Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
TasFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 6:09 am

 
TasFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 6:11 am

downdata wrote:
qf789 wrote:
BITRE out for January 19, domestic

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoi ... _2019a.pdf

Largest increases PER-KGI (16.3%), PER-PHE (14.2%), PER-ZNE (10.1%), BNE-HBA (9.5%)

Largest decreases PER-DRW (16%), PPP-SYD (14.2%), BNE-BDB (14.3%)


At the current rate of growth, MEL will overtake SYD to become the largest airport by passenger in Australia within a decade, possibly before SZW even opens.


Melbourne figures may include AVV; certainly the Melbourne-Sydney city pair includes AVV-SYD.
 
DanielK
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:31 am

https://www.afr.com/business/transport/ ... 326-p517o6

Perth to Paris direct in the plans, but this dispute seems to be continuing
 
TasFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:17 am

TasFlyer wrote:


For an article that is freely available, see:

http://www.premier.tas.gov.au/releases/west_coast_takes_off
 
Obzerva
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:48 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:20 am

Just a query regarding VA and the 737 MAX.

Yes, it’s nice to have new aircraft, with its fuel efficiencies, but can anyone identify a single new route which they believe will be opened by VA with the MAX8 they couldn’t currently operate?

I realise the larger MAX scheduled for a few years time would give them more room to move with a more premium business class, however I just can’t identify where the MAX8 fits in to VA’s fleet that an -800 couldn’t do now, unless there’s something I’m not seeing?
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:48 am

I would not be surprised if Scurrah defers and/or cancels most of the MAX-8 order, and slightly bringing forward the MAX-10s for the "Perth Product".

Long Haul International Services (LAX and HKG) as previously mentioned are likely to remain the status quo due to their JVs with HX and DL respectively. HKG 'surviving' may likely depend on HNA/HX's financial health.

Short Haul International on the other hand, I can see PS going a similar path to 'early-era' JB by axing most short haul international (unsubsidised) routes, like when JB first started at DJ by axing most 77W routes (JB iirc axed HKT, JNB and NAN from the 77W roster to concentrate on LAX and AUH).

While the inaugural CEO, BG is an example of how to run Virgin, BG also did make mistakes (diversifying into a mixed fleet that JB inherited, using 77Ws to low yielding destinations).
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 12:13 pm

Adding new 737MAX aircraft with the new Perth business class seating could actually be cheaper and create more value than refurbishing existing mid life aircraft with the new product.

From where I sit if the CEO is going to cost save by delaying the introduction of the MAX, he will also cost save by delaying the introduction of the Perth business class seat.
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1980
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 12:28 pm

QF has some lovely puff out there in their battle against Perth Airport now....
 
mh124
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:29 pm

51% originating PER-LHR from Perth - was this more than anyone else guessed ?!
 
GRJGeorge
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 3:53 pm

QF63 SYD-JNB diverted to MRU today. Stop wasn't very long, so couldn't have been too serious, probably a medical?
On the way now MRU-JNB
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 8:12 pm

On VA and the 737MAX, personally I think there is too much focus on the Perth Product. As I have stated before, and I say this as someone who works as groundcrew within the VA system that if this were to be introduced it wont be until the 737MAX10's. The whole idea behind a Perth Product was to have it in 737's that would replace A332's so they could be deployed elsewhere. I can not see the A332's being pulled off domestic for a while so the need for such a product isn't needed. Additionally I have previously stated having a fleet with 2 different business classes would create operational issues. Currently it is quite common to see rego swaps on PER bound flights particularly in the evening as a result of the original planned aircraft being late which causes a knock on effect including running the risk of crew timing out.

I also don't buy those who say the order needs to be cancelled as the aircraft is expensive or it doesn't offer anything the current fleet doesn't already do. Unfortunately this is a short sighted view on things. Firstly those who are saying that the order needs to be cancelled haven't addressed if this were to happen what happens in regards to TT as it stands now VA has 80 737's of which 77/78 are required to be operating on a daily basis to fulfil the schedule. So what happens does TT stay a mixed fleet if the order is canned, the whole point of TT getting 737's was to reduce costs across the group, some of the 737's TT is due to get was with the 737MAX in mind, in other words in a replacement to accommodate the existing 737 moving from VA to TT. Secondly the biggest cost of the airline, any airline, is fuel. Having seen what the fuel usage is like across the network there are significant savings to be made by having a more fuel efficient aircraft. Those short haul International routes that are currently loss making may well be profitable with the 737MAX or at least break even. BNE-PER in the winter suffers from payload restrictions when winds are at their strongest. Flights to DPS suffer from payload restrictions, again these routes would benefit from the 737MAX. On a typical trans con flight a 737MAX could save at least 1 tonne in fuel burn, bare in mind on a typical day there are 4 flights from BNE, 4 from SYD and 5 from MEL. In addition to that running 2 737MAX versus 1 A332 would see less fuel used, while increasing the seat count by around 80 seats. The only downfall from this is less cargo could be carried. Overall there are many arguments why the 737MAX should be taken by VA. I also think while 42 737MAX have been ordered some may in fact be subject to being sold to lessors than leased back to VA. Also some of the oldest 737's will need to be replaced over the next 4 to 5 years. I do think once they start taking the 737MAX they will only be taking a few each year so on that case alone the first couple of years may be 1 for 1 replacements so existing 737's can be handed over to TT
Forum Moderator
 
TN486T
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:18 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:12 pm

HBA-SRN (Hobart - Strahan).. Well, like a "blast from the past". Just looking at a TAA timetable from Sep 1964 !! TN Flt 1409/1410 Dep HBA 1100 Arr SRN 1155 Dep SRN 1215 Arr HBA 1305 thrice weekly Mon, Wed, and Fri. Service operated by a Beechcraft.
Whilst in a reflective mood a Bizjets Sep 1977 timetable shows the following:
Melbourne (presumably MEB - Essendon) Dep 0900 daily to Strahan and Queenstown Arr 1130 then reverse return Dep Strahan 1630 Arr MEB 1855. The Sunday service tagged thru to HBA from SRN, and reverse on return journey.
So hopefully, this new service "sticks" past the government subsidy period cause Strachan is a great place to visit and stay.
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1721
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:27 pm

I agree with qf789 that there's too much focus on PER with the VA MAX, and too much on new destinations/routes as well. The MAX would of course reduce cost (and therefore increase yield) on longer sectors such as to DPS, but also to DRW and CNS. Not to take away from the obvious possibility of supplementing SQ on ADL-SIN, or adding CGK, or myriad other things that the MAX can do versus the NG. The MAX10 is the real opportunity for PER, in my opinion, as it will most easily allow them to do something similar to Mint.

mh124 wrote:
51% originating PER-LHR from Perth - was this more than anyone else guessed ?!


I don't necessarily think this should be taken as O&D from PER. Anyone who gets to PER on another airline or ticket will count as 'originating in PER'. Might not make a huge difference, but could account for some of the UK visitors (arrive in PER, stay a few nights, then head off to other destinations with VA or JQ, for example), and will no doubt also include some Australians who fly to PER on VA or JQ because it's cheaper/quicker/easier/whatever.
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:14 am

VA to CGK I find also less likely, without a partner.

VA does have an interline agreement with GA however, if VA/GA deepens their relationship beyond their current interline arrangement, there may be a slim chance of VA to CGK to supplement GA's existing service.

A deepened VA/GA partnership would also allow VA/GA to 'right-size' DPS operations (whether if it means one or the other carrier replacing each other on certain DPS services), e.g VA withdrawing from SYD-DPS and GA up-gauging on SYD-DPS to a 2-class 77W config that replaces the VA capacity for example.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2790
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:28 am

qf789 wrote:
On VA and the 737MAX, personally I think there is too much focus on the Perth Product. As I have stated before, and I say this as someone who works as groundcrew within the VA system that if this were to be introduced it wont be until the 737MAX10's. The whole idea behind a Perth Product was to have it in 737's that would replace A332's so they could be deployed elsewhere. I can not see the A332's being pulled off domestic for a while so the need for such a product isn't needed. Additionally I have previously stated having a fleet with 2 different business classes would create operational issues. Currently it is quite common to see rego swaps on PER bound flights particularly in the evening as a result of the original planned aircraft being late which causes a knock on effect including running the risk of crew timing out.

I also don't buy those who say the order needs to be cancelled as the aircraft is expensive or it doesn't offer anything the current fleet doesn't already do. Unfortunately this is a short sighted view on things. Firstly those who are saying that the order needs to be cancelled haven't addressed if this were to happen what happens in regards to TT as it stands now VA has 80 737's of which 77/78 are required to be operating on a daily basis to fulfil the schedule. So what happens does TT stay a mixed fleet if the order is canned, the whole point of TT getting 737's was to reduce costs across the group, some of the 737's TT is due to get was with the 737MAX in mind, in other words in a replacement to accommodate the existing 737 moving from VA to TT. Secondly the biggest cost of the airline, any airline, is fuel. Having seen what the fuel usage is like across the network there are significant savings to be made by having a more fuel efficient aircraft. Those short haul International routes that are currently loss making may well be profitable with the 737MAX or at least break even. BNE-PER in the winter suffers from payload restrictions when winds are at their strongest. Flights to DPS suffer from payload restrictions, again these routes would benefit from the 737MAX. On a typical trans con flight a 737MAX could save at least 1 tonne in fuel burn, bare in mind on a typical day there are 4 flights from BNE, 4 from SYD and 5 from MEL. In addition to that running 2 737MAX versus 1 A332 would see less fuel used, while increasing the seat count by around 80 seats. The only downfall from this is less cargo could be carried. Overall there are many arguments why the 737MAX should be taken by VA. I also think while 42 737MAX have been ordered some may in fact be subject to being sold to lessors than leased back to VA. Also some of the oldest 737's will need to be replaced over the next 4 to 5 years. I do think once they start taking the 737MAX they will only be taking a few each year so on that case alone the first couple of years may be 1 for 1 replacements so existing 737's can be handed over to TT


Great insight, thanks qf789. Goes to show the complexity of the decision:
1. Fuel
2. Payload/performance
3. Not all aircraft are delivered at once
4. Maximising second life of existing 737s
5. Responsible management of capex, rather than back-loading it
6. Existing network vs new/potential

One thing I don't get thought is... why did VA send VH-YVA, aBSI plane, over to Tiger? Why not more of the VO- or VU- regd aircraft?
 
TasFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:13 am

TN486T wrote:
HBA-SRN (Hobart - Strahan).. Well, like a "blast from the past". Just looking at a TAA timetable from Sep 1964 !! TN Flt 1409/1410 Dep HBA 1100 Arr SRN 1155 Dep SRN 1215 Arr HBA 1305 thrice weekly Mon, Wed, and Fri. Service operated by a Beechcraft.
Whilst in a reflective mood a Bizjets Sep 1977 timetable shows the following:
Melbourne (presumably MEB - Essendon) Dep 0900 daily to Strahan and Queenstown Arr 1130 then reverse return Dep Strahan 1630 Arr MEB 1855. The Sunday service tagged thru to HBA from SRN, and reverse on return journey.
So hopefully, this new service "sticks" past the government subsidy period cause Strachan is a great place to visit and stay.


Great nostalgia! I should have said this new service operates from Cambridge aerodrome (YCBG), not Hobart airport (YMHB). Flights take 50 minutes, departing YCBG at 7:00, and returning at 16:00.
Also, a HBA-LST service is expected to be announced soon. Not quite rivalling intra-WA but it's a start!
 
CityRail
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:26 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:34 am

ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送
 
a19901213
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:38 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:03 am

CityRail wrote:
ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送


The only chance would probably be when 797 are commercially available.

There’s no plane of the size right now that has the range to sustain this route.
 
JQ321
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:40 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:08 am

a19901213 wrote:
CityRail wrote:
ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送


The only chance would probably be when 797 are commercially available.

There’s no plane of the size right now that has the range to sustain this route.

A321XLR
 
smi0006
Posts: 2580
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:24 am

CityRail wrote:
ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送


From my understanding one of the key obstacle is the charges CBR airport charge as well, as a family run business by the snow family, they selectively sponsor carriers and routes... as the only billionaire in Canberra I feel old mate Terry could let the airport company slacken the costs a little..,
 
TasFlyer
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:37 am

smi0006 wrote:
CityRail wrote:
ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送


From my understanding one of the key obstacle is the charges CBR airport charge as well, as a family run business by the snow family, they selectively sponsor carriers and routes... as the only billionaire in Canberra I feel old mate Terry could let the airport company slacken the costs a little..,


Can Airbus and Boeing trick their 321XLR and 797 respectively with a nudge-bar for clearance of any cars parked behind the plane? :lol:
 
mh124
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:04 pm

DeltaB717 wrote:
I agree with qf789 that there's too much focus on PER with the VA MAX, and too much on new destinations/routes as well. The MAX would of course reduce cost (and therefore increase yield) on longer sectors such as to DPS, but also to DRW and CNS. Not to take away from the obvious possibility of supplementing SQ on ADL-SIN, or adding CGK, or myriad other things that the MAX can do versus the NG. The MAX10 is the real opportunity for PER, in my opinion, as it will most easily allow them to do something similar to Mint.

mh124 wrote:
51% originating PER-LHR from Perth - was this more than anyone else guessed ?!


I don't necessarily think this should be taken as O&D from PER. Anyone who gets to PER on another airline or ticket will count as 'originating in PER'. Might not make a huge difference, but could account for some of the UK visitors (arrive in PER, stay a few nights, then head off to other destinations with VA or JQ, for example), and will no doubt also include some Australians who fly to PER on VA or JQ because it's cheaper/quicker/easier/whatever.



Sorry i should have put the reference in.
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/wp-co ... REPORT.pdf
See page 10. For the first time they break down the O+D by Australian city. Perth comes out at 50.1.
 
mh124
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:33 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:18 pm

CityRail wrote:
ACT Government is trying to lure a direct flight between CBR and China.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/canber ... 517fv.html

My thought is other than HKG, there's no port in China where this route will be profitable without subsidy; where HKG is not really China (Mainland) but will be close enough for business and transit passneger demand.

Having said that, I believe there's demand perhaps for freight ex-CBR if there's adequate logistics network for fresh produce etc. So will be interesting.

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 G3226 發送


Just looking at the Dec numbers for CBR-SIN. 3394 outbound - does that include the passengers who start journey in Sydney?
I'm presuming it doesn't - in which case its 109 passengers per flight. Thats peak season as well - hardly seems all that impressive. If SIN can't work stand alone (and SIN would be big for business plus a huge transit point for the large VFR market that now exists in CBR) I can't see anything more ambitious working.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:58 pm

Qantas has modified its training for aerodynamic stall warnings after the incident onboard a 744 in April 2017 near HKG

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/qan ... hong-kong/
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:14 pm

Virgin 738 VH-VUP is currently out of service in ASP after suffering a bird strike on arrival to ASP, engineers have been sent from MEL to inspect the aircraft

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-27/ ... g/10945868

On a separate note VA rolled out new menus across the domestic fleet a week ago

Here is a story of the most popular things on the menu currently

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-a ... f754fd48d9
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1980
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:25 pm

mh124 wrote:
Sorry i should have put the reference in.
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/wp-co ... REPORT.pdf
See page 10. For the first time they break down the O+D by Australian city. Perth comes out at 50.1.


Im surprised that SYD has less journey starts/finishes than MEL.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2586
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:02 pm

qf789 wrote:

On a separate note VA rolled out new menus across the domestic fleet a week ago

Here is a story of the most popular things on the menu currently

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-a ... f754fd48d9


Have always loved the Cheese and Crackers; go great with a beer and easy to handle in a cramped economy seat. I sort of wonder why both airlines don't ditch all the silly biscuits they insist on giving as snacks and just offer the cheese and crackers. I guess it is because they would still need a dairy-free vegetarian option.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
brucetiki
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:36 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:15 am

qf789 wrote:

On a separate note VA rolled out new menus across the domestic fleet a week ago

Here is a story of the most popular things on the menu currently

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-a ... f754fd48d9



Don't tell me the protein balls have gone :D
The early bird catches the worm, the late bird will be featured on a You Tube video
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1872
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:51 am

qf2220 wrote:
mh124 wrote:
Sorry i should have put the reference in.
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/wp-co ... REPORT.pdf
See page 10. For the first time they break down the O+D by Australian city. Perth comes out at 50.1.


Im surprised that SYD has less journey starts/finishes than MEL.

I'm not, considering SYD has QF1/2 to go if one wants to go to LHR.

Michael
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1721
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:37 am

mh124 wrote:
DeltaB717 wrote:
I agree with qf789 that there's too much focus on PER with the VA MAX, and too much on new destinations/routes as well. The MAX would of course reduce cost (and therefore increase yield) on longer sectors such as to DPS, but also to DRW and CNS. Not to take away from the obvious possibility of supplementing SQ on ADL-SIN, or adding CGK, or myriad other things that the MAX can do versus the NG. The MAX10 is the real opportunity for PER, in my opinion, as it will most easily allow them to do something similar to Mint.

mh124 wrote:
51% originating PER-LHR from Perth - was this more than anyone else guessed ?!


I don't necessarily think this should be taken as O&D from PER. Anyone who gets to PER on another airline or ticket will count as 'originating in PER'. Might not make a huge difference, but could account for some of the UK visitors (arrive in PER, stay a few nights, then head off to other destinations with VA or JQ, for example), and will no doubt also include some Australians who fly to PER on VA or JQ because it's cheaper/quicker/easier/whatever.



Sorry i should have put the reference in.
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/wp-co ... REPORT.pdf
See page 10. For the first time they break down the O+D by Australian city. Perth comes out at 50.1.


My fault, I shouldn't have said "O&D" in that context. What I meant was that not all of that 50.1% are necessarily PER residents, because O&D only means they started or ended their journey on that ticket in Perth. As an aside, thanks for reminding me to download the Deloitte report! :)
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 2:15 am

SQ to go all A350 to BNE from 1 May 19

https://www.ausbt.com.au/singapore-airl ... ource=hero
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1980
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:16 am

eamondzhang wrote:
qf2220 wrote:
mh124 wrote:
Sorry i should have put the reference in.
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/wp-co ... REPORT.pdf
See page 10. For the first time they break down the O+D by Australian city. Perth comes out at 50.1.


Im surprised that SYD has less journey starts/finishes than MEL.

I'm not, considering SYD has QF1/2 to go if one wants to go to LHR.

Michael


Melbourne has 37/1 (20 mins more with A330 and A380) and 2/36 (30 mins more with A380 and A330), both with a comparable midpoint to 1/2.

So not sure that is the reason.

Doing some dummy bookings online, QF9/10 is a bit down the list (#3)for options ex SYD (1/2 is top), whereas it is #1 option for ex MEL bookings. Perhaps QF is managing it to be so that passengers from MEL go via PER more than those from SYD?
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:18 am

qf789 wrote:
SQ to go all A350 to BNE from 1 May 19

https://www.ausbt.com.au/singapore-airl ... ource=hero


SQ245/SQ246 will remain a 3-class long-haul A350, whilst the other 3 flights will be the 2-class regional A350 product (265/266 switched from the 2-class regional/old long haul 772)..
 
vhebb
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:22 am

Joyce had stated that SIN-LHR-SIN will remain (hence the new F lounge) once the new direct SYD and MEL to LHR begin. So QF could be back up to 4x daily if the keep PER as well:

SYD-LHR-SYD
MEL-LHR-MEL
???-SIN-LHR-SIN-???
PER-LHR-PER
 
JQ321
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:40 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:51 am

vhebb wrote:
Joyce had stated that SIN-LHR-SIN will remain (hence the new F lounge) once the new direct SYD and MEL to LHR begin. So QF could be back up to 4x daily if the keep PER as well:

SYD-LHR-SYD
MEL-LHR-MEL
???-SIN-LHR-SIN-???
PER-LHR-PER

They said East Coast and in their Diagram included Brisbane so maybe they'll go to 5 flights and the Sin-lhr-sing would probably oiriginate in SYD as it currently does with feed in from all other SIN flights.
 
Ryanair01
Posts: 485
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:27 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:08 am

qf2220 wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
qf2220 wrote:

Im surprised that SYD has less journey starts/finishes than MEL.

I'm not, considering SYD has QF1/2 to go if one wants to go to LHR.

Michael


Melbourne has 37/1 (20 mins more with A330 and A380) and 2/36 (30 mins more with A380 and A330), both with a comparable midpoint to 1/2.

So not sure that is the reason.

Doing some dummy bookings online, QF9/10 is a bit down the list (#3)for options ex SYD (1/2 is top), whereas it is #1 option for ex MEL bookings. Perhaps QF is managing it to be so that passengers from MEL go via PER more than those from SYD?


Put simply it's a Melbourne to London flight that refuels in Perth. I'm probably being dense, but I don't follow the confusion about why people from Melbourne would be on the Melbourne flight?
 
Obzerva
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:48 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:46 am

Ryanair01 wrote:
qf2220 wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
I'm not, considering SYD has QF1/2 to go if one wants to go to LHR.

Michael


Melbourne has 37/1 (20 mins more with A330 and A380) and 2/36 (30 mins more with A380 and A330), both with a comparable midpoint to 1/2.

So not sure that is the reason.

Doing some dummy bookings online, QF9/10 is a bit down the list (#3)for options ex SYD (1/2 is top), whereas it is #1 option for ex MEL bookings. Perhaps QF is managing it to be so that passengers from MEL go via PER more than those from SYD?


Put simply it's a Melbourne to London flight that refuels in Perth. I'm probably being dense, but I don't follow the confusion about why people from Melbourne would be on the Melbourne flight?


I think it was more of an observation about the way QF manages their availability displays, and yes they manipulate them strongly.

It’s the same way that the QF website will offer you a 2 stop to MAN (via SIN and LHR) when there’s a perfectly good one stop QF codeshare on EK.

QF will deliberately push one flight option over another to certain markets.

If QF weren’t deliberately funnelling the MEL traffic on to the flight via PER and more freely offered via SIN instead, then who would realistically be wanting to pick the PER-MEL as a stand-alone flight with all the additional international check in requirements and timeframes?
QF need to need keep the domestic leg of it as full as possible, so it makes sense to be targeting the traveller going all the way through.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:57 am

Quite simple really... In the GDS displays as the MEL flight is the one flight number with no connections it will always appear at the top of the screen.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:18 am

JQ321 wrote:
vhebb wrote:
Joyce had stated that SIN-LHR-SIN will remain (hence the new F lounge) once the new direct SYD and MEL to LHR begin. So QF could be back up to 4x daily if the keep PER as well:

SYD-LHR-SYD
MEL-LHR-MEL
???-SIN-LHR-SIN-???
PER-LHR-PER

They said East Coast and in their Diagram included Brisbane so maybe they'll go to 5 flights and the Sin-lhr-sing would probably oiriginate in SYD as it currently does with feed in from all other SIN flights.


Qantas own four LHR slots so I think we can safely assume that they will not operate more than four flights. Given that they have committed to all of SYD/MEL/PER/SIN-LHR then the SIN flight would either be BNE-SIN-LHR or SYD-SIN-LHR, to make SYD twice daily. My money is on the latter.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4530
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:22 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
JQ321 wrote:
vhebb wrote:
Joyce had stated that SIN-LHR-SIN will remain (hence the new F lounge) once the new direct SYD and MEL to LHR begin. So QF could be back up to 4x daily if the keep PER as well:

SYD-LHR-SYD
MEL-LHR-MEL
???-SIN-LHR-SIN-???
PER-LHR-PER

They said East Coast and in their Diagram included Brisbane so maybe they'll go to 5 flights and the Sin-lhr-sing would probably oiriginate in SYD as it currently does with feed in from all other SIN flights.


Qantas own four LHR slots so I think we can safely assume that they will not operate more than four flights. Given that they have committed to all of SYD/MEL/PER/SIN-LHR then the SIN flight would either be BNE-SIN-LHR or SYD-SIN-LHR, to make SYD twice daily. My money is on the latter.

Yes with a BNE flight connecting in SIN in both directions.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
kriskim
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:44 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:41 am

For those confused why there are more MEL pax on the PER-LHR flight, it is because:

- QF9/10, believe it or not is a MEL originating flight, it was always MEL’s flight, in the past the stop over was SIN and DXB, now it is PER. The 787 used for PER-LHR is a MEL based aircraft.

Keep in mind that MEL pax also has the option of connecting viaSIN onwards to QF1.

Zkpilot wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
JQ321 wrote:
They said East Coast and in their Diagram included Brisbane so maybe they'll go to 5 flights and the Sin-lhr-sing would probably oiriginate in SYD as it currently does with feed in from all other SIN flights.


Qantas own four LHR slots so I think we can safely assume that they will not operate more than four flights. Given that they have committed to all of SYD/MEL/PER/SIN-LHR then the SIN flight would either be BNE-SIN-LHR or SYD-SIN-LHR, to make SYD twice daily. My money is on the latter.

Yes with a BNE flight connecting in SIN in both directions.


If the flight remains as an A380, I’m sorry but I don’t see it originating in BNE, the new non-stop service will complement the current service viaSIN from Sydney. BNE pax will still have the option of connecting onwards from SIN as they currently do, I can see however, QF possibly adding a second fight to make BNE-SIN double daily, similar to MEL’s current schedule.

Remember that the new non-stop flights are for high yielding pax who are going to pay a premium to fly non-stop. The rest will simply be redirected to the current A380 flight viaSIN. By removing the flight from SYD, QF is handing over market share over to other carriers.
A world built upon connectivity.
 
qantas747
Posts: 378
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 12:51 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:05 pm

Qantas owns 4 pairs of slots 2 morning arrivals, 2 lunch time arrivals and departures with two evening departures.

What times do you think we will see on SYD-LHR? Would it likely be evening departures and morning arrivals both ways to be premium heavy?
Is it likely that QF will look to shuffle slots around to account for the new services?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:07 pm

Agreed re BNE, the main reason I don't see SIN originating there is that an A380 isn't necessary for BNE-SIN. SIN-LHR will still carry a substantial amount of traffic from SYD and MEL so I don't see having a through service being enough of a justification for that much capacity on BNE-SIN.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2790
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:24 pm

brucetiki wrote:
qf789 wrote:

On a separate note VA rolled out new menus across the domestic fleet a week ago

Here is a story of the most popular things on the menu currently

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-a ... f754fd48d9



Don't tell me the protein balls have gone :D


Ha! Those damn protein balls/bars! May they never sully our skies again - truly horrendous. Good to see they've refreshed.
 
qf002
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:42 pm

qantas747 wrote:
Qantas owns 4 pairs of slots 2 morning arrivals, 2 lunch time arrivals and departures with two evening departures.


It's actually three early morning arrivals and one at lunchtime.

qantas747 wrote:
What times do you think we will see on SYD-LHR? Would it likely be evening departures and morning arrivals both ways to be premium heavy?


Something like -

dep SYD 2000 arr LHR 0600+1
dep LHR 1000 arr SYD 1800+1

An evening departure from LHR won't work during the northern summer due to the curfews at both ends. The existing QF2 departs after 2100 and arrives into SYD at 0500, even pushing that departure back to 2200 will see the plane circling over SYD by 0300 (assuming 20hr flight time).

I don't think they will need to sacrifice utilisation to operate at the ends of the day when it's a nonstop service, that will attract enough of a yield premium in itself. You'd only need two aircraft for a daily service with the schedule above, and they would still have the service via SIN departing in the evening for people who want/need that overnight option.

More broadly, if they keep the same slots that they have today then I'd expect early morning arrivals from SYD/MEL/SIN and at lunchtime from PER. Lunchtime departures to SYD/MEL and evening departures to SIN/PER. Of course, there's no reason why they couldn't swap some slots around, would make sense to bring the PER departure forward to the afternoon rather than late at night.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:31 pm

Qantas being accused of cancelling flights on MEL-SYD to improve loads and increase profitability. In the first 2 months of this QF's cancellation rate has increased averaging around 6% while VA's cancellation rate has fallen and averages around 4%

https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/financ ... -loadings/
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:47 pm

qf002 wrote:
[

More broadly, if they keep the same slots that they have today then I'd expect early morning arrivals from SYD/MEL/SIN and at lunchtime from PER. Lunchtime departures to SYD/MEL and evening departures to SIN/PER. Of course, there's no reason why they couldn't swap some slots around, would make sense to bring the PER departure forward to the afternoon rather than late at night.


The whole argument over why they chose a early morning arrival from PER into LHR at around 5am was to minimise hold times, the same would apply to other non-stops, therefore if any flight is going to land at LHR at lunchtime it will be the SIN one. As of Saturday the flight departs PER just before 7pm for a just after 5am arrival therefore an afternoon departure would not work. If it were to arrive at LHR at lunchtime it would require to depart PER at 2am again I cant see that happening. The current arrangement works well due to the way the aircraft is rotate through to do a US flight.
Forum Moderator
 
qf002
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:51 pm

qf789 wrote:
The whole argument over why they chose a early morning arrival from PER into LHR at around 5am was to minimise hold times, the same would apply to other non-stops, therefore if any flight is going to land at LHR at lunchtime it will be the SIN one.


Was it? I remember it being mentioned but the schedule was primarily built around maximising utilisation. Wouldn’t be an issue anyway if they swapped the 789 for the same A350/777 used for SYD/MEL.

The issue with the SIN flight coming in later is that it would have to depart SYD after curfew. Personally I can’t see them continuing an A380 flight out of MEL or BNE, it will either be from SYD or they will drop it altogether. I think there is also a strong argument to be made for maintaining an overnight LHR-SYD which can’t be achieved (sensibly) with a nonstop.

qf789 wrote:
As of Saturday the flight departs PER just before 7pm for a just after 5am arrival therefore an afternoon departure would not work. If it were to arrive at LHR at lunchtime it would require to depart PER at 2am again I cant see that happening. The current arrangement works well due to the way the aircraft is rotate through to do a US flight.


PER-LHR will come secondary to SYD/MEL-LHR once those routes become possible. I’m sure QF will keep it going but it’s not going to get the sort of attention and gushing that we’ve seen from management over the last 12 months.

RE afternoon departure, I was referred to departure from LHR to PER. If they could secure a late-morning arrival slot (around 10am) then the flight could depart PER at midnight then depart LHR early afternoon for an afternoon arrival into PER. Presumably there will be other changes to utilisation patterns (including the existing MEL-PER sector) if/when all these new flights start, certainly QF won’t be constrained by them if they want to do something different.
 
JQ321
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:40 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:26 pm

qf002 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The whole argument over why they chose a early morning arrival from PER into LHR at around 5am was to minimise hold times, the same would apply to other non-stops, therefore if any flight is going to land at LHR at lunchtime it will be the SIN one.


Was it? I remember it being mentioned but the schedule was primarily built around maximising utilisation. Wouldn’t be an issue anyway if they swapped the 789 for the same A350/777 used for SYD/MEL.

The issue with the SIN flight coming in later is that it would have to depart SYD after curfew. Personally I can’t see them continuing an A380 flight out of MEL or BNE, it will either be from SYD or they will drop it altogether. I think there is also a strong argument to be made for maintaining an overnight LHR-SYD which can’t be achieved (sensibly) with a nonstop.

qf789 wrote:
As of Saturday the flight departs PER just before 7pm for a just after 5am arrival therefore an afternoon departure would not work. If it were to arrive at LHR at lunchtime it would require to depart PER at 2am again I cant see that happening. The current arrangement works well due to the way the aircraft is rotate through to do a US flight.


PER-LHR will come secondary to SYD/MEL-LHR once those routes become possible. I’m sure QF will keep it going but it’s not going to get the sort of attention and gushing that we’ve seen from management over the last 12 months.

RE afternoon departure, I was referred to departure from LHR to PER. If they could secure a late-morning arrival slot (around 10am) then the flight could depart PER at midnight then depart LHR early afternoon for an afternoon arrival into PER. Presumably there will be other changes to utilisation patterns (including the existing MEL-PER sector) if/when all these new flights start, certainly QF won’t be constrained by them if they want to do something different.

Looking at the recent Perth-London figures it seems as if they'd need a tag team flight from Brisbane or decrease freqquency which would enable BNE-LHR non-stop for say 3 days a week.
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1980
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - March 2019

Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:45 pm

vhebb wrote:
Joyce had stated that SIN-LHR-SIN will remain (hence the new F lounge) once the new direct SYD and MEL to LHR begin. So QF could be back up to 4x daily if the keep PER as well:

SYD-LHR-SYD
MEL-LHR-MEL
???-SIN-LHR-SIN-???
PER-LHR-PER


The SIN-LHR-SIN market will be those perhaps not willing to pay as much for the direct service but still wanting to fly QF. Id suspect A380 still. Perhaps, with a low probability, a reconfiguration to increase the seat count?

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