eamondzhang wrote:

Yeah I know, that's why I'm kinda surprised to see Airlineroute's reporting on this issue.

QF's schedules showed a double daily A380 for a few hours overnight and then were updated early this morning. I'm sure airlineroute's post will eventually be updated.

They have jumped the gun like us it usually takes a few days for the schedules to fully update.

eamondzhang wrote:

Airlineroute has posted some more updates for QF NW17 SYD routes: http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... t-changes/

Highlight is QF117/118 AND QF127/128 will both opby A388 during 10DEC17 and 11FEB18, with QF117/8 A380 rotation continues until 01MAR. For the rest of the period both flights will be operated by 747-400.

Sounds like a huge capacity increase to me.... And dunno where the A380 would come from.

Christmas peak then Lunar new year mid-Feb. Hong Kongers I have known like to travel home for both, and CX are already pretty well maxed out.

MooLor wrote:

eamondzhang wrote:

Airlineroute has posted some more updates for QF NW17 SYD routes: http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... t-changes/

Highlight is QF117/118 AND QF127/128 will both opby A388 during 10DEC17 and 11FEB18, with QF117/8 A380 rotation continues until 01MAR. For the rest of the period both flights will be operated by 747-400.

Sounds like a huge capacity increase to me.... And dunno where the A380 would come from.

Christmas peak then Lunar new year mid-Feb. Hong Kongers I have known like to travel home for both, and CX are already pretty well maxed out.

True and QF is already selling at 2nd highest class in Y (B Class). But they don't have spare A380s for TWO flights unless they made some other changes (one is fine but the fleet is maxed out that way).

CX can still replace A333s with 77Gs if they want more capacity and I do believe they have spare 77G capacity.

They could actually go double daily A380 in FEB when MEL-LAX QF93 goes 789 4 weekly, that frees up an A380.

Yesterday (16 August) marked the 46th anniversary since QF took delivery of their first 747

Hey guys,

re: new domestic entrant...
I could see Air New Zealand in the medium term operating some golden triangle flights if things with Virgin Australia continue to wilt. They have the marketing clout to make it work I reckon. A Chinese-backed airline I guess would be possible but I think unlikely - however, look at Spring Airlines Japan, the successful (???) Japanese spin-off of the Chinese airline Spring Airlines.

re: Norwegian seeking (Argentinian) rights for Buenos Aires-Sydney and Buenos Aires-Perth ...
The former sounds possible, the latter sounds improbable. I always thought that we would eventually see Norwegian reach Australia somehow, but never thought it would be from Argentina! I know that Norwegian is just seeking traffic rights and isn't proposing - yet - to start services but wow! A great development I believe. Wonder if Jetstar have any longer range expansion plans like these from Australia. Been a while since talk of Jetstar reaching southern Europe was bubbling away, and Scoot in the meantime has nabbed Athens as it's first Euro-route.

Cheers
Bunumuring

bunumuring wrote:

Hey guys,

re: Norwegian seeking (Argentinian) rights for Buenos Aires-Sydney and Buenos Aires-Perth ...
The former sounds possible, the latter sounds improbable. I always thought that we would eventually see Norwegian reach Australia somehow, but never thought it would be from Argentina! I know that Norwegian is just seeking traffic rights and isn't proposing - yet - to start services but wow! A great development I believe. Wonder if Jetstar have any longer range expansion plans like these from Australia. Been a while since talk of Jetstar reaching southern Europe was bubbling away, and Scoot in the meantime has nabbed Athens as it's first Euro-route.

Cheers
Bunumuring

Thanks for sharing. Interesting though I had never thought a route from South America to Perth would ever be considered. EZE-PER is 6700nm for those interested about 1100nm shorter than PER-LHR or about 100nm longer than DOH-SYD. EZE-SYD 3 weekly and EZE-PER 2 weekly according to the following thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1371305

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

Just to clarify, QF have switched the 747/388 and 330 around to HKG so the 330 is on the early rotation and the 747 on the later rotation. Is that right?

RyanairGuru wrote:

Just to clarify, QF have switched the 747/388 and 330 around to HKG so the 330 is on the early rotation and the 747 on the later rotation. Is that right?

Here's the latest

QF127/128 from 29 October 17 to 24 March 18 will switch from 747 to A330 however for part of the season Mondays and Thursdays will see 747

QF117/118 will be upgraded from A330 to 744 from 29 October 17 then see A388 from 10 December 17 to 1 March 18. Will go back to 744 until 24 March 18

From 25 March 18 QF127/128 will go back to 744 and QF117/118 back to A330

https://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-brings- ... -hong-kong

qf789 wrote:

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

I can't imagine that the Australian unions would allow Norwegian to fly here. And In this instance, I'd be with the unions all the way.

mariner

qf789 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Just to clarify, QF have switched the 747/388 and 330 around to HKG so the 330 is on the early rotation and the 747 on the later rotation. Is that right?

Here's the latest

QF127/128 from 29 October 17 to 24 March 18 will switch from 747 to A330 however for part of the season Mondays and Thursdays will see 747

QF117/118 will be upgraded from A330 to 744 from 29 October 17 then see A388 from 10 December 17 to 1 March 18. Will go back to 744 until 24 March 18

From 25 March 18 QF127/128 will go back to 744 and QF117/118 back to A330

https://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-brings- ... -hong-kong

So the short answer is yes?

I wouldn't believe anything after March 25 at this stage, as that is the beggining of the next IATA season. Given that they are currently tinkering with the schedules four months out it is unlikely we will see any changes for IATA Summer 2018 until the dust has settled with these current changes.

mariner wrote:

qf789 wrote:

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

I can't imagine that the Australian unions would allow Norwegian to fly here. And In this instance, I'd be with the unions all the way.

mariner

The unions have no say in a foreign carriers right to operating here. Those same unions have no issue with JQ using Thai based cabin crew on 787's in and out of Australia.

mariner wrote:

qf789 wrote:

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

I can't imagine that the Australian unions would allow Norwegian to fly here. And In this instance, I'd be with the unions all the way.

mariner

Why would the unions have a beef??

bunumuring wrote:

Spring Airlines Japan, the successful (???) Japanese spin-off of the Chinese airline Spring Airlines.

Not quite, they haven't made a penny yet. But your points still hold, I still believe HNA group's got the best chance of this.

Spring Airlines does use its Japanese subsidiary to enter markets that the parent company may not be able to operate (especially like CKG-NRT where the stage length is quite long and a 738 can do the trip more comfotable)

Cheers
Michael

TN486 wrote:

Why would the unions have a beef??

The airline unions have had beefs in a lot of other countries, and I've never thought of Australia unions as being all that complaisant.

The US unions had a beef with Norwegian, for example:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... /95695004/

"Lawmakers, unions call on Trump to oppose Norwegian Air"

http://norwaytoday.info/news/parat-conf ... norwegian/

"Parat confirms conflict between pilots and Norwegian"

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.as ... el=6108722

"Continued deadlock in Norwegian airline conflict

I can't imagine Mr. Shorten, with his "jobs for Australians," biting the Norwegian bullet, and I would be quite disappointed if he did.

http://www.alpa.org/news-and-events/new ... cation-now

"ALPA to DOT: Deny Norwegian UK Application Now
Show-Cause Answer Must be “Denied”

mariner

Jetstar's current employment practices are arguably much more 'egregious' (not my opinion, I just can't think of the right word) than Norwegian.

The situation at DY really is a storm in a tea cup. All crew flying TATL are based in either Europe or USA. Not so with Jetstar, where Thai and Indonesian based crew fly to HNL. For reasons I don't quite understand ALPA and AFA seem OK to have double standards so long as JQ stick to Hawaii. Maybe they don't realise it is a state.

mariner wrote:

I can't imagine Mr. Shorten, with his "jobs for Australians," biting the Norwegian bullet, and I would be quite disappointed if he did.

Nor Turnbull and his need to appease the right.....

mariner wrote:

qf789 wrote:

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

I can't imagine that the Australian unions would allow Norwegian to fly here. And In this instance, I'd be with the unions all the way.

mariner

Can't see why it should have any impact on Australian Unions at all. If DY Argentina were to fly to Australia, you would assume they would be employing Argentinians, or other South Americans on board and as long as they are abiding by their local employment laws it really has very little to do with anything here. If anything, another carrier in need of handling, will only help in employ further Australians.

It would be a bit of a slippery slope if we started excluding airlines because we didn't like the work practices of the airline. We'd probably exclude the ME3, some Asian airlines (including China!!) and potentially even NZ.

Regarding EZE to PER... wouldn't the flight be much longer than GC route?? I thought casa wasn't keen flying south of 40. The straight route is right over the (almost) centre of Antartica.

Looks like the QF73/74 SYD-SFO-SYD has also had a time adjustment now leaving SYD later at 17:55 and leaving SFO earlier at 20:35.

This now spreads QFs SYD-USA departures throughout the day:

LAX: 11:30
DFW: 14:40
SFO 17:55

jupiter2 wrote:

Can't see why it should have any impact on Australian Unions at all. If DY Argentina were to fly to Australia, you would assume they would be employing Argentinians, or other South Americans on board and as long as they are abiding by their local employment laws it really has very little to do with anything here. If anything, another carrier in need of handling, will only help in employ further Australians.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/new ... 69086.html

"US PILOTS WANT TO BLOCK EXPANSION OF NORWEGIAN AIRLINES LOW-C0ST TRANSATLANTIC FLIGHTS"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/ ... expansion/

"US pilots call on Trump to stop Norwegian's low-cost transatlantic flights"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... /97649968/

"Airline pilots still hope Trump will dump Norwegian Air"

They've been having a heck of a stoush about it up north, but it seems a little un-notioced here - LOL - and, again, I'm not sure its something there Australia unions will ignore.

mariner

mariner wrote:

jupiter2 wrote:

Can't see why it should have any impact on Australian Unions at all. If DY Argentina were to fly to Australia, you would assume they would be employing Argentinians, or other South Americans on board and as long as they are abiding by their local employment laws it really has very little to do with anything here. If anything, another carrier in need of handling, will only help in employ further Australians.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/new ... 69086.html

"US PILOTS WANT TO BLOCK EXPANSION OF NORWEGIAN AIRLINES LOW-C0ST TRANSATLANTIC FLIGHTS"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/ ... expansion/

"US pilots call on Trump to stop Norwegian's low-cost transatlantic flights"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... /97649968/

"Airline pilots still hope Trump will dump Norwegian Air"

They've been having a heck of a stoush about it up north, but it seems a little un-notioced here - LOL - and, again, I'm not sure its something there Australia unions will ignore.

mariner

I'm aware of what's been going up there, I just don't see how anything can be done about if all applicable laws are being followed. Nobody is being forced to work for them and if the conditions aren't what you were expecting, then you walk away when you can. We see a lot of complaints on here about the conditions for cabin crew in particular for the Middle Eastern airlines, but we haven't seen any calls to ban them and those appear to be far more restrictive on a personal freedoms perspective.

jupiter2 wrote:

I'm aware of what's been going up there, I just don't see how anything can be done about if all applicable laws are being followed. Nobody is being forced to work for them and if the conditions aren't what you were expecting, then you walk away when you can. We see a lot of complaints on here about the conditions for cabin crew in particular for the Middle Eastern airlines, but we haven't seen any calls to ban them and those appear to be far more restrictive on a personal freedoms perspective.

Even if nothing can be achieved, as effectively happened in the US, but at the least there can be a fuss made if anyone thinks it is warranted. Whether the fuss would achieve anything is open to question, and some people think a fuss shouldn't be made - most a.netters thought AJ was wrong with the grounding - or said so at the time.

Or we can all just go to sleep.

But if the low wages should start to tread on the toes of Qantas, say, I'd like to hear AJ, and I think it is incumbent on Bill Shorten, in his current mode, to make a fuss.

mariner

aborted take off at SYD in last 30 mins. QF again. Was a SYD/joburg flight apparently. Engine died on takeoff run. Apparently they need to change an engine. How long will that take ?

But if the low wages should start to tread on the toes of Qantas, say, I'd like to hear AJ, and I think it is incumbent on Bill Shorten, in his current mode, to make a fuss.

I can't imagine AJ saying anything except "bring it on." He would love to have an excuse to drive down legacy wages further at QF. That is one of the reasons for JQ and a lot of mainline staff have been shuffled to lesser agreements. As has been pointed out JQ (and QF back in the BKK days) has not been shy in using staff from cheaper countries with trimmed conditions.

tullamarine wrote:

I can't imagine AJ saying anything except "bring it on." He would love to have an excuse to drive down legacy wages further at QF.

I'm sure it wouldn't be dull - LOL. I also think it would be to the benefit of AJ/Qantas.

mariner

TN486 wrote:

mariner wrote:

qf789 wrote:

While they are seeking traffic rights only its an interesting development. SYD-EZE is just under 6400nm. I have thought that if they started service to Australia it would be done from Asia or even a nonstop from Europe.

I believe JQ has no plans to fly to Europe and their focus is Asia.

I can't imagine that the Australian unions would allow Norwegian to fly here. And In this instance, I'd be with the unions all the way.

mariner

Why would the unions have a beef??

Norwegian can fly here now, if they don't want to fly to BNE, MEL. SYD or PER.

Unions have no say in traffic rights issues unless the short guy electricity bill, gets control of the lower house, he probably wouldn't control the senate.

wouldn't AVV & OOL be perfect for Norwegian ?

QF7 diversion earlier today departing to DFW.



EK413

Ongoing delays and at least 120 flights cancelled due to weather at SYD

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-up ... b736922fc0

BNE airport reports strong lift in international passengers in 2016/2017

There were 5.64 million international travellers at Brisbane Airport in the 12 months to June 30 2017, up 6.9 per cent from the prior corresponding period.
It was the fastest pace of growth since 2004/05, when international traffic jumped 19 per cent according to the Brisbane Airport website.

BNE domestics numbers only rose 0.2%

In contrast to the strong growth in international traffic, domestic passenger numbers at Brisbane Airport was flat in 2016/17, edging just 0.2 per cent higher to 17.2 million.
Brisbane Airport said domestic traffic was “heavily impacted by Cyclone Debbie and capacity consolidation”.

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/0 ... assengers/

There was a comment on Austbt that caught my attention.

While this probably is no more than a rumour at this stage but QF management are in discussions with Airbus about converting the 8 388's not taken up into A359ULR's. While QF is probably talking to Boeing as well about the 778/779 it will be interesting how this develops. One benefit of the A359ULR over the 778 is QF could take delivery before 2022 as previously reported. Personally I think the 778/779 would be a better fit for QF but we are in for some interesting times ahead.

USAOZ wrote:

Unions have no say in traffic rights issues unless the short guy electricity bill, gets control of the lower house, he probably wouldn't control the senate.

The unions can kick up an almighty stink, as happened in the US, and unions kicking up a stink has happened in Australia before.

mariner

The following tweet from an analyst at CAPA is claiming that JQ will launch twice weekly services from Melbourne to Zhengzhou in December.
https://twitter.com/winglets747/status/ ... 5534605312

Also, Qantas posted a short video of the aft fuselage section of their first 787 about to be joined to the rest of the aircraft.
https://www.facebook.com/Qantas/videos/ ... 702017686/

USAOZ wrote:

wouldn't AVV & OOL be perfect for Norwegian ?

AVV doesn't have customs for passenger services currently, although it could be done NZ got customs added to MCY for there flight to AKL. OOL is almost near breaking point, so would need to be in the off-peak.

A330freak wrote:

The following tweet from an analyst at CAPA is claiming that JQ will launch twice weekly services from Melbourne to Zhengzhou in December.
https://twitter.com/winglets747/status/ ... 5534605312

I think JQ signed a MoU with Henan's local government for a direct service from Australia to Zhengzhou earlier this year, so that wouldn't be too surprising.

Michael

zkncj wrote:

USAOZ wrote:

wouldn't AVV & OOL be perfect for Norwegian ?

AVV doesn't have customs for passenger services currently, although it could be done NZ got customs added to MCY for there flight to AKL. OOL is almost near breaking point, so would need to be in the off-peak.

MCY's runway is only long enough for short-haul 737/A320 operation of up to 3.5 hours at MTOW. Longer 737/A320 routes will mean load restrictions.

Eastbound AKL-MCY has a few rows blocked off already due to the longer flight time. Whereas Westbound doesn't have that problem.

qf789 wrote:

There was a comment on Austbt that caught my attention.

While this probably is no more than a rumour at this stage but QF management are in discussions with Airbus about converting the 8 388's not taken up into A359ULR's. While QF is probably talking to Boeing as well about the 778/779 it will be interesting how this develops. One benefit of the A359ULR over the 778 is QF could take delivery before 2022 as previously reported. Personally I think the 778/779 would be a better fit for QF but we are in for some interesting times ahead.

Interesting. I can't see QF taking the A380s. They may be loved by pax but they are not loved internally at QF.

My gut feel is that the 359ULR vs the 778 will be like the 345 and the 777LR was a few years back. QF may be better waiting for the more flexible and capable plane. But then again if no one is buying the 778 and 779 then maybe the 359 answer. Then again the 359 doesn't offer much of a capacity bump over the 789 so they'd be stuck without a long term 380 replacement.

Decisions!

A330freak wrote:

The following tweet from an analyst at CAPA is claiming that JQ will launch twice weekly services from Melbourne to Zhengzhou in December.
https://twitter.com/winglets747/status/ ... 5534605312

MEL killing it with new long haul route this year!

Todays QR908 DOH-SYD diverted to BNE, is about to land in SYD

Yesterdays QR909 was delayed overnight and looks like today is facing the same

Sources have indicated QF JFK services will be relocating from Terminal 7 to Terminal 8 towards the end of September. I ain't sure if Terminal 8 is A380 equiped, however certainly makes a lot of sense considering Terminal 8 is owned by American Airlines (AA).

EK413

USAOZ wrote:

aborted take off at SYD in last 30 mins. QF again. Was a SYD/joburg flight apparently. Engine died on takeoff run. Apparently they need to change an engine. How long will that take ?

See Cancelled showing at JNB...will it be rescheduled...no chance QF sending A380 to JNB to catch up backlogs perhaps?

grjplanes wrote:

USAOZ wrote:

aborted take off at SYD in last 30 mins. QF again. Was a SYD/joburg flight apparently. Engine died on takeoff run. Apparently they need to change an engine. How long will that take ?

See Cancelled showing at JNB...will it be rescheduled...no chance QF sending A380 to JNB to catch up backlogs perhaps?

QF63 nightstopped not cancelled. There will now be 2 x QF63 services 19/8 with the delayed service departing 7:30L. Worth noting the QF27 nightstopped now scheduled to depart 08:00L.

EK413

EK413 wrote:

Sources have indicated QF JFK services will be relocating from Terminal 7 to Terminal 8 towards the end of September. I ain't sure if Terminal 8 is A380 equiped, however certainly makes a lot of sense considering Terminal 8 is owned by American Airlines (AA).

EK413

Probably wouldn't mater if it's not A380 equiped. I can't see QF sending the A380 to JFK. Maybe QF/AA are quietly confident of the joint venture getting approval.

qf2048 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Sources have indicated QF JFK services will be relocating from Terminal 7 to Terminal 8 towards the end of September. I ain't sure if Terminal 8 is A380 equiped, however certainly makes a lot of sense considering Terminal 8 is owned by American Airlines (AA).

EK413

Probably wouldn't mater if it's not A380 equiped. I can't see QF sending the A380 to JFK. Maybe QF/AA are quietly confident of the joint venture getting approval.

AS and AB (whilst operating) are going the opposite way, from 8 to 7. VX also to 7 to be with AS, so a few minor moves at JFK

sq256 wrote:

Eastbound AKL-MCY has a few rows blocked off already due to the longer flight time. Whereas Westbound doesn't have that problem.

Pardon my ignorance but why would AKL-MCY have rows blocked off when the departure airport is AKL with a 12,000 ft strip?

DavidByrne wrote:

sq256 wrote:

Eastbound AKL-MCY has a few rows blocked off already due to the longer flight time. Whereas Westbound doesn't have that problem.

Pardon my ignorance but why would AKL-MCY have rows blocked off when the departure airport is AKL with a 12,000 ft strip?

It doesn't. AKL-MCY flights have the same booking profile as all the other South East Queensland flights.

qf2048 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Sources have indicated QF JFK services will be relocating from Terminal 7 to Terminal 8 towards the end of September. I ain't sure if Terminal 8 is A380 equiped, however certainly makes a lot of sense considering Terminal 8 is owned by American Airlines (AA).

EK413

Probably wouldn't mater if it's not A380 equiped. I can't see QF sending the A380 to JFK. Maybe QF/AA are quietly confident of the joint venture getting approval.

I wonder if this is simply triggered by a ground handler change from BA to AA? Maybe QF haven't received the service they wanted from BA? Or they hiked prices?

Or is BA not renovating T7? Maybe he move is temporary for space reasons? Long time since I flew through T8 but for an American terminal I recalle sit being nice, T7 was dark and small. How does the AA lounge compare with the BA?