to understand. If you want more Qantas at PER you have to use it.

You're pretty much saying you expect WA passengers to fork out hundreds of extra dollars and add ridiculous backtracking/valuable hours to an itinerary so Qantas won't threaten to dismantle an already-absysmal hub? The reason nobody flies QF from PER is because they don't fly anywhere anymore!
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:59 am

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 26):
You're pretty much saying you expect WA passengers to fork out hundreds of extra dollars and add ridiculous backtracking/valuable hours to an itinerary so Qantas won't threaten to dismantle an already-absysmal hub?

No, I am not saying anything like that. I'm saying that an airline can only offer - if people choose not to fly it, or fly others instead, there isn't much the airline can do.

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 26):
The reason nobody flies QF from PER is because they don't fly anywhere anymore!

The question should really be - why doesn't Qantas fly much from Perth anymore?

mariner

[Edited 2013-02-04 19:03:49]
aeternum nauta
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 3:52 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
If you want more Qantas at PER you have to use it.

The QF issue at PER is a couple of things as I see it;

1. The QF domestic situation in Perth has never been stronger. QF has a large share of transcon, Corporate Traffic, lots of FIFO Mining traffic and is the biggest operator of intra-WA routes. This all generates lots of presence for the Frequent Flyer Program and lots points that need places to be redeemed.

2. JQ covers DPS, CGK and SIN from PER which gives QF group coverage of the major leisure routes. 1 x SIN mainline service to cover business people, along with a JQ SIN service to cover the leisure segment, should be enough in terms of services with the question really being that of capacity and what is appropriate for the market.

The real problem with PER, and esp PER-HKG which I've done quite a few times, is that the lack of frequency in the market by QF set it up to be a failure while an A333 was too much aircraft for a 3 x weekly service. A daily A332 properly configured, ie with say 24 Skybeds rather than 36, would be a more appropriate aircraft for PER-HKG and would actually probably be a better aircraft for a sustainable PER-SIN based purely on O&D.

The other thing out of PER that QF doesn't recognise, and that I'm surprised that JQ hasn't also recognised, is there are plenty of shorthaul opportunities available that they should be exploiting. Virgin has PER-Phuket and I don't see any reason why JQ isn't in that market. PER-KUL also has a fair amount of both business, leisure and student traffic and again I don't see any reason why JQ isn't it that market as well. (Even with MAS now being in OW)

In relation to ADL, I'm very surprised they didn't swap the QF A330 for a JQ A330. Although it would cause the usual amount of outrage, it would at least link ADL in with Asia rather than completely abandoning it.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 4:41 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 28):
2. JQ covers DPS, CGK and SIN from PER which gives QF group coverage of the major leisure routes.

That may be part of the problem - perception. Jetstar has achieved what it set out to be, the brand does not carry national connotations.

Too successfully, perhaps. I don't think many Australians get the warm and fuzzies about Jetstar and for the flag wavers among us, that may be important.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 5:39 am

Jetstar operating PER-CGK has had the perverse effect of making Garuda desirable.   
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
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:28 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 30):
Jetstar operating PER-CGK has had the perverse effect of making Garuda desirable.   

I've never had a problem on Garuda. I like the airline.

Then again, I've never had a problem on Jetstar. You blokes must be really, really picky.  

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:40 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 28):
and that I'm surprised that JQ hasn't also recognised, is there are plenty of shorthaul opportunities available that they should be exploiting.

Exactly. I have no idea why JQ haven't looked into flights from PER to KUL, BKI, HKT, SUB or KCH. We've even got PR launching PER-DRW-MNL with an A320 now.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:47 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 30):
Jetstar operating PER-CGK has had the perverse effect of making Garuda desirable.

As much as I agree with Mariner, I think there is room for QF Mainline 737-800 service on CGK. That's what it used to be prior to Jetstar taking over. The problem is the PER-CGK aircraft is operating onwards into the Jetstar Asia network so from an overall network persepective JQ makes a better use of the aircraft. What's also interesting is that while QF promised a daily PER-CGK service, the limited Indonesia capacity they have is dumped primarily into DPS. If QF is serious about PER-CGK then we'll see what happens when more Indonesia capacity comes up. While it's only 2 or 3 a week, it'll never really do any good.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:44 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 33):
As much as I agree with Mariner, I think there is room for QF Mainline 737-800 service on CGK.

Maybe, even probably, but I assume there's a reason they switched it to Jetstar and - I'm guessing - the reason is yield.

It's a curious problem. Indonesia is one of Australia's nearest land mass neighbours, with a vast population but its relationship with Australia is ambivalent and for many Australians it is fly-over country - apart from Bali.

I am surprised (nay, shocked) that there is no Australian air service to Lombok, even just a couple of times a week. It's a beautiful island, almost like Bali used to be, with fine hotels. I am less surprised that there is no air service, even just two or three times a week to Yogjakarta, or several other Indonesian cities. There are quite strong, if old (WW2) Australian ties to Balikpapan, and some oil industry and access to the forests of Borneo, but we won't be flying there on any Australian airline.

These places all within the range of the A320 from PER (or some from DRW) but for Australians, it seems it's Bali - or on to Phuket.

So while others might want more air service from PER (or DRW) to the glamorous capitals of the world, I'm scratching my head that our near neighbour is so under-served.

I know of no other country in the world where this situation exists.

mariner

[Edited 2013-02-05 02:47:12]
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:24 am

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 23):
I used to be very patriotic about my flag carrier, but AJ seriously needs to go. Pronto.

Are you offering to step in, take charge of a well known icon & return it to profitability again without making the necessary changes which AJ had balls to go ahead with & have it done...?

Just remember had it not been for AJ the loyal QF passengers wouldn't be flying the QF anymore due to the ongoing union industrial action... Yes, he grounded the airline but it had to be done to show who's boss...


EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
ben175
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 35):
Are you offering to step in, take charge of a well known icon & return it to profitability again without making the necessary changes which AJ had balls to go ahead with & have it done...?

Why don't you have a scroll through the wall posts on Qantas' Facebook page... you might come to realise that to the people of WA and SA, Qantas is no Australian icon.
 
AirNiugini
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:41 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:33 pm

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 30):

Garuda is bloody good these days mate, you should give them a go next time you head off to South East Asia or Europe...            

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 36):
Why don't you have a scroll through the wall posts on Qantas' Facebook page... you might come to realise that to the people of WA and SA, Qantas is no Australian icon.

People on facebook say outrageous things at the best of times, but I do see what your point is. The people who reply on behalf of QF pretty much copy and paste the same bloody response... Hopeless!!

I do find it a little strange that the QF PR department have not sent AJ out to chat about the latest changes (he has been pretty quiet of late), all I have seen are newspaper articles. It would be good to see QF talking up the good points of the restructure too. (Or maybe there are none.)

Quoting EK413 (Reply 35):
Are you offering to step in, take charge of a well known icon & return it to profitability again without making the necessary changes which AJ had balls to go ahead with & have it done...?

I am, and I would select a few people from this forum to be part of my leadership team too.      

Quoting sydscott (Reply 28):
In relation to ADL, I'm very surprised they didn't swap the QF A330 for a JQ A330. Although it would cause the usual amount of outrage, it would at least link ADL in with Asia rather than completely abandoning it.

I think the loss of ADL - SIN won't be a major inconvenience for those pax flying to Singapore and beyond via MEL. That is if the ADL - MEL connections are well timed with International MEL departures. You usually have to be at the airport 3 hours before for International, and about 30 minutes before hand on a domestic. So the two options might be very similar time from check in in ADL to disembarking in SIN.

I guess the same goes for people who still want to fly from BNE/ADL to LHR via SYD on QF Metal... Shouldn't be too much of a total time difference (however SYD can be nightmarish)

Perth to HKG on the other hand, completely different story.
Its time to fly!
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:55 pm

Every time the subject of QF and routes comes up the "Sydney vs the rest of Australia" comes up, its been like that for decades and will continue to be like that, for those of us that dont live in Sydney we dont have the luxuary of seeing like 10 or more QF tails lined up at the international terminal flying to whats left of their world network. Even here in Melbourne we have lost a few citys served by QF. For Perth over the years QF have not had a vision for Western Australia and this goes back to the GD years, I have always woundered why couldnt have QF years ago make Perth a gateway to Australia from the west like as Sydney is from the east. Perth is a unique city in the fact that it is one of the most isolated citys in the world it has a popluation of over a million people a beautiful city with hot summers mild winters, south of Perth for the wine buffs you have Margret River and for the sufers some of the best waves to ride in the world and beautiful and ruggered coastlline and some great fishing. North of Perth you have Geraldton, and Kalbari and Monkey Mia once again great fishing and holiday places up that way plus Ningaloo Reef which is I belive is on par with the Great Barrier Reef plus Perth itself the city has a very large ex pat English popluation the mining sector that this stupid and desperate Federal Labor Government rely on are head quartered in Perth. So my point is why didnt they over the years QF base a few wide bodys at Perth open up the Indian Ocean and create markets like Seychells, the Maidives, Sri Lanka, and even Madagascar they are with in flying distance of Perth or a one stop flight to LHR via Johannesburg. there are so many markets that QF can try from a city that sits right on the Indian Ocean and is the capital of a State that is bigger than Texas. I find it amazing that the national airline of Australia have all but left Perth with no international service except for Singapore and handed Perth over to the competition. Not even a Perth Auckland service, there is so much that QF can do with Perth and Western Austraila I am sure if they could make Perth a gateway to Australia from the West it could work. Just some of my thoughts. But I dont blame the West Australians being pissed of with last lot of anouncements regarding their city and Qantas.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:57 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 23):
Oh don't worry, us in the West have Qatar!

I could list a number of carriers that fly into SYD and not PER, but I'll let you have your moment in the sun  
Quoting Ben175 (Reply 23):
No disrespect to you, but I don't think you understand simply because you have the luxury of Qantas' extensive and expansive hub at your doorstep. Saying PER cannot sustain anything more than a flimsy A330 to Singapore makes no logical sense when almost every other established airline in PER has doubled or even tripled their capacity within the last 12-24 months. Yes, EK and SQ capture alot of connecting traffic, but there is significant O&D demand for Singapore (it's one of Australia's most travelled international routes) and Hong Kong

As per the previous post by the others in the thread, the other carriers are able to beat QF on route network choices and price (as they have proven lower cost bases). So it becomes a self-perputuating cycle, people fly the other ME/Asian carriers and QF have to reduce/withdraw their services, and as QF withdraws the others pick up the slack left by QF.

But don't get too jealous of us in SYD, whilst we may have QF's main hub here, the QF Intl network is peanuts when compared to EK. EK's FIDS in terminal 3 of DXB is truly astonishing !!  Wow!

[Edited 2013-02-05 04:59:29]
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
User avatar
9MMPD
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:30 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:30 pm

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 38):
Perth is a unique city in the fact that it is one of the most isolated citys in the world it has a popluation of over a million people

We are close the 2 million now (curently 1.9) thats alot of travellers to forsake.

Just hope AJ can get QF International back on its feet and then use some imagination for Perth.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:39 pm

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 38):
the mining sector that this stupid and desperate Federal Labor Government rely on are head quartered in Perth.

If you're trying to sell Perth and Western Australia, you lost me right there.

If you want Qantas to be a "national carrier" you'd better push your mates on the other side of politics to re-nationalise the airline.

But personally, I'd turn BME into an international airport.  

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

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:10 pm

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 36):

you might come to realise that to the people of WA and SA, Qantas is no Australian icon.

I never said "Australian icon"... I said "well known icon"...

As for those comments on Facebook it comes from those which don't understand how the industry works...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:50 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 34):
Maybe, even probably, but I assume there's a reason they switched it to Jetstar and - I'm guessing - the reason is yield.

Personally I doubt that. I think the reason has more to do with Jetstar being able to use the Australian beyond rights into Singapore to connect in with the Jetstar Asia Network, especially since it's a Jetstar Asia aircraft operating PER-CGK under a leasing arrangement, whereas QF mainline, having no real need to connect CGK-SIN, wouldn't use them. So I think it has more to do with that than yield.

Quoting mariner (Reply 34):
So while others might want more air service from PER (or DRW) to the glamorous capitals of the world, I'm scratching my head that our near neighbour is so under-served.

I think what we really need are Australia-Indonesia Open Skies. At the moment all of the Indonesia capacity on the Australian end is entirely utilised. An Open Skies arrangement would encourage the connecting of these secondary cities and allow lots more capacity into CGK and DPS. That, along with more capacity into Italy, France and Canada, should be high on the list of things to do for DFAT and the Dept of Transport.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 39):
I could list a number of carriers that fly into SYD and not PER, but I'll let you have your moment in the sun

That works the other way around as well. There are a number that fly into Perth that don't fly into SYD.  
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18185
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:57 pm

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 43):
So I think it has more to do with that than yield.

Maybe. If aircraft use is the key to it, that that strikes me as entirely valid, too. It is all Qantas Group.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:50 pm

Quoting sydscott (Reply 3):
QF could obtain some 737-900ER's and use them on the East Coast trunk routes while they split the A332's coming from Jetstar between International and Domestic.

I've always thought this, and still do. In fact I always wondered where the 757 went with QF. A 757 style aircraft (739MAX or 321NEO) would be perfect for Australian domestic. Most markets operate with a mix of 767 and 737 anyway, so meet them half way and make everything 739. If they wanted they could even go down the AA 321 route and have a flAAgship product for PER-SYD/MEL/BNE.

The A321/739 (again using a flAAghsip interior) would also be perfect for near-Asia flying, and not just from PER/DRW. For example, CGK and MNL (maybe even SIN) should be within the NEO's range from BNE.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 3):
I think the Plan B is already in place - instead of the A332's coming from JQ back to Domestic, they go to International instead. The A332 has plenty of range to do India, China, Korea and most of the rest of the region from Australia while the 767's, with the IPADS etc, are more than adequate for the domestic trunk network.

Sounds good to me. I flew on a refurbished iPad 767 (a HNL bird) last week and was VERY impressed. They will be fine for domestic routes for the rest of this decade.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 43):
I think what we really need are Australia-Indonesia Open Skies

Sopt on. Personally I don't doubt that there is demand for an A320 from Yogyakarta to Australia. However, so long as the bilateral limits frequency then practically every authority will be used to DPS. An open skies agreement should be the #1 aviation priority IMHO.

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 21):
And QF is the national carrier of Australia - Australia is not Sydney.

If that is how you feel, then I suggest that you start lobbying the Commonwealth to re-nationalize Qantas, and run it as a public transport provider.

If not, let Qantas be operated in a profit-maximizing manner for the benefit of its shareholders, allowing those same shareholders' management team to pursue those markets where it sees the greatest profit potential. *


*NB: I don't, and never have, live in Sydney, and can in fact count on one hand the number of time that I have been to that city in my life.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
fiscal
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:47 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 pm

Unlike some I can understand the rationale behind the reduced services out of Perth, but I am personally more concerned with the redemption status for QF FF points out of Perth. At present with all of the changes to schedules and alliances, Perth QF FF's have been left severely disadvantaged. Take for instance a PER - LHR redemption. You now only have the choice of CX via HGK, or QF via MEL or SYD, all of which require significant additional points.

I know that this may well change after 1st April, with QF codesharing on EK metal, but we have to wait for those arrangements to be made, and there has been no word yet on how generous the offerings may be, especially in Premium seats.
 
AirbusA322
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 6:38 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:52 pm

Tiger to launch:
SYD-ASP
SYD-CNS

MEL-ASP
MEL-MCY

Pending Announcement from the company.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:23 am

Quoting fiscal (Reply 46):
You now only have the choice of CX via HGK

Personally, if I was travelling in business I'd go with CX over QF, and EK, anyday. But I do take your point and it does seem counter intuitive to reduce opportuities to redeem while at the same time hugely growing the domestic base from which people in PER can earn points.
 
fiscal
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 11:47 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 68

Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:31 am

Funny how this topic was talking about PER-CGK

http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/...-june/story-e6frg2qc-1226571493812

Seems Garuda has beaten us to it.