Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
NTLDaz wrote:Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
A capacity jump would, IMO, make little sense unless they go less than daily. After all they would likely be losing most East Coast traffic.
ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
A capacity jump would, IMO, make little sense unless they go less than daily. After all they would likely be losing most East Coast traffic.
?? I don’t follow. Why would they go less than daily? There would still be plenty of East coast traffic, not to mention PER originating traffic. QF have also in the past said they would keep SIN-LHR, weather they do or not will be interesting to see.
NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
A capacity jump would, IMO, make little sense unless they go less than daily. After all they would likely be losing most East Coast traffic.
?? I don’t follow. Why would they go less than daily? There would still be plenty of East coast traffic, not to mention PER originating traffic. QF have also in the past said they would keep SIN-LHR, weather they do or not will be interesting to see.
Given PS will give non stop from both SYD and MEL I suspect this would reduce the East Coast traffic via Perth. Pre Covid you had QF1 SYD to LHR via SIN and QF9 MEL via PER. The MEL-PER leg wouldn't exist any more. Why would you need extra capacity on PER - LHR ? Especially when we know the 787 does the trip easily.
ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:
?? I don’t follow. Why would they go less than daily? There would still be plenty of East coast traffic, not to mention PER originating traffic. QF have also in the past said they would keep SIN-LHR, weather they do or not will be interesting to see.
Given PS will give non stop from both SYD and MEL I suspect this would reduce the East Coast traffic via Perth. Pre Covid you had QF1 SYD to LHR via SIN and QF9 MEL via PER. The MEL-PER leg wouldn't exist any more. Why would you need extra capacity on PER - LHR ? Especially when we know the 787 does the trip easily.
QF said something like 75% or a similar number of PAX originate in PER on the PER-LHR flight, that would be 170/180 pax per flight, the A351 in a 4 class configuration will seat 260/280 I would think, it’s not a huge capacity jump.
NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
Given PS will give non stop from both SYD and MEL I suspect this would reduce the East Coast traffic via Perth. Pre Covid you had QF1 SYD to LHR via SIN and QF9 MEL via PER. The MEL-PER leg wouldn't exist any more. Why would you need extra capacity on PER - LHR ? Especially when we know the 787 does the trip easily.
QF said something like 75% or a similar number of PAX originate in PER on the PER-LHR flight, that would be 170/180 pax per flight, the A351 in a 4 class configuration will seat 260/280 I would think, it’s not a huge capacity jump.
What does the 787 hold - 236 ? Also putting in F - does Perth need F ? Maybe they'll put an A350 on Perth but it makes no sense to me. Also, I haven't seen anywhere that Qantas have said they'll be using a PS aircraft out of Perth.
ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:
QF said something like 75% or a similar number of PAX originate in PER on the PER-LHR flight, that would be 170/180 pax per flight, the A351 in a 4 class configuration will seat 260/280 I would think, it’s not a huge capacity jump.
What does the 787 hold - 236 ? Also putting in F - does Perth need F ? Maybe they'll put an A350 on Perth but it makes no sense to me. Also, I haven't seen anywhere that Qantas have said they'll be using a PS aircraft out of Perth.
236 yes on the 789, F on the A351 will be what between 4-8 seats? Does PER need F, who knows but QF may also want to have all 1 type to LHR? 2 while the A380 is around and 3 if PER stays 789, I could see PER going A350 as that fleet grows. The article in the thread started mentions the A350 on PER-LHR but the source is doubted it seems.
NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
What does the 787 hold - 236 ? Also putting in F - does Perth need F ? Maybe they'll put an A350 on Perth but it makes no sense to me. Also, I haven't seen anywhere that Qantas have said they'll be using a PS aircraft out of Perth.
236 yes on the 789, F on the A351 will be what between 4-8 seats? Does PER need F, who knows but QF may also want to have all 1 type to LHR? 2 while the A380 is around and 3 if PER stays 789, I could see PER going A350 as that fleet grows. The article in the thread started mentions the A350 on PER-LHR but the source is doubted it seems.
I guess we'll know more when they make an order. SYD / MEL - JFK as well as SYD / MEL - LHR will be the priority. How many frames will that require ?
zkojq wrote:Great to hear. This plane is going to make Qantas a lot of money. I wonder how many A350-1000nonULRs will end up in the Qantas fleet as well.
NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
A capacity jump would, IMO, make little sense unless they go less than daily. After all they would likely be losing most East Coast traffic.
?? I don’t follow. Why would they go less than daily? There would still be plenty of East coast traffic, not to mention PER originating traffic. QF have also in the past said they would keep SIN-LHR, weather they do or not will be interesting to see.
Given PS will give non stop from both SYD and MEL I suspect this would reduce the East Coast traffic via Perth. Pre Covid you had QF1 SYD to LHR via SIN and QF9 MEL via PER. The MEL-PER leg wouldn't exist any more. Why would you need extra capacity on PER - LHR ? Especially when we know the 787 does the trip easily.
qf789 wrote:At today’s half year results Qantas says it will firm up an order for A350-1000’s for Project Sunrise by the middle of this year with deliveries in 2025.
Previously Qantas had announced their plan to buy A350-1000’s to operate flights such as SYD-JFK and SYD/MEL-LHR however due to the pandemic the Project was put on hold.
Also suggests PER-LHR will be upgraded to A350’s as well
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/qan ... non-stops/
ZK-NBT wrote:NTLDaz wrote:ZK-NBT wrote:
?? I don’t follow. Why would they go less than daily? There would still be plenty of East coast traffic, not to mention PER originating traffic. QF have also in the past said they would keep SIN-LHR, weather they do or not will be interesting to see.
Given PS will give non stop from both SYD and MEL I suspect this would reduce the East Coast traffic via Perth. Pre Covid you had QF1 SYD to LHR via SIN and QF9 MEL via PER. The MEL-PER leg wouldn't exist any more. Why would you need extra capacity on PER - LHR ? Especially when we know the 787 does the trip easily.
QF said something like 75% or a similar number of PAX originate in PER on the PER-LHR flight, that would be 170/180 pax per flight, the A351 in a 4 class configuration will seat 260/280 I would think, it’s not a huge capacity jump.
Kikko19 wrote:Has the a350 the leg? Will be modified heavily?
smi0006 wrote:I think the key here - LHR in particular is the holy yield grail for QF, they have lost a huge amount of this traffic to ME3 and Asian carriers over the years. Their product couldn’t compete with SQ,EK,QR. What that can beat them on is time and non-stop. Highly unlikely VS, or BA would compete, and no one else legally can.
These routes are about stealing high yield pax back from those carriers, and retaining the high yield they currently have - not converting the majority current traffic to non-stop. What happens when the 380 is retired will be interesting!
QF have four LHR slots, wouldn’t surprise me if they keep them all;
SYD-LHR 350
MEL-LHR 350
SYD-SIN-LHR 380
PER-LHR 789 (doesn’t matter which city it starts in)
Leaves us with
SYD-JFK 350
SYD-ORD 350
With some Asian flying to fill out the utilisation.
Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Kent350787 wrote:Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
Kent350787 wrote:Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
SCFlyer wrote:Kent350787 wrote:Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
Somerandom787 wrote:SCFlyer wrote:Kent350787 wrote:
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
Or they may keep the A380 on SYD-SIN-LHR alongside the PS flights as a cheaper option for Perth, Sydney, and Melbourne travelers and as an alternative for Brisbane travelers (where Brisbane travelers can take the A330 to SIN before going on the A380 to LHR)
Or QF could do what I said above plus start the Perth-London flight in Adelaide instead of Melbourne or Brisbane (though I would seriously doubt QF starting long haul ops out of Adelaide)
NTLDaz wrote:Somerandom787 wrote:SCFlyer wrote:
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
Or they may keep the A380 on SYD-SIN-LHR alongside the PS flights as a cheaper option for Perth, Sydney, and Melbourne travelers and as an alternative for Brisbane travelers (where Brisbane travelers can take the A330 to SIN before going on the A380 to LHR)
Or QF could do what I said above plus start the Perth-London flight in Adelaide instead of Melbourne or Brisbane (though I would seriously doubt QF starting long haul ops out of Adelaide)
Unless they have some wild plans to launch the US from ADL I can't see how starting QF9 there would work.
Somerandom787 wrote:SCFlyer wrote:Kent350787 wrote:
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
Or they may keep the A380 on SYD-SIN-LHR alongside the PS flights as a cheaper option for Perth, Sydney, and Melbourne travelers and as an alternative for Brisbane travelers (where Brisbane travelers can take the A330 to SIN before going on the A380 to LHR)
Or QF could do what I said above plus start the Perth-London flight in Adelaide instead of Melbourne or Brisbane (though I would seriously doubt QF starting long haul ops out of Adelaide)
SCFlyer wrote:Kent350787 wrote:Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
BNEFlyer wrote:SCFlyer wrote:Kent350787 wrote:
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
BNE-PER-LHR would obviously provide QF with East Coast-LHR flights from the three major ports, but for BNE travellers going to cities other than LHR, the BNE-PER/SYD/MEL-LHR options becomes two stops to Europe rather than one on a competitor via SIN/DOH/DXB.
PER/SYD/MEL-LHR is really only attractive for travellers who need to connect (from regional areas and cities without a competitor) or those who have PER/SYD/MEL as their home airport.
NTLDaz wrote:BNEFlyer wrote:SCFlyer wrote:
QF will probably still want to rotate the 789s between PER and the East Coast, so highly tipping it becomes BNE-PER-LHR & v.v. This despite SIN (and ME stopovers) being a more popular option towards BNE/Queensland flyers.
BNE-PER-LHR would obviously provide QF with East Coast-LHR flights from the three major ports, but for BNE travellers going to cities other than LHR, the BNE-PER/SYD/MEL-LHR options becomes two stops to Europe rather than one on a competitor via SIN/DOH/DXB.
PER/SYD/MEL-LHR is really only attractive for travellers who need to connect (from regional areas and cities without a competitor) or those who have PER/SYD/MEL as their home airport.
That's exactly the same now . If you want to fly to Europe on Qantas you were always looking at 2 stops unless going to London. Where it might get interesting is if ( eventually) there are more flights to continental Europe from Perth - like the PER - FCO flights.
tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:BNEFlyer wrote:BNE-PER-LHR would obviously provide QF with East Coast-LHR flights from the three major ports, but for BNE travellers going to cities other than LHR, the BNE-PER/SYD/MEL-LHR options becomes two stops to Europe rather than one on a competitor via SIN/DOH/DXB.
PER/SYD/MEL-LHR is really only attractive for travellers who need to connect (from regional areas and cities without a competitor) or those who have PER/SYD/MEL as their home airport.
That's exactly the same now . If you want to fly to Europe on Qantas you were always looking at 2 stops unless going to London. Where it might get interesting is if ( eventually) there are more flights to continental Europe from Perth - like the PER - FCO flights.
That is the exact reason the EK alliance came into being. It enabled QF to offer one-stop to just about everywhere in Europe from all mainland state capitals with typically good connection times in DXB due to the timing of EK's hub banks.
NTLDaz wrote:tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
That's exactly the same now . If you want to fly to Europe on Qantas you were always looking at 2 stops unless going to London. Where it might get interesting is if ( eventually) there are more flights to continental Europe from Perth - like the PER - FCO flights.
That is the exact reason the EK alliance came into being. It enabled QF to offer one-stop to just about everywhere in Europe from all mainland state capitals with typically good connection times in DXB due to the timing of EK's hub banks.
Of course but some people want to fly on Qantas and some certainly don't want to go through Dubai. Personally, my last 2 trips to Europe have been on EK with a QF issued ticket.
tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:tullamarine wrote:That is the exact reason the EK alliance came into being. It enabled QF to offer one-stop to just about everywhere in Europe from all mainland state capitals with typically good connection times in DXB due to the timing of EK's hub banks.
Of course but some people want to fly on Qantas and some certainly don't want to go through Dubai. Personally, my last 2 trips to Europe have been on EK with a QF issued ticket.
Yes, but realistically QF will never serve more than 2 or 3 ports within continental Europe. EK does just about everywhere. I have used them a number of times with a QF flight number taking me to ports such as AMS, IST and WAW. On QF metal, I would have had to overfly Europe to LHR then backtrack on BA with associated increase in both time and cost. EK's service was great with the longest connection time in DXB 4 hours and the shortest 50 minutes.
tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:tullamarine wrote:That is the exact reason the EK alliance came into being. It enabled QF to offer one-stop to just about everywhere in Europe from all mainland state capitals with typically good connection times in DXB due to the timing of EK's hub banks.
Of course but some people want to fly on Qantas and some certainly don't want to go through Dubai. Personally, my last 2 trips to Europe have been on EK with a QF issued ticket.
Yes, but realistically QF will never serve more than 2 or 3 ports within continental Europe. EK does just about everywhere. I have used them a number of times with a QF flight number taking me to ports such as AMS, IST and WAW. On QF metal, I would have had to overfly Europe to LHR then backtrack on BA with associated increase in both time and cost. EK's service was great with the longest connection time in DXB 4 hours and the shortest 50 minutes.
jrfspa320 wrote:tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
Of course but some people want to fly on Qantas and some certainly don't want to go through Dubai. Personally, my last 2 trips to Europe have been on EK with a QF issued ticket.
Yes, but realistically QF will never serve more than 2 or 3 ports within continental Europe. EK does just about everywhere. I have used them a number of times with a QF flight number taking me to ports such as AMS, IST and WAW. On QF metal, I would have had to overfly Europe to LHR then backtrack on BA with associated increase in both time and cost. EK's service was great with the longest connection time in DXB 4 hours and the shortest 50 minutes.
Agree, even outside of LHR where would QF fly non stop that could fill an A350.
Places like CDG and FRA would seem better served on 787s which cant make it from the east coast anyway.
NTLDaz wrote:tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:
Of course but some people want to fly on Qantas and some certainly don't want to go through Dubai. Personally, my last 2 trips to Europe have been on EK with a QF issued ticket.
Yes, but realistically QF will never serve more than 2 or 3 ports within continental Europe. EK does just about everywhere. I have used them a number of times with a QF flight number taking me to ports such as AMS, IST and WAW. On QF metal, I would have had to overfly Europe to LHR then backtrack on BA with associated increase in both time and cost. EK's service was great with the longest connection time in DXB 4 hours and the shortest 50 minutes.
Yep - last 2 times on EK I flew into LIS and out of BCN and before that into PRG and out of MUC. You just can't beat the ME airlines for 1 stop convenience.
But ' if ' QF can do LHR, CDG, FCO and FRA they'll cover a lot of ground for where many want to go. If TK ever do a non stop from SYD / MEL to IST that would shake things up a bit.
tullamarine wrote:NTLDaz wrote:tullamarine wrote:Yes, but realistically QF will never serve more than 2 or 3 ports within continental Europe. EK does just about everywhere. I have used them a number of times with a QF flight number taking me to ports such as AMS, IST and WAW. On QF metal, I would have had to overfly Europe to LHR then backtrack on BA with associated increase in both time and cost. EK's service was great with the longest connection time in DXB 4 hours and the shortest 50 minutes.
Yep - last 2 times on EK I flew into LIS and out of BCN and before that into PRG and out of MUC. You just can't beat the ME airlines for 1 stop convenience.
But ' if ' QF can do LHR, CDG, FCO and FRA they'll cover a lot of ground for where many want to go. If TK ever do a non stop from SYD / MEL to IST that would shake things up a bit.
Even if QF do fly to the ports you listed, Oneworld does not have a hub in central Europe which is dominated by Star. Even if you could do a non-stop to FRA (from PER), if you were heading to MUC,GVA, ZRH etc there is no seamless connection recognising status available to you and you'd be better served going via DXB on EK.
LTEN11 wrote:So with the likely closer of Russian airspace for the foreseeable future, would the 350 still have the range flying via the Middle East to do SYD/MEL-LHR, with a viable payload ?
flipdewaf wrote:LTEN11 wrote:So with the likely closer of Russian airspace for the foreseeable future, would the 350 still have the range flying via the Middle East to do SYD/MEL-LHR, with a viable payload ?
I would think so, my understanding is that the biggest challenge of al the routes is SYD-LHR, avoiding Russia to the south adds about 3% on but on the really challenging days the route would likely go east of Russia anyway and over Alaska and drop in to LHR from the north.
Fred
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
LTEN11 wrote:flipdewaf wrote:LTEN11 wrote:So with the likely closer of Russian airspace for the foreseeable future, would the 350 still have the range flying via the Middle East to do SYD/MEL-LHR, with a viable payload ?
I would think so, my understanding is that the biggest challenge of al the routes is SYD-LHR, avoiding Russia to the south adds about 3% on but on the really challenging days the route would likely go east of Russia anyway and over Alaska and drop in to LHR from the north.
Fred
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
That's around a 1000nm further, they'd have to be some pretty favourable conditions.
Kent350787 wrote:Polot wrote:That’s 30 to 50 more seats total over the 789, and likely a large number of additional premium seats that would need to be filled. Nonstops from MEL/SYD to LHR will hurt premium demand on PER-LHR the most, as those are the passengers most likely to favor the nonstop over connecting at PER.
Let's be clear - the only reason for people from the east to stopover in PER is that the current aircarft cannot fly direct to LHR. Once there are direct flights from MEL (and SYD) demand on PER-LHR will be fundamentally O&D from PER, with perhaps a trickle from ADL.
oceanvikram wrote:Some very good points by the posts in this topic and I was wondering if any of the below options sound feasible:If A350 has the legs to do MEL/SYD – LHR, then surely a daily BNE-LHR could be done as well. Maybe remove Oz-SIN-LHR to free up a slot? Or remove PER-LHR since BNE is less sensitive to commodities’ prices and has a much larger tourism industry.
Is QF bold enough to consider PER their western international hub. I believe PER-FRA/CDG/TLV/JNB can be done quite successfully on the 787 on daily basis. Even though it is still a one stop for eastern states, I believe it could be competitive with the likes of ME3, C3, SQ,TG and CX.
Is FCO viable year round on daily bases from Oz? I feel the current flights from PER are to tap the pent up demand for travelling due to COVID. FCO seems to me to be a low yielding and seasonal with VFR and tourist traffic.
Is DEL viable year round on daily bases from Oz? I feel the current flights from MEL/SYD flights are to tap the pent up demand for travelling due to COVID. DEL seems to me to be a low yielding and seasonal with VFR traffic.
I believe QF is a very conservative airline and is always working on catching up to its competitors. As far as I am aware QF produced 2 (off) game changers to the aviation industry, introduction of business class and maybe nonstop from Oz to continental USA. I hope project sunrise will be another game changer that other airlines will hope to imitate.
These are exciting times for QF, confirming project sunrise and the order of Airbus narrow bodies.
oceanvikram wrote:Some very good points by the posts in this topic and I was wondering if any of the below options sound feasible:If A350 has the legs to do MEL/SYD – LHR, then surely a daily BNE-LHR could be done as well. Maybe remove Oz-SIN-LHR to free up a slot? Or remove PER-LHR since BNE is less sensitive to commodities’ prices and has a much larger tourism industry.
Is QF bold enough to consider PER their western international hub. I believe PER-FRA/CDG/TLV/JNB can be done quite successfully on the 787 on daily basis. Even though it is still a one stop for eastern states, I believe it could be competitive with the likes of ME3, C3, SQ,TG and CX.
Is FCO viable year round on daily bases from Oz? I feel the current flights from PER are to tap the pent up demand for travelling due to COVID. FCO seems to me to be a low yielding and seasonal with VFR and tourist traffic.
Is DEL viable year round on daily bases from Oz? I feel the current flights from MEL/SYD flights are to tap the pent up demand for travelling due to COVID. DEL seems to me to be a low yielding and seasonal with VFR traffic.
I believe QF is a very conservative airline and is always working on catching up to its competitors. As far as I am aware QF produced 2 (off) game changers to the aviation industry, introduction of business class and maybe nonstop from Oz to continental USA. I hope project sunrise will be another game changer that other airlines will hope to imitate.
These are exciting times for QF, confirming project sunrise and the order of Airbus narrow bodies.
Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
anstar wrote:Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
Isn't sunrise for JFL and Europe from the east coast? I haven't seen any hint the 350 will be on PER-LHR.
PM wrote:anstar wrote:Scotron12 wrote:A nice shot in the arm for the A350. Will also give a big capacity jump on PER-LHR
Isn't sunrise for JFL and Europe from the east coast? I haven't seen any hint the 350 will be on PER-LHR.
It's more than a hint.
Read the OP's article.
"The A350-1000s will also be used on the Perth-London nonstop route lifting capacity and they are also capable of flying from Perth to Los Angeles nonstop."