QF has cancelled today's QF129/130 SYD-PVG due to Typhoon Lekima and yesterday's flight got diverted to HKG

This article gives a good summary of the split scimitar winglets.
They are expensive and add weight, so you really only see the benefits above 1000nm routes.
http://www.b737.org.uk/winglets.htm#splitscimitar

Of note the AT winglets on the 737Max are quite different from these retrofits.

qf2220 wrote:

Boof wrote:

Some big news out of Qantas and AusPost yesterday. A321 freighters!!

I love how QF Freight can run planes that mainline doesn't seem to want/be able to - 763 and now A320family!

I’m seeing QF mainland migrating to the A320 family at some point in the future, I have no doubt that the A321NEO variants will end up in QF mainline first then A320NEO’s replacing the 737’s. This is just my opinion of course.

Fairly clear that the 321neoXLR will take some of the shorter SE-Asian routes from SYD/MEL, cross country and maybe new routes from Adelaide to Asia or to India, hopefully with a proper international 1-1 business product for Qantas (the talk when that order was announced was 12 QF, 12 JQ and 12 TBA)

Remainder of domestic could still be 797/737NG otherwise there is lot of conversion courses to pay for.

No A321 Freighter for QF Cargo they will using JQ Belly space on there NEO'S

qf789 wrote:

The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development is calling for more capacity into SYD after recent trends see a move away from very large aircraft

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... stark-now/

In the meantime SYD CEO has called for more flexibility in SYD aircraft movement cap.

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... ement-cap/

Are there really no more slots as claimed by the article; does any new service require an existing one to be offset?

qf789 wrote:

danair380 wrote:

Well this is interesting, and kinda of a surprise to me. VA 737-800's with split-scimitar winglets

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... -737-800s/

But why only 5 aircraft?

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

I wonder how much money Boeing makes per refit? They have the airlines' balls in the vice: Boeing not only has a monopoly on the refit, but they also know how much fuel will be saved and can use this information to price the winglets just low enough to make it worthwhile for the airlines while maximising profit for themselves.

TasFlyer wrote:

qf789 wrote:

danair380 wrote:

Well this is interesting, and kinda of a surprise to me. VA 737-800's with split-scimitar winglets

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... -737-800s/

But why only 5 aircraft?

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

I wonder how much money Boeing makes per refit? They have the airlines' balls in the vice: Boeing not only has a monopoly on the refit, but they also know how much fuel will be saved and can use this information to price the winglets just low enough to make it worthwhile for the airlines while maximising profit for themselves.

The manufacturers of the SSW is a joint venture between Boeing and Acviation Partners; it is not Boeing itself. The refit is not necessarily done by Boeing; As VA had there's done in Christchurch, I think this means it was done at the Air NZ maintenance facility there.

BrianWilkes wrote:

No A321 Freighter for QF Cargo they will using JQ Belly space on there NEO'S

What are you talking about? Joyce has specifically stated that they are converting some A321s into freighters.

https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/qa ... 809-p52fii

""These A321s are very exciting. They give you 45 per cent more capability than existing freighters in weight and 70 per cent more in containerised volume because they are containerised above and below the wing."

Mr Joyce said he also had 109 brand-new Airbus A320s coming next year so "we have a lot of aircraft which we could convert into freighters as they retire from the Jetstar network"."

moa999 wrote:

Fairly clear that the 321neoXLR will take some of the shorter SE-Asian routes from SYD/MEL, cross country and maybe new routes from Adelaide to Asia or to India, hopefully with a proper international 1-1 business product for Qantas (the talk when that order was announced was 12 QF, 12 JQ and 12 TBA)

Remainder of domestic could still be 797/737NG otherwise there is lot of conversion courses to pay for.

I think you are jumping the gun there, QF is going to decide on its future narrowbody needs next year. Some of those 321neoXLR's could make their way into fleets for 3K and JW as well. Also it appears that no more 787's will be ordered until Project Sunrise is finalised, this is going to leave them with not a room to move towards the second half of next year providing all the 744's are gone by then.

https://aviationweek.com/awincommercial ... rders-2020

Next week marks 30 years since the Domestic Pilots Dispute, which grounded aviation within Australia.

A few basic points as I understand it:

- At the time Hawke and the ACTU had a deal which capped union wage claims (The Prices and Income Accord)
- Australian Airlines pilots had not submitted a pay claim for several years, because Australian Airlines was in bad financial shape
- By 1989 Australian had recovered and the pilots put in a deferred claim, basically compensating them for years with no pay rise
- This created a claim bigger than capped Accord levels
- The pilots rather than striking worked between 9-5 and Ansett's pilots went out in solidarity, as did East West and IPEC
- Qantas pilots, who were then an international only airline, didn't back their domestic colleagues
- Ansett were especially upset as they had agreed pay rises for each year that Australian hadn't. Sir Peter Abele's felt their deal was being dishonored (his view, others disagree!)
- Ansett had hired former ACTU staff to run industrial relations. The Pilots Union (AFAP) was 'right wing' and disliked by the ACTU left
- Australian Airlines didn't want to pay or upset Hawke, as they were owned by the Federal Government
- Hawke and ACTU didn't back the pilots union, who were not affiliated to the ACTU.
- That was because the Prices and Income "Accord" was Hawke's proudest achievement (which Abeles had been instrumental in). Hawke feared the pilot's pay claim would cause the Accord to collapse
- The AFAP blundered and got their members into a position where they risked personal liability for the airline's losses
- The airlines started suing pilots. To avoid being sued the pilots either had to side with the airline or resign
- Most resigned, thinking the airlines would have to rehire them to stay in business
- The Eastern Airlines Pilots Dispute in America and general de-regulation fall out meant there were many US Pilots available for an immediate start. The airlines started a recruitment campaign in the US
Ansett recruitment film
https://youtu.be/j5t5aE0iW4o
- The airlines sent out a "take it or leave it" offer to the pilots, about 20% accepted and 80% rejected it, becoming "the 89ers"
Australian Airlines message to their former pilots

- Meanwhile, the airlines were grounded. The RAAF, chartered jets from overseas airlines and international flights on domestic tags operated mainly triangle routes.
RAAF Herc being used to ferry domestic fliers

- Tourism was devastated and many small business owners were wiped out
- The Australian economy took a $1b hit ($2b in today's money) and the country entered recession years ahead of elsewhere
- Slowly airline schedules started up again

This page is worth a read, although it is very much from the pilot's perspective rather than a balanced review http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/aviation/pd89_document.htm#1.

I have heard rumours now that QF or AA wants to fly DFW-MEL based on the success of SYD-DFW but DFW-MEL's distance is only a little shorter than PER-LHR. If AA fly's it it needs to update their pilot agreement. Plus the 789 in AA's config is denser than QF. I'm willing to be QF will launch MEL-DFW with AA launching seasonal LAX-MEL, resuming LAX-AKL (year round) and AA or QF launching DFW-BNE.

qf789 wrote:

danair380 wrote:

Well this is interesting, and kinda of a surprise to me. VA 737-800's with split-scimitar winglets

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... -737-800s/

But why only 5 aircraft?

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

VA have been clear that the 5 are a trial and, as qf789 says, if the SSWs perform as expected (or better) they may well add them to more aircraft further down the track. Interestingly, that 160t per aircraft per year is approx. a 2% reduction in fuel burn - 2% of anything never sounded quite so big, right!?

DeltaB717 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

danair380 wrote:

Well this is interesting, and kinda of a surprise to me. VA 737-800's with split-scimitar winglets

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... -737-800s/

But why only 5 aircraft?

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

VA have been clear that the 5 are a trial and, as qf789 says, if the SSWs perform as expected (or better) they may well add them to more aircraft further down the track. Interestingly, that 160t per aircraft per year is approx. a 2% reduction in fuel burn - 2% of anything never sounded quite so big, right!?

The approximate payback time is around 5-6 years. With the MAX fleet order being delayed, it is likely that, should the trial go well, all the 738 fleet except the VO* series will be retrofitted.

Does anyone know anything about QF possibly launching MEL-DFW? It would be nice to have a route from MEL to the interior US that bypasses LAX/SFO.

BNAMealer wrote:

Does anyone know anything about QF possibly launching MEL-DFW? It would be nice to have a route from MEL to the interior US that bypasses LAX/SFO.

Maybe more likely for AA to launch MEL-LAX as part of its side of the deal when it comes to new routes due to the QF/AA JV?

BAeRJ100 wrote:

BrianWilkes wrote:

No A321 Freighter for QF Cargo they will using JQ Belly space on there NEO'S

What are you talking about? Joyce has specifically stated that they are converting some A321s into freighters.

https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/qa ... 809-p52fii

""These A321s are very exciting. They give you 45 per cent more capability than existing freighters in weight and 70 per cent more in containerised volume because they are containerised above and below the wing."

Mr Joyce said he also had 109 brand-new Airbus A320s coming next year so "we have a lot of aircraft which we could convert into freighters as they retire from the Jetstar network"."

Since I first posted this news to the forum I have been thinking about where these A321's are coming from. The Australian Aviation article posted today says that "The A321s will be passenger-to-freighter (P2F) conversions. The source of the aircraft to be converted was not disclosed."

The timing works well for the new A321LR's being delivered from mid 2020 to replace the three A321's that JQ own in Australia and then they are converted (VWY, VWT, VWX) which would meet the October 2020 start date. I'm not saying I'm correct but the timing and ownership do make this work. Food for thought.

tullamarine wrote:

DeltaB717 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

VA have been clear that the 5 are a trial and, as qf789 says, if the SSWs perform as expected (or better) they may well add them to more aircraft further down the track. Interestingly, that 160t per aircraft per year is approx. a 2% reduction in fuel burn - 2% of anything never sounded quite so big, right!?

The approximate payback time is around 5-6 years. With the MAX fleet order being delayed, it is likely that, should the trial go well, all the 738 fleet except the VO* series will be retrofitted.

I struggled with the ROI on installing these winglets. Based on the IATA fuel price index of $602 US per metric tonne as of the 2nd of August and allowing for $80k for installation costs it is close to $800k US total cost (the price on APB's website is from 2014). VA have said they will save 160T of fuel per year so the return is $96k per year or 8.3 year return based on fuel alone which seems like a long time. Obviously the less VA pay for fuel the longer this return becomes which is why I struggled however I've since found some further benefits that contribute to the ROI from the 737.org.uk website:

• Improved climb gradient. This will enable a higher RTOW from climb limited airports (hot, high or noise abatement) or obstacle limited runways.
• Reduced climb thrust. A winglet equipped aircraft can typically take a 3% derate over the non-winglet equivalent aircraft. This can extend engine life and reduce maintenance costs.
• Environmentally friendly. The derate, if taken, will reduce the noise footprint by 6.5% and NOx emissions by 5%. This could give savings on airport noise quotas or fines.
• Reduced cruise thrust. Cruise fuel flow is reduced by up to 6% giving savings in fuel costs and increasing range.
• Improved cruise performance. Winglets can allow aircraft to reach higher levels sooner. Air Berlin notes, “Previously, we'd step-climb from 35,000 to 41,000 feet. With Blended Winglets, we can now climb direct to 41,000 feet where traffic congestion is much less and we can take advantage of direct routings and shortcuts which we could not otherwise consider.”

Ryanair01 wrote:

Next week marks 30 years since the Domestic Pilots Dispute, which grounded aviation within Australia.

Thanks for sharing this. I found your post really interesting! Whilst I was young at the time, I do remember the RAAF flights covering the dispute.

Since I first posted this news to the forum I have been thinking about where these A321's are coming from. The Australian Aviation article posted today says that "The A321s will be passenger-to-freighter (P2F) conversions. The source of the aircraft to be converted was not disclosed."

The timing works well for the new A321LR's being delivered from mid 2020 to replace the three A321's that JQ own in Australia and then they are converted (VWY, VWT, VWX) which would meet the October 2020 start date. I'm not saying I'm correct but the timing and ownership do make this work. Food for thought.

You may be right but, strangely, the graphic released by QF shows an A321 with CFM engines rather than IAE. All existing QF Group A32Xs are IAE powered.

tullamarine wrote:

DeltaB717 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

I would have liked to see more but it comes down to cost and if it goes well I would expect to see more retrofitted. It is expected each plane will save 200,000 litres of fuel or 160,000 kg per plane per year, in total that is 1,000,000 litres or 800,000 kg which is enough fuel for 100 PER-MEL trips or 225-250 MEL-SYD, it is quite a saving, of course the more aircraft that have them the more fuel saved. It would also be interesting to see if QF plan to retrofit any of their 738's

VA have been clear that the 5 are a trial and, as qf789 says, if the SSWs perform as expected (or better) they may well add them to more aircraft further down the track. Interestingly, that 160t per aircraft per year is approx. a 2% reduction in fuel burn - 2% of anything never sounded quite so big, right!?

The approximate payback time is around 5-6 years. With the MAX fleet order being delayed, it is likely that, should the trial go well, all the 738 fleet except the VO* series will be retrofitted.

I probably would not add the VU registered aircraft in there as the ROI will hit about the same time the aircraft is due to be retired, particularly the early model VU aircraft as some of those are currently pushing 15 years old. VA has 46 aircraft with BSI interior, that being YF*, YI*, YV* and YW* registered aircraft, all these aircraft range from 1.5 years to just over 8 years old, the YI* ones ranges from 5-8 years

BNAMealer wrote:

Does anyone know anything about QF possibly launching MEL-DFW? It would be nice to have a route from MEL to the interior US that bypasses LAX/SFO.

On the AA side, I'd have to go with the others tipping MEL-LAX (replacing QF95/96).
Slim chance of seasonal DFW-BNE on AA's side during the NW or NS.
Can't see any additional BNE-LAX flights as yields on that route are under pressure as it is.

Boof wrote:

Since I first posted this news to the forum I have been thinking about where these A321's are coming from. The Australian Aviation article posted today says that "The A321s will be passenger-to-freighter (P2F) conversions. The source of the aircraft to be converted was not disclosed."

The timing works well for the new A321LR's being delivered from mid 2020 to replace the three A321's that JQ own in Australia and then they are converted (VWY, VWT, VWX) which would meet the October 2020 start date. I'm not saying I'm correct but the timing and ownership do make this work. Food for thought.

The original article you linked did mention P2F conversions, so it was always clear to me that these were not new planes. If they are 3 of the existing JQ birds or sourced from other operators/leasing firms, I guess we have to wait and see. It will depend on (1) JQ's fleet plans and if they can/want to replace three A321s rather than add 3 new NEOs, and (2) how cheap can they be sourced elsewhere. Those three birds you mention will all be 11 to 12 years old in 2020, so maybe there is better value in sourcing older ones closer to the 20-year mark? With the NEOs and LRs replacing older fleets at many airlines over the coming years, one would think there are some good deals to be had. LH has some early ones built in '93/'94 still flying and given their typical stage length they must be high cycles, so even at 18-20 years old there would still be a lot of life in them for a P2F conversion.

tullamarine wrote:

You may be right but, strangely, the graphic released by QF shows an A321 with CFM engines rather than IAE. All existing QF Group A32Xs are IAE powered.

Just going by the way the logos are applied in this graphic, this was put together by the intern in AusPost or QF's marketing/media department, someone who does not even know or care that the same aircraft can come with different engine types. I would not read anything into that.

The existing JQ a321s are only as old as May 2008, so I'd suggest at least a few more years in passenger config before a freight conversion. I'm pretty sure that the freighters coming before the a321neo, so I think they'll be from another airline.

VWY is older being a 2001 Aero Lloyd delivery, then flying with Spirit from 2004 then Jetstar from 2008

VWZ is similar (but listed by airfleets as owned by Pembroke Capital (Standard Chartered))

Flight cancellations ex-HKG to Australia this evening due to intensifying protests at Chep Lap Kok Airport:

CX111, CX161, CX101, CX135
QF128, QF118, QF30, QF98
VA82, VA68

VA down to 1 332 on domestic for Tuesday, most A332 flights have been downgraded to 738

With all this HKG drama unfolding at the airport, I wonder if Macau could be set up as an alternate for diversions... Macau has a number of hotels that im sure would be of use in a scenario like this. Or alternatively get passengers on the ground and then ferry them across to Hong Kong.
Wheres Viva Macau when you need them? LOL

QF has cancelled HKG flights for Tuesday except QF117

qf789 wrote:

VA down to 1 332 on domestic for Tuesday, most A332 flights have been downgraded to 738

What're all the others doing? I get that two of them would've been planned for international, and one is in a hangar, but the other two...?

Two are in HKG, they were supposed to leave last night. They will now leave in the middle of the day / early afternoon (earliest slots VA could get). Another two are performing the scheduled flying into and out of HKG today. And one is in maintenance getting Wifi fitted. Leaving one for trans-con.

DeltaB717 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

VA down to 1 332 on domestic for Tuesday, most A332 flights have been downgraded to 738

What're all the others doing? I get that two of them would've been planned for international, and one is in a hangar, but the other two...?

2 are stuck in HKG, 2 are doing SYD/MEL-HKG this morning, 1 is doing transcon and the other is in maintenance.

QuayWeeAir wrote:

With all this HKG drama unfolding at the airport, I wonder if Macau could be set up as an alternate for diversions... Macau has a number of hotels that im sure would be of use in a scenario like this. Or alternatively get passengers on the ground and then ferry them across to Hong Kong.
Wheres Viva Macau when you need them? LOL

Not a bad idea, and you could simply put people on buses now given the bridge is open (at least those with destination Hong Kong).

EuroKick wrote:

DeltaB717 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

VA down to 1 332 on domestic for Tuesday, most A332 flights have been downgraded to 738

What're all the others doing? I get that two of them would've been planned for international, and one is in a hangar, but the other two...?

2 are stuck in HKG, 2 are doing SYD/MEL-HKG this morning, 1 is doing transcon and the other is in maintenance.

Ahh I hadn't realised two were stuck in HKG... I mixed up the flight numbers and thought those were today's outbounds cancelled. Thanks!

Further cancellations out of HKG today as the airport authority say check-in services have been suspended since 1630 local time:

https://twitter.com/JournoDannyAero/status/1161206990493777920?s=20

Flights affected to Australia so far:

CX161, CX101 - SYD
CX146 - CNS/BNE
CX105 - MEL
CX177 - ADL
VA82 - SYD
VA68 - MEL

I imagine all QF flights this evening will shortly be cancelled as as well.

Latest on VA HKG flights, tonight’s flights have been delayed overnight once again impacting Domestic services

https://twitter.com/virginaustralia/sta ... 12672?s=21

The other 4 VA 737's to get SSW are YIJ, YIR, YIS and YIU

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... it-460237/

Also XFJ is due to be back in service tomorrow 15 August

openskies88 wrote:

Further cancellations out of HKG today as the airport authority say check-in services have been suspended since 1630 local time:

https://twitter.com/JournoDannyAero/status/1161206990493777920?s=20

Flights affected to Australia so far:

CX161, CX101 - SYD
CX146 - CNS/BNE
CX105 - MEL
CX177 - ADL
VA82 - SYD
VA68 - MEL

I imagine all QF flights this evening will shortly be cancelled as as well.

QF flights QF98/128/30/118 (Tues evening) have departed and arrived in OZ Weds AM (today)

Todays (Weds) QF 97/127/29/117 are currently still scheduled to depart

QF97 (VH-ZNC) and QF29 (VH-QPI) have left on time.
QF127 is being operated by VH-OEE today (presumably to pick up slack from yesterdays cancellation?).

With OEE operating QF127/128 today, tonight's QF98 and tomorrow's QF97 will be operated by a 789 for the second day in a row. QF127 will operate with an A330 tomorrow (Thursday) which will rotate with QF98.

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Interesting schedule as would unlikely be same crew and then that adds significant cost having to overnight crew... presume that Air Asia does same crew returns given they do a 30min turn in PER whilst Batik and Garuda overnight so would change crew... Is the PER-DPS market really that sensitive to flight times that they can’t operate same-crew return schedules profitably?

The Air Current is reporting https://tinyurl.com/y5f5dwa9 that Boeing will mothball development of the 778. Doubt Ostrower would run the story without solid information. It would also fit with yesterday's Aviation Analyst story https://tinyurl.com/y5mm75bhthat Airbus are in "final talks" with several customers ahead of a formal launch of the A350-1000 ULR.

Hard to imagine Boeing would freeze development of the 778 if they were still in serious contention for Project Sunrise. So Airbus has the more persuasive technical/commercial bid? AJ lost patience with the 77X delays? Boeing decided it needed to focus on the MAX and a 797 launch?

tealnz wrote:

The Air Current is reporting https://tinyurl.com/y5f5dwa9 that Boeing will mothball development of the 778. Doubt Ostrower would run the story without solid information. It would also fit with yesterday's Aviation Analyst story https://tinyurl.com/y5mm75bhthat Airbus are in "final talks" with several customers ahead of a formal launch of the A350-1000 ULR.

Hard to imagine Boeing would freeze development of the 778 if they were still in serious contention for Project Sunrise. So Airbus has the more persuasive technical/commercial bid? AJ lost patience with the 77X delays? Boeing decided it needed to focus on the MAX and a 797 launch?

Probably all of the above. AJ had made a number of claims about when Sunrise would take flight and he definitely wanted it to happen before he left the QF CEO role; the rumoured delay last week in the 778 program meant this was unlikely if Boeing were chosen.

Now with the rumoured shuttering of the 778 program, it seems only Airbus will be presenting a BAFO for Sunrise unless Boeing decide to go with a non-compliant bid and offer something we haven't heard of like an extended range 789. If Airbus believe they are the only live bidder and haven't yet issued their BAFO, I wonder if they may be tempted to knock the price up a little bit.

tullamarine wrote:

If Airbus believe they are the only live bidder and haven't yet issued their BAFO, I wonder if they may be tempted to knock the price up a little bit.

They would be unwise to do that, you'd think. By this stage in the process QF must have a pretty good feel for the $$ around each element of a package (including options on 359 and regular 35K) plus any premium for a 35K ULR.

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Will this be the only overnight DPS-PER service?

If they want to tackle JQ they need to offer daylight services on both legs. That inbound schedule is a killer. Something like this would be better:

DPS 0800 PER 1140
PER 1230 DPS 1610

ben175 wrote:

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Will this be the only overnight DPS-PER service?

If they want to tackle JQ they need to offer daylight services on both legs. That inbound schedule is a killer. Something like this would be better:

DPS 0800 PER 1140
PER 1230 DPS 1610

Looks like the only overnight service... (excluding Batik's 0120 arrival in PER). That's what I don't understand, the market probably isn't that sensitive to the flight timetable and significantly more sensitive to price so why not operate a timetable that allows them to use the same crew for both flights?

Parts for the next 789 for QF VH-ZNI should start arriving in the next day or so

The firing order for production has also been updated, ZNL which is the first to be delivered next year will LN1019, probably delivery for late April or early May 2020

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... dit#gid=19

So ZNI/J/K are all within 10 spots on the Everett production line.

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Does that make PER-DPS the single international market with the most number of airlines on it, or would that be SYD-AKL or SYD-LAX or another I can't think of right now?

Obzerva wrote:

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Does that make PER-DPS the single international market with the most number of airlines on it, or would that be SYD-AKL or SYD-LAX or another I can't think of right now?

I believe Garuda’s pulling out of PER-DPS with this replacing it.

rtav wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

rtav wrote:

Citilink have opened reservations for DPS-PER service. Although not yet officially announced.
First flight DPS-PER is scheduled on the 27th of October where as first PER-DPS is scheduled for the 28th

The route seems to be operated daily with an A320

QG542 DPS0110 - 0450PER 320 D
QG543 PER0950 - 1330DPS 320 D

Does that make PER-DPS the single international market with the most number of airlines on it, or would that be SYD-AKL or SYD-LAX or another I can't think of right now?

I believe Garuda’s pulling out of PER-DPS with this replacing it.

I highly doubt that - I just booked flights to DPS on GA for next June. GA is also the only airline currently offering J on the route, besides Batik who have abysmal loads and a not so great reputation in WA.

GA targets the high end sector of the market staying in five star and scoops up some of the lower yielding pax to fill up Y. Citilink will go after QZ and JQ.