smi0006 wrote:

With JQ pilot strike I’d also say we’ll see QF steering away from 320NEOs as they’ll want to keep separate fleet types between the two carriers.

I'm not sure why one part of the group having a strike is going to have an effect on which type another part of the group flies.

redroo wrote:

vhebb wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Great to see some traction on this finally!! This is a huge boost for the project rest is really putting IR pressure on pilots.

Do you think the pilots should be forced to fly the new aircraft on less money? I bet management won't take a reduced salary or bonus due to the new aircraft.

Pilots are generally paid by aircraft weight. So a smaller plane than a 747 or a380 equals less pay. You cant get a pay rise for moving to a bigger aircraft and not get a pay cut for moving to a smaller bird.

Excellent point.

Dan23 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Is there something wrong with ZNJ, on top of the PER-LHR changes tonight's MEL-SFO has been cancelled

Hydraulic leak, -ZNJ will op tonight’s QF95 MELLAX.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Domestic legs of QF9/10 are cancelled again today along with QF95 (assuming QF96 will be as well). ZNJ not ready for service yet? Might not be required until Sunday now.

Based on the QF95 ETA into LAX I’d say the QF16 will most likely get the chop.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whatsaptudo wrote:

Captdasbomb wrote:

qf789 wrote:

So do the pilots think that PS is DOA. Just out of curiosity Qantas has said they wanted 30% efficiency gains from the pilot , though at the same time those 787 pilots have said they gave too much, can you elaborate on what they actually want and what the pilots actually want. It would be great to get some insight into this

Sticking point was duty hours extension by 30% subject to CASAs approval without adding flight crew members. So PS will still have 4 person crew Captain,FO & 2 SOs. But this will increase the minimum rest hours before/after flight.

Whereas the unions want additional Captain added & the legacy guaranteed 75hrs from 747 crew. Whether Qantas will hire foreign cabin crew like they do with Perth to London one wonders.

Where do you get this 75 hour guarantee from? Qantas legacy longhaul pilots (which includes the 747, but excludes the 787) get paid a credit system with a min guarantee over 56 days of 160-175 hours. Your use of this 75 hour guarantee (a couple of times now) indicates you don’t actually know how the contract works but seem to be telling this thread that you do. And that is not what we are asking for. The increase in duty time to complete these missions is at the moment is not legal.

My bad. May have been reading a wrong feed. Got hold of the current EBA. It makes for some light reading material.

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/docume ... 415325.pdf

tmwj1 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

With JQ pilot strike I’d also say we’ll see QF steering away from 320NEOs as they’ll want to keep separate fleet types between the two carriers.

I'm not sure why one part of the group having a strike is going to have an effect on which type another part of the group flies.

It’s was apparently a key component of JQ getting A320s over the large established 738 it helped separate the pilot workforce’s and allowed them to establish differing conditions and pay. Not saying I agree with it, but if both JQ and QF were to move to the same fleet pretty hard to argue the star on your name badge vs a kangaroo means you should be paid less...

tmwj1 wrote:

I'm not sure why one part of the group having a strike is going to have an effect on which type another part of the group flies.

smi0006 wrote:

It’s was apparently a key component of JQ getting A320s over the large established 738 it helped separate the pilot workforce’s and allowed them to establish differing conditions and pay. Not saying I agree with it, but if both JQ and QF were to move to the same fleet pretty hard to argue the star on your name badge vs a kangaroo means you should be paid less...

I see your point, however we only have to look the Jetconnect case, to see that the pilots there even wear the same uniform while flying a 737, and yet they are paid way less than their Qantas counterparts. Industrially, I reckon any aircraft the other part of the group is already flying would have very little, if any bearing on whether Qantas picks 737MAX or A320NEO for the domestic fleet replacement.

patrickjp93 wrote:

QF742 wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

PER-DFW, LOL. Only 51 miles shorter than SYD-LHR.

But seriously, is this tentatively their A380 replacement? If they're going for high premium capacity it'll likely perform well on SYD-DFW replacing the A380.

I don’t think the 12 will replace the entire a380 fleet - why would they add an additional fuel tank for aircraft they don’t intend to push for long journeys (ie current a380 journeys).

The a35k will inadvertently replace the a380 - eg SYD-SIN-LHR will no longer be needed. They will need to order more (in a standard form) if they want to totally replace the a380.

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

QF742 wrote:

patrickjp93 wrote:

QF742 wrote:

I don’t think the 12 will replace the entire a380 fleet - why would they add an additional fuel tank for aircraft they don’t intend to push for long journeys (ie current a380 journeys).

The a35k will inadvertently replace the a380 - eg SYD-SIN-LHR will no longer be needed. They will need to order more (in a standard form) if they want to totally replace the a380.

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

Qantas haven’t officially ordered the A35K, just announced A35K is choice of aircraft. The original A380 order was for 20, & not implying they’ll order that many.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EK413 wrote:

QF742 wrote:

patrickjp93 wrote:

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

Qantas haven’t officially ordered the A35K, just announced A35K is choice of aircraft. The original A380 order was for 20, & not implying they’ll order that many.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When/if they do announce the order I presume they will include some options/purchase rights for extra standard configuration A35K (which will be the true A380/744 replacement).

smi0006 wrote:

tmwj1 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

With JQ pilot strike I’d also say we’ll see QF steering away from 320NEOs as they’ll want to keep separate fleet types between the two carriers.

I'm not sure why one part of the group having a strike is going to have an effect on which type another part of the group flies.

It’s was apparently a key component of JQ getting A320s over the large established 738 it helped separate the pilot workforce’s and allowed them to establish differing conditions and pay. Not saying I agree with it, but if both JQ and QF were to move to the same fleet pretty hard to argue the star on your name badge vs a kangaroo means you should be paid less...

They both have 787's.

anstar wrote:

They both have 787's.

And both had A330s on different contracts for a long time as well.

EK413 wrote:

Qantas haven’t officially ordered the A35K, just announced A35K is choice of aircraft. The original A380 order was for 20, & not implying they’ll order that many.

QFs initial order for A380s was 12 airframes. The second order was for 8 frames. I don't remember if the second order was new or excersing options. It is the second order that was cancelled.

Gemuser

QF742 wrote:

patrickjp93 wrote:

QF742 wrote:

I don’t think the 12 will replace the entire a380 fleet - why would they add an additional fuel tank for aircraft they don’t intend to push for long journeys (ie current a380 journeys).

The a35k will inadvertently replace the a380 - eg SYD-SIN-LHR will no longer be needed. They will need to order more (in a standard form) if they want to totally replace the a380.

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

With no spares (and optimally timed LHR slots) they can do it with 8 frames (thanks to qf002 who showed they can do LHR with two frames in the other thread). 12 would be a good number for PS, ORD, a spare or two for maintenance and maybe a shorter turn (HKG? HND?)

QF742 wrote:

patrickjp93 wrote:

QF742 wrote:

I don’t think the 12 will replace the entire a380 fleet - why would they add an additional fuel tank for aircraft they don’t intend to push for long journeys (ie current a380 journeys).

The a35k will inadvertently replace the a380 - eg SYD-SIN-LHR will no longer be needed. They will need to order more (in a standard form) if they want to totally replace the a380.

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

Agree that it’s unlikely QF will share the love across as many options as they have tried to put out as PR feel good stories to relevant local media markets.

SYD will get the most attention from the A350 order, just like it has with the A380, with MEL likely getting some attention also at a later point.

I can see the following occurring:

- daily SYD-LHR launched first (highest prestige and demand value)
- between 5 x weekly and daily SYD-JFK (can maximise yields and funnel demand at certain times of the year to fly via LAX/DFW)
- daily MEL-LHR
- 3 x weekly MEL-DFW (adds another connection point in the US for the MEL market, without having to start off at a high frequency)
- 5 x weekly SYD-ORD (replacing BNE)

Overall these moves would give it a strong balance of [code][/code]routes to potentially build from or to tweak schedules moving forward.

IndianicWorld wrote:

QF742 wrote:

patrickjp93 wrote:

The 12 A350s are the exact 12 craft needed for Project Sunrise. You have BNE/SYD/MEL going to both JFK and LHR. Each of those flights is 19-20.5 hours, so to have one ready for takeoff at daily cadence, you need 2 planes per city pair, and really you need some extras. I don't think SYD-SIN-LHR is realistically going anywhere, just down-gauging to an A330/787 eventually. Oddly enough that also means SYD-IAH has no replacement yet.

It's too bad. The 777-9 was perfect for SYD-DFW and MEL-LAX to down-gauge off the A380. Oh well. I suppose we'll have to see how load factors rebalance.

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

Agree that it’s unlikely QF will share the love across as many options as they have tried to put out as PR feel good stories to relevant local media markets.

SYD will get the most attention from the A350 order, just like it has with the A380, with MEL likely getting some attention also at a later point.

I can see the following occurring:

- daily SYD-LHR launched first (highest prestige and demand value)
- between 5 x weekly and daily SYD-JFK (can maximise yields and funnel demand at certain times of the year to fly via LAX/DFW)
- daily MEL-LHR
- 3 x weekly MEL-DFW (adds another connection point in the US for the MEL market, without having to start off at a high frequency)
- 5 x weekly SYD-ORD (replacing BNE)

Overall these moves would give it a strong balance of [code][/code]routes to potentially build from or to tweak schedules moving forward.

Brisbane flight will probably stay as long as Queensland maintains the rumoured subsidy for the 4 789s based there

Has anyone heard how Virgin's trial of scimitar winglets on a few 738s is going? Any plans to roll this out fleetwide? Not a fan of the look but it seems to be popular in the US, notable exception being AA.

Captdasbomb wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

QF742 wrote:

I’m no expert on fleet logistics, but I don’t think you can fly SYD/MEL/BNE-LHR/JFK each with 12 aircraft. I also very much doubt, despite what QF say, that we will see anything other than SyD/MEL-LHR and SyD-JFK/ORD (replacing BNE-ORD).

Agree that it’s unlikely QF will share the love across as many options as they have tried to put out as PR feel good stories to relevant local media markets.

SYD will get the most attention from the A350 order, just like it has with the A380, with MEL likely getting some attention also at a later point.

I can see the following occurring:

- daily SYD-LHR launched first (highest prestige and demand value)
- between 5 x weekly and daily SYD-JFK (can maximise yields and funnel demand at certain times of the year to fly via LAX/DFW)
- daily MEL-LHR
- 3 x weekly MEL-DFW (adds another connection point in the US for the MEL market, without having to start off at a high frequency)
- 5 x weekly SYD-ORD (replacing BNE)

Overall these moves would give it a strong balance of [code][/code]routes to potentially build from or to tweak schedules moving forward.

Brisbane flight will probably stay as long as Queensland maintains the rumoured subsidy for the 4 789s based there

Simple solution is to move SFO to daily, should/if PS happens and after the SYD/MEL stuff is implemented.

From BNE: Daily LAX and Daily SFO would take up the 4 BNE based 789s (Utilisation takes 2 frames each for LAX and SFO).

If you keep SFO on the evening departure ex-BNE, it would allow to operate the BNE-PER-LHR-PER-BNE-SFO-BNE yo-yo, just as as the MEL-PER-LHR-PER-MEL-SFO-MEL run does now.

BREAKING NOW: QF adds SYD and/or MEL to FRA to the proposed Project Sunrise network.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... lKPd42v3RM

SYD-FRA will very likely kill the MEL/BNE to JFK routes if they get up on the PS network.

Gemuser wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Qantas haven’t officially ordered the A35K, just announced A35K is choice of aircraft. The original A380 order was for 20, & not implying they’ll order that many.

QFs initial order for A380s was 12 airframes. The second order was for 8 frames. I don't remember if the second order was new or excersing options. It is the second order that was cancelled.

Gemuser

According The Australian

QANTAS CANCELS OUTSTANDING ORDER FOR EIGHT A380S

Qantas says it has cancelled its outstanding order for eight A380s after discussions with Airbus.

The eight aircraft were part of an order for 20 A380s made in 2006.

“Following discussions with Airbus, Qantas has now formalised its decision not to take eight additional A380s that were ordered in 2006,” Qantas said in a statement on Thursday.

Initial plans had Qantas potentially operating up to 30 A380s. However, the firm order book eventually stood at 20 aircraft.

While those eight remaining A380s remained listed as “on order” for many years, the thinking at Qantas’s Mascot headquarters has been that they would never be taken.

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... ght-a380s/

The point I was making would be the fact QF initially had 20 on order & only accepted delivery of 12. The A350 is a better fit aircraft vs the A380 which is limited where it can be deployed.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SCFlyer wrote:

BREAKING NOW: QF adds SYD and/or MEL to FRA to the proposed Project Sunrise network.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... lKPd42v3RM

SYD-FRA will very likely kill the MEL/BNE to JFK routes if they get up on the PS network.

SYD-JFK is likely the only route that was likely t eventuate anyway as the demand for the route at the premium they are looking for will be hard to achieve when looking at SYD and then MEL or BNE on top of that.

qf789 wrote:

aerokiwi wrote:

Has anyone heard how Virgin's trial of scimitar winglets on a few 738s is going? Any plans to roll this out fleetwide? Not a fan of the look but it seems to be popular in the US, notable exception being AA.

Havent heard anything about them. I am not even sure all 5 have them yet, I haven't seen anything in any of the weekly newsletters Virgin puts out. I would imagine they would at least be rolled out to the rest of the international fleet. As to fleet wide I would probably say no, I cant see a return being added on the VO* and VU* fleet, however the YF*, YI*. YV* and YW* registered aircraft there could be some benefit. The SSW really only benefit on longer flights so I can only see them benefit the international flights plus PER/MEL/SYD/BNE-DRW and PER-SYD/BNE/HBA/MEL flights domestically. While SSW add some benefits from a ramp perspective extra precautions are required including requiring a wing walker while under tow including in and out of gates

Agree about the older birds. Interesting re impact on ground handling. Hadn't considered that as an issue. Thanks!

qf789 wrote:

aerokiwi wrote:

Has anyone heard how Virgin's trial of scimitar winglets on a few 738s is going? Any plans to roll this out fleetwide? Not a fan of the look but it seems to be popular in the US, notable exception being AA.

Havent heard anything about them. I am not even sure all 5 have them yet, I haven't seen anything in any of the weekly newsletters Virgin puts out. I would imagine they would at least be rolled out to the rest of the international fleet. As to fleet wide I would probably say no, I cant see a return being added on the VO* and VU* fleet, however the YF*, YI*. YV* and YW* registered aircraft there could be some benefit. The SSW really only benefit on longer flights so I can only see them benefit the international flights plus PER/MEL/SYD/BNE-DRW and PER-SYD/BNE/HBA/MEL flights domestically. While SSW add some benefits from a ramp perspective extra precautions are required including requiring a wing walker while under tow including in and out of gates

VA has said that during the initial trial only the YI* fleet will be retrofitted with the SSW. These birds principally do NZ and Pacific services meaning their average stage length is over 3 hours which is the point where the extra efficiency overcomes the extra weight. These are also fairly young planes which will mean they can absorb the 5-6 year payback period. VO and VU* fleets are too old to benefit as they will rollover as the MAX arrive from 2021.

SCFlyer wrote:

BREAKING NOW: QF adds SYD and/or MEL to FRA to the proposed Project Sunrise network.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... lKPd42v3RM

SYD-FRA will very likely kill the MEL/BNE to JFK routes if they get up on the PS network.

I’m calling marketing click bait on the FRA non stop. To make these flights work they need yield. Do we really think there are enough higher yielding passengers between Australia and Germany every day to warrant a non stop? I can’t see it. The business connections are strong between Sydney and London, NYC, HKG, TKY and LAX... but it’s been a long time since I heard of someone going to FRA.

If there was demand it would be more cost effective to hub through Perth* using a 789.

* subject to PAPL and QF ending their differences.

EK413 wrote:

Gemuser wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Qantas haven’t officially ordered the A35K, just announced A35K is choice of aircraft. The original A380 order was for 20, & not implying they’ll order that many.

QFs initial order for A380s was 12 airframes. The second order was for 8 frames. I don't remember if the second order was new or excersing options. It is the second order that was cancelled.

Gemuser

According The Australian

QANTAS CANCELS OUTSTANDING ORDER FOR EIGHT A380S

Qantas says it has cancelled its outstanding order for eight A380s after discussions with Airbus.

The eight aircraft were part of an order for 20 A380s made in 2006.

“Following discussions with Airbus, Qantas has now formalised its decision not to take eight additional A380s that were ordered in 2006,” Qantas said in a statement on Thursday.

Initial plans had Qantas potentially operating up to 30 A380s. However, the firm order book eventually stood at 20 aircraft.

While those eight remaining A380s remained listed as “on order” for many years, the thinking at Qantas’s Mascot headquarters has been that they would never be taken.

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... ght-a380s/

The point I was making would be the fact QF initially had 20 on order & only accepted delivery of 12. The A350 is a better fit aircraft vs the A380 which is limited where it can be deployed.

You are right, I'm wrong. Memory is trickey!
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... antas.html

Gemuser

FRA will join LHR and CDG as a third European destination, according to AJ.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... -frankfurt

There was lots of discussion in last month's thread about the viability of mooted Qantas group services to India. Commenters pointed to the stranglehold that SQ has through the number of Indian ports they service. In this light it's interesting to see the anna.aero figures a few days back on SQ's top 20 connecting countries and routes. Australia-India is far and away SQ's most significant connecting country pair, at least by pax numbers. DEL to MEL/SYD/BNE and BOM to SYD are all in SQ's top 12 connecting routes.

The conclusion you have to draw is the HUGE importance overall of the Australian market for SQ. Australia is part of six of the top eight SQ connecting country pairs and makes up 10 of the top 20.

[Last sentence edited.]

CraigAnderson wrote:

FRA will join LHR and CDG as a third European destination, according to AJ.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... -frankfurt

Qantas's whole Europe strategy has been a bit of a mess in the last few years. Via Singapore/Bangkok/HK vs via Perth vs via Dubai (with EK) vs via Singapore but a bit of Dubai on the side and now Sunrise nonstop. LHR, CDG, FRA on QF and BA metal, then just QF, then QF for LHR and EK for the rest, now back to QF.

If this were Virgin they'd (rightly) be mocked for all the chopping and changing.

I mean, are they just rotating through different execs who want to make a mark by changing stuff for the sake of it? If PS goes ahead - big IF - do they then double down on SIN, PER or even DXB for the riff raff yields? Or do they just give up on that altogether? Does your head in.

I must say, I rather like ZNK’s name. It’s the indigenous name for Kangaroo, gifted to us from the Guuggu Yimithirr people of Cooktown.

moa999 wrote:

redroo wrote:

long time since I heard of someone going to FRA.
If there was demand it would be more cost effective to hub through Perth* using a 789.
.

Major Car Manufacturers, Allianz, Siemens, SAP, Bosch, Deutsche Bank.

Appreciate that but is there enough traffic between Sydney and those business to warrant a non stop flight?

redroo wrote:

Appreciate that but is there enough traffic between Sydney and those business to warrant a non stop flight?

There would be from Melbourne, BMW, Mercedes, Bosch & Siemens have their Australian HQ's in Melbourne, Allianz also has a decent MEL presence.Not to mention a decent German immigrant population as a result.

A JetStar Airbus A320 rolled into soft ground at Manila yesterday while taxiing for takeoff to Tokyo Narita as GK40. The aircraft is registered JA13JJ & the flight was cancelled. No injuries have been reported.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EK413 wrote:

A JetStar Airbus A320 rolled into soft ground at Manila yesterday while taxiing for takeoff to Tokyo Narita as GK40. The aircraft is registered JA13JJ & the flight was cancelled. No injuries have been reported.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As much as everyone is jumping on the Jetstar hate bandwagon for the moment, thats Jetstar Asia, nothing to do with Jetstar Australia

jman wrote:

EK413 wrote:

A JetStar Airbus A320 rolled into soft ground at Manila yesterday while taxiing for takeoff to Tokyo Narita as GK40. The aircraft is registered JA13JJ & the flight was cancelled. No injuries have been reported.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As much as everyone is jumping on the Jetstar hate bandwagon for the moment, thats Jetstar Asia, nothing to do with Jetstar Australia

Jetstar Japan actually, but otherwise you are right.

jman wrote:

EK413 wrote:

A JetStar Airbus A320 rolled into soft ground at Manila yesterday while taxiing for takeoff to Tokyo Narita as GK40. The aircraft is registered JA13JJ & the flight was cancelled. No injuries have been reported.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As much as everyone is jumping on the Jetstar hate bandwagon for the moment, thats Jetstar Asia, nothing to do with Jetstar Australia

Last I checked Qantas Group have a 49% stake in Jetstar Asia & 33% stake in Jetstar Japan.

Recommend you quit whilst your ahead with the left field comments regarding JQ bashing.

Source.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B6DLXfihqRq ... nktumcccff


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@qf789 interesting comment you made in the Sunrise thread about change in loads and stopovers from Perth.

From speaking to people here, those that have tried the non stop rave about it and are willing to pay the extra... although some baulk at the cost when taking their whole family on it. The non stoppers have been “converted” and “preach” to the non converted!!

I haven’t heard of anyone recently taking the EK flights. SQ and Qatar get mentioned a lot more than EK these days.

Thoughts?

redroo wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

BREAKING NOW: QF adds SYD and/or MEL to FRA to the proposed Project Sunrise network.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... lKPd42v3RM

SYD-FRA will very likely kill the MEL/BNE to JFK routes if they get up on the PS network.

I’m calling marketing click bait on the FRA non stop. To make these flights work they need yield. Do we really think there are enough higher yielding passengers between Australia and Germany every day to warrant a non stop? I can’t see it. The business connections are strong between Sydney and London, NYC, HKG, TKY and LAX... but it’s been a long time since I heard of someone going to FRA.

If there was demand it would be more cost effective to hub through Perth* using a 789.

* subject to PAPL and QF ending their differences.

I agreed best option is CDG/FRA ex PER. I’d imagine the WA state government would throw some cash at to too. Problem is PAPL agreement and QF done have enough 789

Re FRA: it's also becoming more important financially, and with brexit now more or less locked in, it will only get more so. I'm sure this in itself will support some volume of direct flights.

This is an example of growth flying with A350s too.....

DFW going daily and ORD starting a week earlier. JV off to a great start?

qf2220 wrote:

Re FRA: it's also becoming more important financially, and with brexit now more or less locked in, it will only get more so. I'm sure this in itself will support some volume of direct flights.

This is an example of growth flying with A350s too.....

I dunno if I buy this. Deutsche Bank has retrenched like crazy. The auto sector in Australia is essentially dead. The financial sector has scattered with Brexit across multiple locations in Europe. And corporate travel isn't really what people think it is, much like government travel. FRA is a Star megahub and is essentially a backwater for tourism - Munich and Berlin of far greater interest.

You'd think it would be a via PER option first and foremost to test if there's still demand. IQF did can jumbo services a full 6 years ago so it's hardly been itching to return. Then again, their Europe strategy is such a mess, who knows?

nomorerjs wrote:

DFW going daily and ORD starting a week earlier. JV off to a great start?

Additional frequency to DFW could be related to growth in traffic on the back of the AA JV (before AA routed all their traffic - presumably including a decent proportion of the DFW O&D market - on their own metal via LAX).

I doubt that ORD launching a week earlier is related though; rather someone had the bright idea to not launch the route one week after Easter and miss out on the higher demand over Easter/school holidays.

nomorerjs wrote:

DFW going daily and ORD starting a week earlier. JV off to a great start?

LAX-AKL starts 3 weeks earlier as well.