Sydscott wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

Actually DFW is consistently more delay-prone vs O'Hare, according to the latest stats (January through September '21).
https://www.transtats.bts.gov/OT_Delay/ ... 1.asp?20=E
Since ORD has now completed the OMP (the runway reconfiguration plan), with all 8 runways operational, you can expect ORD will continue to show improvements in on-time stats.


The "magic" at O'Hare is its "connectability". Since you bring up New York City, O'Hare offers 50 daly flights into the three NYC a/p's. Neither DFW or LAX can match the sheer frequency of flights out of O'Hare to the NE, and that's more than just NYC, so I'd think that plays a role in QF's decision to come to O'Hare.
https://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollecti ... nstops.pdf

Also Qantas is certainly aware of the further transformation that will occur at ORD over the next decade: terminals that will allow international<>domestic transfers in-house for each alliance, so there's a commitment to improve the airport facilities which could come into their bullish thinking on O'Hare.
https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

I wouldn't be surprised with a 3x weekly ORD flight by QF. The connections to the NE is a good point, but I do wonder whether there is:
1. sufficient links from Australia to that part of the world outside major cities to make those connections worthwhile
2. people from smaller ports in the US who'd fly to Australia if they could fly via ORD.

With family in Boston, we are outliers, although I do know a few people with university connections. Otherwise the east coast is mostly NYC with may a bit of FL thrown in for the more adventurous Aussies.

Realistically all of the major ports into the NE are covered via QF's Dallas Service. That was one of the major points of going there so that QF flyers could go 1 stop to LGA and DCA. So an ORD service isn't going to add major cities but it will add some minor ones along with more Eastern Canada Service.

AnsettB727 wrote:

I lived in Chicago 15 years ago. QF was mumbling about it way back then - it would have been the dream. Let's just wait an see - there are all kinds of 'interesting' QF routes being rumoured in this new post-pandemic future.

ZK-NBT wrote:

AnsettB727 wrote:

I lived in Chicago 15 years ago. QF was mumbling about it way back then - it would have been the dream. Let's just wait an see - there are all kinds of 'interesting' QF routes being rumoured in this new post-pandemic future.

It was announced via LAX from MEL to start in 2003 on a 744, I can’t remember why it didn’t go ahead then, it was cancelled very close to launch.

Kent350787 wrote:

DFW was not-LAX to connect to other places in the US. Noone in Australia actually wants to go to Dallas!

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

AnsettB727 wrote:

I lived in Chicago 15 years ago. QF was mumbling about it way back then - it would have been the dream. Let's just wait an see - there are all kinds of 'interesting' QF routes being rumoured in this new post-pandemic future.

It was announced via LAX from MEL to start in 2003 on a 744, I can’t remember why it didn’t go ahead then, it was cancelled very close to launch.

It was MEL/AKL/ORD and it was canned because of the GFC.

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

AnsettB727 wrote:

I lived in Chicago 15 years ago. QF was mumbling about it way back then - it would have been the dream. Let's just wait an see - there are all kinds of 'interesting' QF routes being rumoured in this new post-pandemic future.

It was announced via LAX from MEL to start in 2003 on a 744, I can’t remember why it didn’t go ahead then, it was cancelled very close to launch.

It was MEL/AKL/ORD and it was canned because of the GFC.

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

It was announced via LAX from MEL to start in 2003 on a 744, I can’t remember why it didn’t go ahead then, it was cancelled very close to launch.

It was MEL/AKL/ORD and it was canned because of the GFC.

It was MEL-LAX-ORD in 2003. No way a 744ER was doing AKL-ORD with a viable load or ORD-AKL more the issue. QF were going to do AKL-DFW around the same time when they got the 744ER though a regular 744 could have done it to with less freight, was never officially announced

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

It was MEL/AKL/ORD and it was canned because of the GFC.

It was MEL-LAX-ORD in 2003. No way a 744ER was doing AKL-ORD with a viable load or ORD-AKL more the issue. QF were going to do AKL-DFW around the same time when they got the 744ER though a regular 744 could have done it to with less freight, was never officially announced

Yet QF somehow managed to fly the 744ER SYD-DFW and DFW-BNE, which are both further that AKL-ORD

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

It was MEL/AKL/ORD and it was canned because of the GFC.

It was MEL-LAX-ORD in 2003. No way a 744ER was doing AKL-ORD with a viable load or ORD-AKL more the issue. QF were going to do AKL-DFW around the same time when they got the 744ER though a regular 744 could have done it to with less freight, was never officially announced

Yet QF somehow managed to fly the 744ER SYD-DFW and DFW-BNE, which are both further that AKL-ORD

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

It was MEL-LAX-ORD in 2003. No way a 744ER was doing AKL-ORD with a viable load or ORD-AKL more the issue. QF were going to do AKL-DFW around the same time when they got the 744ER though a regular 744 could have done it to with less freight, was never officially announced

Yet QF somehow managed to fly the 744ER SYD-DFW and DFW-BNE, which are both further that AKL-ORD

Cut the rolls. DFW-BNE was several years later and was a stretch. The point is QF planned DFW via AKL never officially announced other than when they purchased the 744ER they said it was a planned route. MEL-lAX-ORD was announced and canned weeks before the first flight in 2003, that possibly happened a second time a few years later I can't recall

Kent350787 wrote:

Sydscott wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised with a 3x weekly ORD flight by QF. The connections to the NE is a good point, but I do wonder whether there is:
1. sufficient links from Australia to that part of the world outside major cities to make those connections worthwhile
2. people from smaller ports in the US who'd fly to Australia if they could fly via ORD.

With family in Boston, we are outliers, although I do know a few people with university connections. Otherwise the east coast is mostly NYC with may a bit of FL thrown in for the more adventurous Aussies.

Realistically all of the major ports into the NE are covered via QF's Dallas Service. That was one of the major points of going there so that QF flyers could go 1 stop to LGA and DCA. So an ORD service isn't going to add major cities but it will add some minor ones along with more Eastern Canada Service.

No question on what it will add, but you'd expect ORD will still be largely O&D.

Given the Commonwealth link is still surprises me that there isn't a lot of travel between Australia and SE Canada.

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

Yet QF somehow managed to fly the 744ER SYD-DFW and DFW-BNE, which are both further that AKL-ORD

Cut the rolls. DFW-BNE was several years later and was a stretch. The point is QF planned DFW via AKL never officially announced other than when they purchased the 744ER they said it was a planned route. MEL-lAX-ORD was announced and canned weeks before the first flight in 2003, that possibly happened a second time a few years later I can't recall

You were the one who said that the 744ER outright couldn't do AKL-ORD. If you're going to emphatically claim something, make sure it's right first.

LTEN11 wrote:

If QF announces a start date for ORD again, something terrible will happen again and it won't start. The first time QF announced MEL/AKL/ORD and the GFC happened, then it was BNE/ORD and we got Covid, Lord know's what would happen if they try again.

I suggest we all campaign against QF starting ORD. I'm getting to old to put up with this shit again.

RyanairGuru wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

Cut the rolls. DFW-BNE was several years later and was a stretch. The point is QF planned DFW via AKL never officially announced other than when they purchased the 744ER they said it was a planned route. MEL-lAX-ORD was announced and canned weeks before the first flight in 2003, that possibly happened a second time a few years later I can't recall

You were the one who said that the 744ER outright couldn't do AKL-ORD. If you're going to emphatically claim something, make sure it's right first.

Before criticising others for ‘emphatically’ claiming something, QF never planned AKL-ORD despite your claims that they did. Stop hiding behind semantics to avoid admitting that you’re wrong.

As it is, colour me sceptical that a 74E could make ORD-AKL with a viable load. DFW-BNE diverted fairly regularly, and that was with ~ 100 blocked seats. Note that was departing from an airport that doesn’t get ATC snafus unless a storm has rolled through, shortly entered relatively uncongested Mexican airspace, and then over the Pacific. Departing ORD would have more terminal and en-route ATC delays, potentially less optimal routings until you reach the West Coast etc. The two routes are not really apples-for-apples.

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

If QF announces a start date for ORD again, something terrible will happen again and it won't start. The first time QF announced MEL/AKL/ORD and the GFC happened, then it was BNE/ORD and we got Covid, Lord know's what would happen if they try again.

I suggest we all campaign against QF starting ORD. I'm getting to old to put up with this shit again.

Be optimistic. The saying is third time lucky no?!?!?!

LTEN11 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

If QF announces a start date for ORD again, something terrible will happen again and it won't start. The first time QF announced MEL/AKL/ORD and the GFC happened, then it was BNE/ORD and we got Covid, Lord know's what would happen if they try again.

I suggest we all campaign against QF starting ORD. I'm getting to old to put up with this shit again.

Be optimistic. The saying is third time lucky no?!?!?!

I hope you're right, I like that QF are trying new routes.

Joyce did say they are going to announce another new destination in the next couple of months, so that will be interesting too see what that is. My money is on ICN, lot's of talk of improved business links between Australia and South Korea lately, so it would fit.

DCA350 wrote:

The 787 can make SYD from ORD? That's impressive.. I thought that would be a sunrise route..

LTEN11 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

If QF announces a start date for ORD again, something terrible will happen again and it won't start. The first time QF announced MEL/AKL/ORD and the GFC happened, then it was BNE/ORD and we got Covid, Lord know's what would happen if they try again.

I suggest we all campaign against QF starting ORD. I'm getting to old to put up with this shit again.

Be optimistic. The saying is third time lucky no?!?!?!

I hope you're right, I like that QF are trying new routes.

Joyce did say they are going to announce another new destination in the next couple of months, so that will be interesting too see what that is. My money is on ICN, lot's of talk of improved business links between Australia and South Korea lately, so it would fit.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Did QF buy any A350's yet? Would they have the legs to fly the SYD-ORD or even BNE-ORD? Otherwise, QF could do SYD-YVR-ORD with 5th Freedom Rights between YVR and ORD.

MatheusLPV wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

The 787 can make SYD from ORD? That's impressive.. I thought that would be a sunrise route..

The 787-9 can fly up to 8.300nm .
The SYD-ORD is 8.022nm(gc map) so technically it can do it but I don't know how it will works in terms of payload .
Just to compare the PER-LHR is 7.829nm(gcmap) , is there any payload restriction for the 787-9 in this route ?

MatheusLPV wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

The 787 can make SYD from ORD? That's impressive.. I thought that would be a sunrise route..

The 787-9 can fly up to 8.300nm .
The SYD-ORD is 8.022nm(gc map) so technically it can do it but I don't know how it will works in terms of payload .
Just to compare the PER-LHR is 7.829nm(gcmap) , is there any payload restriction for the 787-9 in this route ?

LAX772LR wrote:

MatheusLPV wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

The 787 can make SYD from ORD? That's impressive.. I thought that would be a sunrise route..

The 787-9 can fly up to 8.300nm .
The SYD-ORD is 8.022nm(gc map) so technically it can do it but I don't know how it will works in terms of payload .
Just to compare the PER-LHR is 7.829nm(gcmap) , is there any payload restriction for the 787-9 in this route ?

Not sure where you're getting that for 789 range, but it doesn't really matter, as such range isn't a static figure.

SYD-ORD wouldn't be much of a problem for a low-density 789. ORD-SYD would be very difficult to consistently pull off, for everything from winds to ATC restrictions.

casperCA wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

Sydscott wrote:

Realistically all of the major ports into the NE are covered via QF's Dallas Service. That was one of the major points of going there so that QF flyers could go 1 stop to LGA and DCA. So an ORD service isn't going to add major cities but it will add some minor ones along with more Eastern Canada Service.

No question on what it will add, but you'd expect ORD will still be largely O&D.

Given the Commonwealth link is still surprises me that there isn't a lot of travel between Australia and SE Canada.

Pre-covid there was quite a bit of service between Canada and Australia. The dominate player was Air Canada. Nighty departures out of Vancouver on a flight that originated in Toronto. so YYZ-YVR-SYD, On some day also a flights into Melbourne and Brisbane. The second aircraft was usually connecting onto Newark from/to Vancouver.

QF was seasonable on the YVR-SYD.

Those looking to save money would fly through LAX or take one of the flights from Vancouver to New Zeeland and connect down under.

I have done the LAX connection once. Would not do it again. Being based out of YYJ I have also done international connections in SEA. These US airports are not setup for this. There is no international departure concourse similar to what you find in major Canadian airports. They can't even do a touchless baggage transfer at SEA or LAX. There is no expedited customs process for international connecting passengers. You end up in multiple long lines. The only reason you have Canadians doing international connections at a US airport is they don't know any better or all the other options are fully booked and this is the only option.

The expansion to Chicago or Seattle is going to have to be driven by domestic US traffic.

Kent350787 wrote:

casperCA wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

No question on what it will add, but you'd expect ORD will still be largely O&D.

Given the Commonwealth link is still surprises me that there isn't a lot of travel between Australia and SE Canada.

Pre-covid there was quite a bit of service between Canada and Australia. The dominate player was Air Canada. Nighty departures out of Vancouver on a flight that originated in Toronto. so YYZ-YVR-SYD, On some day also a flights into Melbourne and Brisbane. The second aircraft was usually connecting onto Newark from/to Vancouver.

QF was seasonable on the YVR-SYD.

Those looking to save money would fly through LAX or take one of the flights from Vancouver to New Zeeland and connect down under.

I have done the LAX connection once. Would not do it again. Being based out of YYJ I have also done international connections in SEA. These US airports are not setup for this. There is no international departure concourse similar to what you find in major Canadian airports. They can't even do a touchless baggage transfer at SEA or LAX. There is no expedited customs process for international connecting passengers. You end up in multiple long lines. The only reason you have Canadians doing international connections at a US airport is they don't know any better or all the other options are fully booked and this is the only option.

The expansion to Chicago or Seattle is going to have to be driven by domestic US traffic.

The YVR flights have always seemed few to me, as its AC only in SYD once a day, plus a seasonal QF, compared to at least 6 direct from LAX to SYD. Perhaps ORD would see more tourism between Australia and Ontario/Quebec etc.

casperCA wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

casperCA wrote:

Pre-covid there was quite a bit of service between Canada and Australia. The dominate player was Air Canada. Nighty departures out of Vancouver on a flight that originated in Toronto. so YYZ-YVR-SYD, On some day also a flights into Melbourne and Brisbane. The second aircraft was usually connecting onto Newark from/to Vancouver.

QF was seasonable on the YVR-SYD.

Those looking to save money would fly through LAX or take one of the flights from Vancouver to New Zeeland and connect down under.

I have done the LAX connection once. Would not do it again. Being based out of YYJ I have also done international connections in SEA. These US airports are not setup for this. There is no international departure concourse similar to what you find in major Canadian airports. They can't even do a touchless baggage transfer at SEA or LAX. There is no expedited customs process for international connecting passengers. You end up in multiple long lines. The only reason you have Canadians doing international connections at a US airport is they don't know any better or all the other options are fully booked and this is the only option.

The expansion to Chicago or Seattle is going to have to be driven by domestic US traffic.

Connecting via a US port into Canada is a pain due to US ESTA requirements for transit pax. Heading to YYZ etc makes more sense if you go via YVR.

The YVR flights have always seemed few to me, as its AC only in SYD once a day, plus a seasonal QF, compared to at least 6 direct from LAX to SYD. Perhaps ORD would see more tourism between Australia and Ontario/Quebec etc.

Not unexpected. Canada is about 1/10 the population of the US.

I think a QF flight to ORD would do well, but the connecting passengers to Canada are not going to be a major factor.

casperCA wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

casperCA wrote:

Pre-covid there was quite a bit of service between Canada and Australia. The dominate player was Air Canada. Nighty departures out of Vancouver on a flight that originated in Toronto. so YYZ-YVR-SYD, On some day also a flights into Melbourne and Brisbane. The second aircraft was usually connecting onto Newark from/to Vancouver.

QF was seasonable on the YVR-SYD.

Those looking to save money would fly through LAX or take one of the flights from Vancouver to New Zeeland and connect down under.

I have done the LAX connection once. Would not do it again. Being based out of YYJ I have also done international connections in SEA. These US airports are not setup for this. There is no international departure concourse similar to what you find in major Canadian airports. They can't even do a touchless baggage transfer at SEA or LAX. There is no expedited customs process for international connecting passengers. You end up in multiple long lines. The only reason you have Canadians doing international connections at a US airport is they don't know any better or all the other options are fully booked and this is the only option.

The expansion to Chicago or Seattle is going to have to be driven by domestic US traffic.

The YVR flights have always seemed few to me, as its AC only in SYD once a day, plus a seasonal QF, compared to at least 6 direct from LAX to SYD. Perhaps ORD would see more tourism between Australia and Ontario/Quebec etc.

Not unexpected. Canada is about 1/10 the population of the US.

I think a QF flight to ORD would do well, but the connecting passengers to Canada are not going to be a major factor.

LTEN11 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

You were the one who said that the 744ER outright couldn't do AKL-ORD. If you're going to emphatically claim something, make sure it's right first.

Before criticising others for ‘emphatically’ claiming something, QF never planned AKL-ORD despite your claims that they did. Stop hiding behind semantics to avoid admitting that you’re wrong.

As it is, colour me sceptical that a 74E could make ORD-AKL with a viable load. DFW-BNE diverted fairly regularly, and that was with ~ 100 blocked seats. Note that was departing from an airport that doesn’t get ATC snafus unless a storm has rolled through, shortly entered relatively uncongested Mexican airspace, and then over the Pacific. Departing ORD would have more terminal and en-route ATC delays, potentially less optimal routings until you reach the West Coast etc. The two routes are not really apples-for-apples.

Despite efforts to find some information on it, I can't find any. I know it was proposed as i worked cargo at the time for a company owned by QF and we made plans to use it for express freight via AKL from SYD, but since I can't find the info to share, I'll wear it.

Are you saying DFW/BNE with 100 blocked seats was viable, but an ORD/AKL with a similar number of blocked seats wouldn't have been ?

What was MEL/LAX/ORD meant to operate with, in particular the LAX/ORD sector ?

ZK-NBT wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Before criticising others for ‘emphatically’ claiming something, QF never planned AKL-ORD despite your claims that they did. Stop hiding behind semantics to avoid admitting that you’re wrong.

As it is, colour me sceptical that a 74E could make ORD-AKL with a viable load. DFW-BNE diverted fairly regularly, and that was with ~ 100 blocked seats. Note that was departing from an airport that doesn’t get ATC snafus unless a storm has rolled through, shortly entered relatively uncongested Mexican airspace, and then over the Pacific. Departing ORD would have more terminal and en-route ATC delays, potentially less optimal routings until you reach the West Coast etc. The two routes are not really apples-for-apples.

Despite efforts to find some information on it, I can't find any. I know it was proposed as i worked cargo at the time for a company owned by QF and we made plans to use it for express freight via AKL from SYD, but since I can't find the info to share, I'll wear it.

Are you saying DFW/BNE with 100 blocked seats was viable, but an ORD/AKL with a similar number of blocked seats wouldn't have been ?

What was MEL/LAX/ORD meant to operate with, in particular the LAX/ORD sector ?

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/about-us/n ... -2002/2822

Original announcement of MEL-LAX-ORD.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/about-us/n ... -2003/2895

Suspended 3 days before first flight due downturn caused by SARS.