Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11105
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 6:42 am

Australian Aviation Thread Part 144 is now open. Please continue here

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1337885

In Part 143 we discussed

SFO has emerged as number 1 destination for business travelers
CA to launch CTU-SYD & SZX-MEL for NW16/17
Discussion of SYD-SFO to go 789 which would be a better fit
SQ upgrades MEL SQ217/218 from 77W to A388 for NW16/17
SQ upgrades SYD SQ231/222 from 77W to A388 for NW16/17
Jin Air to fly ICN-CNS twice weekly from mid December
QF744 lands at OOL due to fog in BNE
CZ adds ADL 3 weekly from mid December
ATSB investigating landing incident of EK A388
Reports that John Thomas will eventually replace JB at VA
SQ increases ADL to 10 weekly for Dec/Jan
VA announces WIFI for its fleet from mid 2017
CA PEK-SYD will see 2 class 77W from 1 Jan 17, drops frequency to daily
OZ to send A388 to SYD on selected dates in Nov 16
SYD & MEL report strong international passenger growth for 15/16, SYD up by 7.5%, MEL up by 9.5%
Congestion at MEL at peak times
QF to resume DPS from mid Dec to early Feb
QF to go double daily on PER-SIN from mid Dec to early Feb
QF to go from 5 to 6 weekly on SYD-MNL from mid Dec to mid Jan
QF to go daily on BNE-CHC for NW16/17
QF will operate daily BNE-POM on 738, CNS-POM to be dropped
QF will increase 717 flying on BNE-ADL, BNE-ISA & BNE-TSV to free up 737’s
ATSB investigating incident between a JQ & D7 aircraft at OOL
NTL as an alternative to SYD
SQ books $41 million loss from its shareholding in VA
QR ADL loads for May
EK commences 2nd A388 service to PER
FlyCorporate inaugural service starts
DPS flights temporarily disrupted due to ash cloud
Flights cancelled to HKG due typhoon
AZ expands codeshare on VA
QF to open new lounge in KTA in mid 17
VA completes $1.1 billion capital raising
LATAM extends codeshare with QF/JQ
QF1 returns to SYD due to cabin heating system error
Progress of BNE second runway
MU planning SYD-WUH-XIY by end of year
QF to receive first 789 in Oct 17
JQ exploring more non-stops to China
TG adjusts schedules for PER & BNE
Both Hong Kong & Fiji show little enthusiasm to renegotiate air service agreements
MH retimes PER
Ongoing debate on QF 787-9’s configuration & initial ULH routes, PER-LHR, MEL-DFW & SYD-ORD possibilities
EK cancellations/delays due to EK accident in DXB
MU increases both PVG-SYD/MEL for NW16/17
Thai Lion Air looking at starting BKK-DPS-PER in 2017
JQ12 NRT-OOL diverts to GUM due to an oil pressure indicator warning
QF purchases 789 Simulator
SQ starts A359 service to MEL
VA to revamp fare structure
QF has no plans for additional A388’s, 8 options pushed out for at least 10 years
D7 looking at expansion in 2017 with BNE, TSV, CNS, ADL & CBR possibilities, destinations currently serviced may see an increase in frequency
VA to retain 2 A320’s for VARA
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
angusjt
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:08 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:09 am

Another interesting piece of news I just found out about is that it appears Kenya Airways are planning Perth-Nairobi flights for 2017.

I'm not too sure if anyones already aware of it and I don't know how long this news has been out for but it sure looks interesting.

Source: https://www.kenya-airways.com/uploadedF ... lan%20.pdf read pages 7 & 10 and it appears they are looking at starting it some time next financial year.
Darwin - Perth - Sydney
 
jupiter2
Posts: 1739
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:18 am

angusjt wrote:
Another interesting piece of news I just found out about is that it appears Kenya Airways are planning Perth-Nairobi flights for 2017.

I'm not too sure if anyones already aware of it and I don't know how long this news has been out for but it sure looks interesting.

Source: https://www.kenya-airways.com/uploadedF ... lan%20.pdf read pages 7 & 10 and it appears they are looking at starting it some time next financial year.


I think you'll find that document is a few years old and really isn't relevant to the current position that Kenya Airways is in. As much as I'd like to see them head this way, it isn't going to happen unfortunately.
 
log0008
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 12:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:30 am

Yeah not going to happen hardly any of the planned routes have eventuated. They are making massive losses and sold a number of there 777s.

I would like to see an African airline try flights via Perth, to either MEL or SYD, with the most likely being ET considering its growth, fleet and economic position but still highly doubtful.
 
User avatar
angusjt
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:08 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:12 am

jupiter2 wrote:
angusjt wrote:
Another interesting piece of news I just found out about is that it appears Kenya Airways are planning Perth-Nairobi flights for 2017.

I'm not too sure if anyones already aware of it and I don't know how long this news has been out for but it sure looks interesting.

Source: https://www.kenya-airways.com/uploadedF ... lan%20.pdf read pages 7 & 10 and it appears they are looking at starting it some time next financial year.


I think you'll find that document is a few years old and really isn't relevant to the current position that Kenya Airways is in. As much as I'd like to see them head this way, it isn't going to happen unfortunately.


Well that's unfortunate :(
Was looking forward for a potential announcement, thanks for correcting me anyways
Darwin - Perth - Sydney
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 798
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:25 am

angusjt wrote:
Another interesting piece of news I just found out about is that it appears Kenya Airways are planning Perth-Nairobi flights for 2017.

I'm not too sure if anyones already aware of it and I don't know how long this news has been out for but it sure looks interesting.

Source: https://www.kenya-airways.com/uploadedF ... lan%20.pdf read pages 7 & 10 and it appears they are looking at starting it some time next financial year.


I know there has been talk of this a couple of years ago, but I thought KQ was in trouble money wise and they got rid of their 777's so what would they use to Perth? Anyway hope it happens Perth should be trying to lure the airlines of the Indian Ocean countries.
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 798
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:38 am

QF has no plans for additional A388’s, 8 options pushed out for at least 10 years.

Did Geoff Dixon get it very very wrong ordering this plane when it was just on the drawing board?
Did Alan Joyce have to take the A380 or could he have cancelled the order?
 
qf002
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:59 pm

Flyingsottsman wrote:
Did Geoff Dixon get it very very wrong ordering this plane when it was just on the drawing board?


I don't think anybody expected things to play out the way they have over the last 10-15 years. The QF of the early-2000s could easily have utilised an extra dozen frames.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 3:01 pm

Effectively the QF/EK arrangement put some of these frames into EK colors not QF colors.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Sun Aug 14, 2016 3:06 pm

I believe Dixon et al made a mistake in ordering the last 8 or so 744's. At least some of these should have been 77W's. The 744ER didn't totally solve the LAX-MEL payload problem. It took the 450 seat A380 to do this.
 
Ditzyboy
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:15 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:59 pm

qf789 wrote:
QF will increase 717 flying on BNE-ADL, BNE-ISA & BNE-TSV to free up 737’s


Somewhat related to this topic, I wish to respond to smi0006's question in the previous thread regarding what happened to the Impulse Airlines cabin crew after the 717s went to Jetstar. Jetstar is the same company/airline as Impulse. Crew simply changed uniforms. They were employed under the same agreement as they were at Impulse/QantasLink. That agreement is still in place, though several work practices have changed to suit the LCC nature of the business. New crew are no longer employed under that contract and the crew remaining at Jetstar under the old Impulse agreement are very happy with it.

There was three groups of Impulse/Jetstar Career Progression to QAL Short Haul (mainline) and a further two (I'm sure it was more than one?) to QD. The two groups to QD also contained Team Jetstar and Jetstar International crew. As you mentioned, there was no external recruitment during this time period to trigger the career progression agreement. The transfer groups were as a result of lobbying by the union. There was also Eastern and Sunstate crew in the above CP groups.
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:09 am

In response to Ditzyboy:
When the original Impulse Cabin Crew became Qantaslink cabin crew around 2002, those cabin crew gained the right for career progression into Qantas Mainline, both domestic and International. In order to preserve that right when those same crew arbitrarily became Jetstar employees in May 2004 , Jetstar agreed to maintain that right for them by allowing the careers progression to continue. The occasions when progression was offered, were determined entirely by QF and their need for extra crew at those times. Jetstar played no part in the progression by determining when it would be offered but they honoured their agreement with the crew concerned.

The whole idea of introducing Team Jetstar employees was to keep the 2 groups of Cabin Crew 'separate' as the Team Jetstar members did NOT have any rights on career progression to QF. Naturally there was also pay differences between the 2 groups…but that's another story!!

The Eastern and Sunstate crew had the same rights as the original Jetstar crew as they were also Qantaslink. While the union/s obviously played a part in the offering of progression to QF for Team Jetstar cabin crew, neither QF nor JQ had any pre-determined obligation to Team Jetstar in this regard but I would assume that in the interests of 'equality' they thought better of it and made a number of positions available to those crew
 
qf2048
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 3:16 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:35 am

Jetgo have announced PQQ- Essendon via their facebook page. Commencing 7th November. Sorry can't find a link.
ZL,QF,KE,BA,AS,CX,FR,U2,W6,EI,IB,JL,AY,LH,AA,AC,FQ,DJ,JQ,LA,FJ,QS,NZ,NF,SB,PG,EK,AB,VA,MH,KA,VN
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7468
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:12 am

sunrisevalley wrote:
I believe Dixon et al made a mistake in ordering the last 8 or so 744's. At least some of these should have been 77W's. The 744ER didn't totally solve the LAX-MEL payload problem. It took the 450 seat A380 to do this.


The 74E max range is 7670nm compared to 7370nm for the 77W. The 74E has a bit more range and the 744 was already in the fleet. And the 77W entered service 2 years after the 74E 2004 vs 2002. However you are probably right some of the late 90's 744's maybe should of been 77E's something smaller with 744 range for a few routes.
 
smi0006
Posts: 2548
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:33 pm

Just saw the thread about the new DL business seats. Given its an upgraded version of QFs 330 seats does anyone think this will be the product offered on the 789, and potentially refitted to the 380s?
 
qf002
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:51 pm

smi0006 wrote:
Just saw the thread about the new DL business seats. Given its an upgraded version of QFs 330 seats does anyone think this will be the product offered on the 789, and potentially refitted to the 380s?


It does look like an excellent product but I'd be surprised to see QF go down that route given that they still have First Class to consider/protect. They would also be dropping hints like crazy if they were planning anything radical, especially with VA trying to create some fanfare around their new seats earlier this year.
 
JQflightie
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:18 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:29 am

Jetstar315 wrote:
In response to Ditzyboy:
When the original Impulse Cabin Crew became Qantaslink cabin crew around 2002, those cabin crew gained the right for career progression into Qantas Mainline, both domestic and International. In order to preserve that right when those same crew arbitrarily became Jetstar employees in May 2004 , Jetstar agreed to maintain that right for them by allowing the careers progression to continue. The occasions when progression was offered, were determined entirely by QF and their need for extra crew at those times. Jetstar played no part in the progression by determining when it would be offered but they honoured their agreement with the crew concerned.

The whole idea of introducing Team Jetstar employees was to keep the 2 groups of Cabin Crew 'separate' as the Team Jetstar members did NOT have any rights on career progression to QF. Naturally there was also pay differences between the 2 groups…but that's another story!!

The Eastern and Sunstate crew had the same rights as the original Jetstar crew as they were also Qantaslink. While the union/s obviously played a part in the offering of progression to QF for Team Jetstar cabin crew, neither QF nor JQ had any pre-determined obligation to Team Jetstar in this regard but I would assume that in the interests of 'equality' they thought better of it and made a number of positions available to those crew


I was TJQ and I got career progression into Mainline QF......
When is my next holiday?
 
User avatar
Chipmunk1973
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:23 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:41 pm

Hi,
In the previous version of this thread I asked if/when QF purchase more 789's would they have the same config as they've hinted at for the first batch (235Pax: 42J/28W/165Y). I believe a response I had suggested that all the fleet would be the same (sorry, trying to find it but struggling.......might be time for glasses/contacts).

But my point is whilst a 235Pax config might be ideal for the routes that QF have rumoured which seem to be niche (MEL-DFW, PER-LHR, SYD-ORD), then why would you order additional frames of the same config when competing on something like SYD-YVR when AC has planes configured with 298 PAX (30J/21W/247Y). I can hardly see how that would be cost competitive? Surely there would have to be two configurations when the fleet expands.

Cheers
Cheers,
C1973
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:35 pm

[quote="Chipmunk1973"]Hi, Surely there would have to be two configurations when the fleet expands.]]

The three ULH routes named will need 8? airplanes. Is this the number of QF firm orders for the 789 as of now?
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11105
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Wed Aug 17, 2016 3:14 pm

sunrisevalley wrote:
Chipmunk1973 wrote:
Hi, Surely there would have to be two configurations when the fleet expands.]]

The three ULH routes named will need 8? airplanes. Is this the number of QF firm orders for the 789 as of now?


For now yes, though with their results being handed down next week we could see some more ordered. Looking at when their 15 remaining options expire, 6 are due to expire in FY18 and will need to be firmed up soon, so I would think we could see a firm order for six 789's. The 5 that were due to expire in FY17 were converted into a firm order last year which included 3 787's transferred from JQ to QF
Forum Moderator
 
travelhound
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Wed Aug 17, 2016 5:14 pm

I don't see a need for QF to order more 787's at present.

One of the 747's that was supposed to be retired last year had a heavy check, so QF have invested a considerable amount of money in that aircraft.

Also QF have been taking A330's off domestic flying to expand on international routes. There is probably scope for QF to increase A330 international flying when opportunities arise.

Without there being an immediate need to replace existing aircraft the nine 789's coming into the QF fleet will already be keeping them busy fir a couple of years.

From what I can work out these aircraft will be used for expansion.
 
bbbb
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:43 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:08 am

After announcing inflight internet a few months back (but not a supplier) it looks like Virgin Australia are evaluating Honeywell's JetWave system (part of the reason why the very funky looking Honeywell 757 is around Sydney at the moment). That would use Inmarsat's network for global coverage, while Qantas plan on using the NBN satellites for domestic Australia coverage (no plans announced for international yet).
 
User avatar
Chipmunk1973
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:23 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:58 am

qf789 wrote:

For now yes, though with their results being handed down next week we could see some more ordered. Looking at when their 15 remaining options expire, 6 are due to expire in FY18 and will need to be firmed up soon, so I would think we could see a firm order for six 789's.


Well that was my hope/expectation that there would be at least another 6 to be ordered. My view is that QF don't do thing's by halves and taking into consideration their recent purchase of a 789 Sim leads me to the opinion that there will be more purchased at specific points.

JQ bought a SIM for their 11, so far QF have purchased 8 with a possible 6 or more on order soon. I wouldn't be shocked if the next tranche is bigger than 6 but at least equals the initial order or 8 if not greater again.

Another reply suggested that the QF 744 retirement may be delayed due to both low fuel costs currently and also because some 744's have undergone heavy maintenance (D checks?) and they will be in the fleet for some time. On this, I would speculate that QF will retain the 744 for flights to JNB and SCL until they have certification to use 789's. Thinking specifically of South Africa and not knowing the O&D data, could there be a possibility of a SYD-CPT or even a PER-CPT using a 789 given the number of South African expat's living in Oz?

Cheers
Cheers,
C1973
 
qf71
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:18 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:42 pm

Reading between the lines it looks likely that QF will hold onto its 9 youngest B744s until the B779 comes online in the next five years or so. With the two B744s that had their service lives extended to leave the fleet by the time the delivery of the first tranche of 8 B789s are delivered.

I would say it is likely that the B789s are to be used for new routes. Whilst I would love to see PER-LHR, the biggest issue I see with the route is technical support on the Perth end with the lack of engineering facilities in Perth.

It is more likely that they will focus on opportunities across the Asia Pacific region with the B787.

Below is one possible scenario for QF Long Haul operations with 8 B787s. Ive also included B747 and A380 ops to provide a big picture view of things.

B747-400
BNE-LAX-JFK (2.0) - Daily
SYD-LAX/SIN (1.0) - LAX 2x Weekly, SIN 3x Weekly, allows for A333 to be redeployed on MEL-SIN on 2x Daily FRI/SAT/SUN
SYD-HKG (1.0) - Daily
SYD-HND (1.5) - Daily
SYD-SCL (1.5) - 4x Weekly*

B787-900
SYD-JNB (1.5) - Daily
SYD-SFO (1.5) - Daily
SYD-BOM (1.5) - 4x Weekly*
SYD-ICN (1.5) - Daily
SYD-YVR (1.0) - 3x Weekly*
SYD-SIN (1.0) - Daily^

A380-800
SYD-DXB-LHR (2.5) - Daily
MEL-DXB--LHR (2.5) - Daily
SYD-DFW (2.0) - Daily
SYD-LAX (2.0) - 6x Weekly*
MEL-LAX (2.0) - Daily
* The following are not daily to allow for engineering and other operational requirements

By placing a B787-9 on SYD-SIN would in turn free up an A330 which I would use to launch daily MEL-PVG. As such MEL-HKG would revert to a daily A333 service with consistent product.
SYD-ICN would run to similar timings to SYD-HND and would provide a point of difference to the Korean Airlines.
SYD-BOM would run to the timings used when QF last ran the service with a morning departure ex SYD with an evening departure from BOM that would arrive into SYD the next afternoon.
SYD-YVR would operate 3x Weekly with a traditional afternoon departure ex SYD. Return service would be late night ex YVR with a early arrival into SYD.
SYD-SIN. Would operate QF5/QF6

Also 1 B747 would be used as an operational spare for the A380/B747/B787 long haul fleet to maintain operational reliability and continuity.
Average airframe hours across the B747/A380/B787 would be 14.1hrs minimum.
 
qf002
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Thu Aug 18, 2016 7:51 pm

travelhound wrote:
One of the 747's that was supposed to be retired last year had a heavy check, so QF have invested a considerable amount of money in that aircraft.


Maintaining old aircraft is a rolling investment. The business case for keeping OEB and (especially) OJM going is probably a strategic one more than anything else - the alternative is to start dropping flights/destinations which QF really doesn't want to do.

Chipmunk1973 wrote:
Thinking specifically of South Africa and not knowing the O&D data, could there be a possibility of a SYD-CPT or even a PER-CPT using a 789 given the number of South African expat's living in Oz?


QF doesn't seem terribly interested in South Africa, unfortunately. Personally I've always thought PER-JNB could be an interesting JQ route, undercutting SA while QF focuses on the premium end of the market via SYD (the strategy would be similar to what they have done at HNL).

I'd be surprised to see CPT though it would be a great route.

qf71 wrote:
SYD-BOM (1.5) - 4x Weekly*
SYD-ICN (1.5) - Daily


You are not going to see QF deploy 235-seat ULH configured 789s into ICN let alone BOM (and even JNB, YVR or to a lesser extent SIN would surprise me).

I see DFW as being the most pressing priority. Going to a double daily 789 service from SYD/MEL not only makes a huge amount of sense in itself but would also instantly resolve a lot of their other network complications (ie QF11 and QF63 can go back to normal, strong markets like HKG and SFO can be boosted and 744 capacity can flow back into Asia and/or they can retire the two older 744s whenever they wish to do so etc).

Longer term, SCL is a no-brainer if CASA will allow it. It perfectly fits the "routes that are less frequent which we want to get to daily" profile that QF outlined last year.

Regional expansion can continue to happen at the same time but will come from the A330 refurbishments ending (which means they have an extra couple of aircraft to play with) and capacity flowing across from either the long-haul network (ie the 744s coming back to regional services) or the domestic network.
 
travelhound
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Thu Aug 18, 2016 11:59 pm

QF71,

Some of the routes you mentioned could be served by Jetstar, so potentially there is room for another Jetstar 787 top-up order.

I suspect QF will be relatively conservative with introducing the 787 fleet. A slow and steady approach would allow them to understand the aircraft in relationship to it's route networks, logistics, etc.

There is no hurry to order more!

QF92,

As I understand it a "C" or "D" check is a capital expenditure item. Even though for a company the size of QF the cost would have been relatively minor there uis still a cost associated with it.

I suspect, as you noted there is some strategy behind keeping these aircraft. If new routes do not work as anticipated a fallback option could be retire the 744's and replace then with 789's.
 
vheca
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 9:20 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 2:30 am

qf71 wrote:
B787-900
SYD-JNB (1.5) - Daily
SYD-SFO (1.5) - Daily
SYD-BOM (1.5) - 4x Weekly*
SYD-ICN (1.5) - Daily
SYD-YVR (1.0) - 3x Weekly*
SYD-SIN (1.0) - Daily^


I notice that you have omitted BNE and MEL. Would there not be a business case where "long and thin" would point to both Brisbane and Melbourne?

Cheers

VHECA
PAX on- 300, 312, 320, 380, 722, 732, 733, 73H, 73W, 739, 742, 743, 74C, 752, 753, 762, 789, AB4, CR7, D1C, D28, DHT, F27, L11
 
kriskim
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:44 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 3:00 am

qf71 wrote:
By placing a B787-9 on SYD-SIN would in turn free up an A330 which I would use to launch daily MEL-PVG. As such MEL-HKG would revert to a daily A333 service with consistent product.


QF made MEL-HKG, x3 weekly 744, x4 weekly A333 for a reason, and that is due to demand on the route commanding extra capacity, they would have just kept it as it was if they wanted consistency. I could see QF adding more services on the route and replacing the 744 completely, something like x10 weekly, and like you mentioned, introduce MEL-PVG x3-4 weekly, with MEL-NRT having an outside chance.
A world built upon connectivity.
 
Qantas16
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 3:05 am

qf71 wrote:
B787-900
SYD-JNB (1.5) - Daily
SYD-SFO (1.5) - Daily
SYD-BOM (1.5) - 4x Weekly*
SYD-ICN (1.5) - Daily
SYD-YVR (1.0) - 3x Weekly*
SYD-SIN (1.0) - Daily^

A380-800
SYD-DXB-LHR (2.5) - Daily
MEL-DXB--LHR (2.5) - Daily
SYD-DFW (2.0) - Daily
SYD-LAX (2.0) - 6x Weekly*
MEL-LAX (2.0) - Daily
* The following are not daily to allow for engineering and other operational requirements


SYD-ICN is very unlikely, particularly on a new 789. They've had the capability to operate this route for years with A330's and have decided against it as it is obviously low-yielding. They aren't going to 'waste' a brand new 789 with great product on this route.

SYD-SIN would create a problem of different products in the market, by introducing W and a better Y (and potentially J) product than the A330 fleet. Also SIN is currently an A330 only operation IIRC so this allows some flexibility with fleet scheduling and allowing them to rotate aircraft through SIN (as well as HKG).

Also, operating SYD-JNB/SFO with a 789 seating ~230 people is a significant reduction in capacity from the ~360 seat 747's currently flying the route 6 or 7x weekly. While that might be appropriate for SYD-JNB, it's unlikely to work for SYD-SFO. I would expect this route to go 10-12x weekly on the 789 or operate MEL/BNE-SFO as well (so SYD daily and MEL or BNE 4-5x weekly). Overall, you are proposing a reduction in capacity to the USA which I find unlikely (unless AA takes some of it).

I would be surprised if we didn't see a QF order for more A330's to fly to Asia (assuming they are cheaper than 789s, though we don't know the price QF is getting them for..) or a top up of 788's for JQ to expand operations. While QF and JQ generally do well of operating alongside each other, there are some areas that are a bit unclear. For example flights to SIN are currently operated alongside QF from MEL (at basically the same departure times). This seems like an ideal route to transition back to QF and allow them to build to 2x daily or expand the JQ operation to ports like BNE, ADL and potentially SYD. ADL-SIN 3x weekly on a 787 would probably work well, would please (a little) the QFFliers and allow connections into the 3K network from SIN. Won't be long until Scoot is flying the route anyway. IMHO Jetstar made a mistake by not entering OOL-SIN before TZ, they don't want to make that mistake with ADL... Similarly with MEL-BKK.
 
travelhound
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:06 am

With the A330-300's already earmarked for replacement with 787's I suspect QF will not be buying anymore A330's.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11105
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:30 am

DL is considering using the A350 on SYD-LAX once they start to receive them next year. DL is also running the numbers on launching a MEL-LAX flight

http://www.ausbt.com.au/delta-eyes-sydn ... ass-suites

From 31st August QFF points can be earned at Woolworths

W/W has dropped W/W dollars and instead will award 1 point for every dollar spent. Once 2000 points are collected it will either be converted into $10 W/W rewards or 870 QFF points.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/woolworths-brin ... r-shoppers
Forum Moderator
 
smi0006
Posts: 2548
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:32 am

I suspect we may see a top up order of more premium configured 789s from QF, opening new long thin premium heavy routes, then maybe a heavier economy configure replacing long 744 routes (YVR, SFO).

Alternatively we may see more expansion ex-MEL, and BNE - the hub busting the 787 was designed for. 744 are too big to operate many routes from both, and the 330 doesn't have the legs- but not the 787 especially with AA, LA, MU and EK at the end of the route!
 
A35J
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:07 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 3:01 am

I was just at Canberra Airport where there was a media conference with Tiger. Does anyone have any more knowledge about what's happening?
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 3:03 am

Tigerair has announced it will recommence MEL-CBR service, though no details yet on schedule, start date. fares, etc:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... qxz8d.html
 
Qantas16
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 3:46 am

DeltaB717 wrote:
Tigerair has announced it will recommence MEL-CBR service, though no details yet on schedule, start date. fares, etc:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... qxz8d.html


I don't get it, why launch this route? VA is currently ~6 daily on the route and QF is ~11 daily and fares are high. Why would VA/TT want to bring fares down on the route?

It is good news for CBR locals and tourism into CBR as well, but I can't see how this is going to help VA/TT, instead just take existing passengers.
 
A35J
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:07 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 3:57 am

Qantas16 wrote:
I don't get it, why launch this route? VA is currently ~6 daily on the route and QF is ~11 daily and fares are high. Why would VA/TT want to bring fares down on the route?

It is good news for CBR locals and tourism into CBR as well, but I can't see how this is going to help VA/TT, instead just take existing passengers.


I expect it might be a bit like QF handing flights to JQ. Given VA is getting rid of their E190s and reducing the ATR fleet Canberra will likely be facing some reductions in VA flights to the city. TT may be coming in to replace some of those lost seats?
 
Qantas16
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 4:35 am

A35J wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
I don't get it, why launch this route? VA is currently ~6 daily on the route and QF is ~11 daily and fares are high. Why would VA/TT want to bring fares down on the route?

It is good news for CBR locals and tourism into CBR as well, but I can't see how this is going to help VA/TT, instead just take existing passengers.


I expect it might be a bit like QF handing flights to JQ. Given VA is getting rid of their E190s and reducing the ATR fleet Canberra will likely be facing some reductions in VA flights to the city. TT may be coming in to replace some of those lost seats?


I'm sure there will be exceptions, but a lot of QF routes that were given to JQ was because of VA (at the time DJ). It was routes where QF was getting crushed by DJ's lower costs/fares and more holiday-type appeal. Routes to places like OOL, CNS and HBA come to mind. Some of these routes QF gave up completely for a while (e.g. OOL) and other's they worked together allowing them to capture both ends of the market (e.g. PER, even SYD-MEL) with VA/DJ sitting in the middle, which is why they struggled for a while (and maybe still are). But MEL-CBR, VA is now established and while still cheaper than QF normally, isn't that different and has similar cost base. By launching MEL-CBR they will likely just be taking their own passengers from higher price VA and moving across to TT. Maybe that is because of retirement of E190/ATR's, but I think they'll regret the day they reopened CBR to LCC competition though.

I would be shocked to see JQ in CBR though, I definitely don't see the appeal for QF.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 7:16 am

travelhound wrote:
With the A330-300's already earmarked for replacement with 787's I suspect QF will not be buying anymore A330's.


Agree. We have seen the last QF A330 order with the next to be 787's to replace A330's in the 2020's.

qf71 wrote:
B787-900
SYD-JNB (1.5) - Daily
SYD-SFO(1.5) - Daily
SYD-BOM(1.5) - 4x Weekly*
SYD-ICN (1.5) - Daily
SYD-YVR(1.0) - 3x Weekly*
SYD-SIN (1.0) - Daily^


I agree you'll see SYD-SFO go 789 the same as SYD-YVR will also go 789. However I disagree with the rest. You won't see QF in BOM or ICN and SIN will stay A330 for product consistency.
Personally I think you'll see the 789 on BNE-LAX-JFK, BNE-DFW, MEL-DFW, SYD-SFO and SYD-YVR with all of those going daily except for SYD-YVR. That allows for the retirement of the non-reconfigured 744's, which are showing their age product wise, and for an overall incremental increase in North America capacity. Asia is well and truly served by the current A333 / A332 / reconfigured 744 combination and taking the 744 off of BNE-LAX-JFK allows for some deployment of additional 744 capacity into Asia while BNE-DFW increases overall North America capacity out of Brisbane. I'd also not be surprised to see American into MEL at some point.
 
jrfspa320
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:18 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 7:30 am

Qantas16 wrote:
qf71 wrote:

SYD-SIN would create a problem of different products in the market, by introducing W and a better Y (and potentially J) product than the A330 fleet. Also SIN is currently an A330 only operation IIRC so this allows some flexibility with fleet scheduling and allowing them to rotate aircraft through SIN (as well as HKG).


I may be proved wrong but I cant see the 9 abreast 787 being better than the 8 abreast A330...but I know what you mean about product, although I cant see the C class being much different from the current A330 product.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 1:29 pm

It will take about 2-years of service for QF to get EDTO-330min approval on the 789. So JNB and SCL service with that type is at least 3-1/2 years away. CASA adopted the ICAO standard for EDTO on July 1st 2015.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:21 pm

Qantas16 wrote:
I would be shocked to see JQ in CBR though, I definitely don't see the appeal for QF.


In terms of QF's operations to Canberra there isn't anything Jetstar can do that QF can't do with Qantaslink. So from a branding point of view it's much better for QF group to be able to deploy Q-400's and 717's when they need them rather than Jetstar A320's.
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:43 pm

Qantas16 wrote:
A35J wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
I don't get it, why launch this route? VA is currently ~6 daily on the route and QF is ~11 daily and fares are high. Why would VA/TT want to bring fares down on the route?

It is good news for CBR locals and tourism into CBR as well, but I can't see how this is going to help VA/TT, instead just take existing passengers.


I expect it might be a bit like QF handing flights to JQ. Given VA is getting rid of their E190s and reducing the ATR fleet Canberra will likely be facing some reductions in VA flights to the city. TT may be coming in to replace some of those lost seats?


I'm sure there will be exceptions, but a lot of QF routes that were given to JQ was because of VA (at the time DJ). It was routes where QF was getting crushed by DJ's lower costs/fares and more holiday-type appeal. Routes to places like OOL, CNS and HBA come to mind. Some of these routes QF gave up completely for a while (e.g. OOL) and other's they worked together allowing them to capture both ends of the market (e.g. PER, even SYD-MEL) with VA/DJ sitting in the middle, which is why they struggled for a while (and maybe still are). But MEL-CBR, VA is now established and while still cheaper than QF normally, isn't that different and has similar cost base. By launching MEL-CBR they will likely just be taking their own passengers from higher price VA and moving across to TT. Maybe that is because of retirement of E190/ATR's, but I think they'll regret the day they reopened CBR to LCC competition though.

I would be shocked to see JQ in CBR though, I definitely don't see the appeal for QF.


I completely agree. In my mind, this is a really silly move from a group perspective. If it really is down to the E190s being withdrawn and the ATR fleet being drawn down, I would've thought you'd expand TT on routes like OOL and CNS, as well as MEL-SYD/BNE/ADL, to free up the VA capacity for CBR. Flights are mostly full here (CBR) and fares are high for what I'm sure is a relatively low cost route... i.e. QF and VA should be making a fortune! I actually hope this is aimed at stimulating more demand from CBR in a different segment of the market but I guess we won't see that until the schedules etc. are released.

Sydscott wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
I would be shocked to see JQ in CBR though, I definitely don't see the appeal for QF.


In terms of QF's operations to Canberra there isn't anything Jetstar can do that QF can't do with Qantaslink. So from a branding point of view it's much better for QF group to be able to deploy Q-400's and 717's when they need them rather than Jetstar A320's.


Again, completely agreed. So what's so different at VA? They're starting to use QQ F100s over here so why not take a couple of them on long-term wet leases, chuck the VA colours on them and use those to replace the E190 capacity if they're that stuck. Or even forget about putting the colours on them, just make the onboard service consistent with VA.
 
A35J
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:07 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 2:13 am

DeltaB717 wrote:
I actually hope this is aimed at stimulating more demand from CBR in a different segment of the market but I guess we won't see that until the schedules etc. are released.


I think you might have hit the nail on the head there. There will only be one TT flight per day, and I expect the majority of people currently flying the route would be highly schedule sensitive. The arrival of TT will probably only reduce, at most, the loads on one or two flights per day and the VA group could easily adjust VA's flight timings to prevent too much loss to TT.

That being said, I think that the bigger problem for VA in CBR is the reduction to the ATR fleet (and to a certain extent the E190 fleet). If they can't offer frequent flights between CBR and SYD / MEL with plenty of timing flexibility they will loose a lot of customers. It will become a vicious cycle of reduced flights leading to fewer overall customers leading to more reductions etc. etc. etc.

On a side note, I was under the impression that VA was delighted with their ATR fleet. Even heard a rumour that Borghetti referred to them as the "ATMs". I can understand to an extent wanting to ditch the Embraer jets for simplicity's sake. But so much of regional flying in Australia is flexibility driven - i.e.: being able to fly in somewhere in the morning and be back home for dinner that evening. You might only have enough demand to fill one out of two flights a day, but cutting frequencies down to one flight a day would reduce demand even more ? If VA is cutting frequencies with the reduced ATR fleet, won't they just be shooting themselves in the foot?
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11105
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:06 am

Xiamen Airlines to start 3rd weekly flight on XMN-MEL from 6 December 2016

MF803 XMN2100 – 0945+1MEL 787 247
MF804 MEL1135 – 1815XMN 787 135

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -dec-2016/
Forum Moderator
 
TN486
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:08 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:57 am

I am at a loss with this TT CBR-MEL thing. I suspect there's more to come on this, a prelude to other things, possible tie ups with international LCC's etc in the future?????
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
 
Qantas16
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:12 am

TN486 wrote:
I am at a loss with this TT CBR-MEL thing. I suspect there's more to come on this, a prelude to other things, possible tie ups with international LCC's etc in the future?????


International LCC's at CBR? I'd be shocked. The only two that could look at it would be TZ and D7. It won't be TZ given SQ is about to start SIN-CBR-WLG flights, and D7 would struggle given CBR isn't a huge market.

I'd suspect CBR has pumped far too much money into attracting LCC's in the hope that once they start doing it, it will open the floodgates to JQ/TT setting up operations to all over the country. Also, MEL seems like an odd route to start with, I would think taking over from VA on a route like OOL or launching CNS would make more sense. I realise TT doesn't have based at either of those locations, but not hard to schedule an aircraft on a MEL-OOL-CBR-OOL-MEL rotation (or BNE-CNS-CBR-CNS-BNE). At least that way you are going after a clearly defined market and also not taking away much from VA. I'd still think it's an interesting move though, but maybe more sensible than MEL.
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:14 am

I would be interested to see if there was a reasonably-sized VFR market to MEL from CBR that would respond to lower-cost service. In my purely personal experience of living in Canberra for some years, quite a number of younger people who left CBR to study or work were choosing MEL over SYD.

Obviously though this would work better if the LCCs were actually in real competition with the premium carriers, rather than their owners.
 
travelhound
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:35 am

It could simply be Canberra allows TT to up the utilisation rate of its aircraft. If this is the case the route could have a very low break even.

Just a thought!
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3349
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:48 am

The ACT govt has been chasing a LCC for the MEL-CBR route for a while, and TT has come to the party to re-establish a link it once had on the sector.

Whether it be by sufficient financial incentives provided or route planning requirements, hopefully this time they will stay around longer and build itself in the market.

TT these days being part of the VA group does make things very different to its previous effort on the sector though, so we will wait and see.

Why did the ACT govt chase MEL as a preferred option one might ask? MEL is a big market that does not bring the visit numbers to Canberra at this point in time that they would hope. This is because of distance to drive being a step too far for many to bother with and higher air fares suppressing demand.

The market stimulation will likely be looked at by all stakeholders and if successful they may well look at new opportunities in future.

At the end of the day this is not that surprising. Good luck to them.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11105
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread Part 144

Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:53 pm

QF announces results for 2015/2016, a record of $1.57 billion underlying profit before tax

•Record underlying profit before tax: $1.53 billion, up 57%
•Record statutory profit before tax: $1.42 billion, up 80%
•Record results for Qantas Domestic, Qantas International, Jetstar Group, Qantas Loyalty
•Near-doubling of earnings per share: 49c, up 24c
•Return on invested capital: 23%, up 6.5 points
•Operating cash flow: $2.8 billion, up 38%
•Net free cash flow: $1.7 billion
•$500m shareholder return: fully-franked 7c per share ordinary dividend and onmarket share buy-back
•Additional cash bonus totalling $75 million for 25,000 non-executive employees
•Continued investment in aircraft cabins and wi-fi

http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media- ... sult-2016/
Forum Moderator

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos