One thing both QF and VA are both now into is the UpgradeMe bidding system for upgrades. Apart from the obvious question as to whether it just makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, I do notice both airlines tend to overprice their suggested bids. Recently I received an offer from Qantas to bid for an upgrade on MEL-SYD with 4000 points + $100. At the same time, a traditional upgrade with points was quoted at 5400 points. VA is no better, a points upgrade was 4900 points for SYD-MEL but the suggested bid on their UpgradeMe platform was $350!!

I have heard of some people overseas getting very good deals with their bidded upgrades but I don't think QF or VA are offering much at the moment and the bid system is just a great way for them to boost revenue.

tullamarine wrote:

One thing both QF and VA are both now into is the UpgradeMe bidding system for upgrades. Apart from the obvious question as to whether it just makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, I do notice both airlines tend to overprice their suggested bids. Recently I received an offer from Qantas to bid for an upgrade on MEL-SYD with 4000 points + $100. At the same time, a traditional upgrade with points was quoted at 5400 points. VA is no better, a points upgrade was 4900 points for SYD-MEL but the suggested bid on their UpgradeMe platform was $350!!

I have heard of some people overseas getting very good deals with their bidded upgrades but I don't think QF or VA are offering much at the moment and the bid system is just a great way for them to boost revenue.

From what I know, these are automated systems linked into revenue and yield management software parameters. There is very little direct human interaction in the price setting in the systems, however it often requires manual triggers for "events" (i.e. when to close inventory for sale and clear upgrades). More and more this is now happening as late as possible for points upgrades whereas the automated revenue and yield management software is able to use its parameters. From some of the clients I've worked with it appeared that the bid systems gave you better chances of earlier upgrades, but if there were seats open in the front once the flight was closed, it appeared as though the manual nature of that event would favour miles/points. However, this would often just be a function of how the airlines defined the priority in their waitlists.

Amadeus were one of the first to offer this module to airlines but now most of the revenue and yield management software providers offer similar systems. It absolutely makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, but no airline would clear any points upgrades if they had better revenue and yield improving options. The goal is to get customers to spend those points on the lowest opportunity cost possible rather than high opportunity cost seats that they can monetise. FWIW, Virgin use a Sabre tool for this. I'm not sure about Qantas. They operate on a lot more in-house native systems but often use GDS tools as part of this. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same Sabre tool since Qantas have been taking on a lot of Sabre software in recent years.

tullamarine wrote:

Correct, The recapitalised and virtually debt-free VA has the opportunity to make a "motza" over the next few years with its domestic franchise in what is really a duopoly. It has effectively a single fleet type in the 737 perfectly suited to its network with all the savings that come with such a structure. You only have to look at Southwest (WN) to see the huge profits available when you exploit this structure. It is the smallest of the US Big 4 but has been the most consistently profitable for years.

Apologies for going back to this a few days late. VA are certainly not debt free. The bankruptcy certainly got rid of much of the legacy debt, but they still carried about A$ 1.2 billion post bankrupcy. However, Bain's business model is the quintessential private equity leveraged buyout. Once they acquire, they use the assets on the balance sheet of the acquired business to leverage debt to fund the acquisition and their post acquisition business strategy. They use it in combination with their own balance sheet, capital and reputation to get significantly better terms. They're now a private company, so we don't really know, but it's certainly in Bain's business model to bring in a lot of debt, but at least they have a track record of using it a little more wisely compared to how the board of a publicly traded company might.

There weren't much unencumbered assets at VA to begin with when Bain acquired the business. Over half the fleet was leased, and most of the fleets that were "owned" - eg the owned 737s and 777s' were already mortgaged to the banks at the time of filing. The only part of the 'owned' fleet that wasn't encumbered were the legacy Skywest Fokkers and the sole legacy Skywest A320 (which was already in the process of being sold off at the time).

SCFlyer wrote:

There weren't much unencumbered assets at VA to begin with when Bain acquired the business. Over half the fleet was leased, and most of the fleets that were "owned" - eg the owned 737s and 777s' were already mortgaged to the banks at the time of filing. The only part of the 'owned' fleet that wasn't encumbered were the legacy Skywest Fokkers and the sole legacy Skywest A320 (which was already in the process of being sold off at the time).

Indeed, however there was significant equity in many of the aircraft that they were unable to refinance in in 2019 and 2020. Backed by Bain's balance sheet and an improved outlook they'll certainly have been able to refinance and increase leverage in the last year.

evanb wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

One thing both QF and VA are both now into is the UpgradeMe bidding system for upgrades. Apart from the obvious question as to whether it just makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, I do notice both airlines tend to overprice their suggested bids. Recently I received an offer from Qantas to bid for an upgrade on MEL-SYD with 4000 points + $100. At the same time, a traditional upgrade with points was quoted at 5400 points. VA is no better, a points upgrade was 4900 points for SYD-MEL but the suggested bid on their UpgradeMe platform was $350!!

I have heard of some people overseas getting very good deals with their bidded upgrades but I don't think QF or VA are offering much at the moment and the bid system is just a great way for them to boost revenue.

From what I know, these are automated systems linked into revenue and yield management software parameters. There is very little direct human interaction in the price setting in the systems, however it often requires manual triggers for "events" (i.e. when to close inventory for sale and clear upgrades). More and more this is now happening as late as possible for points upgrades whereas the automated revenue and yield management software is able to use its parameters. From some of the clients I've worked with it appeared that the bid systems gave you better chances of earlier upgrades, but if there were seats open in the front once the flight was closed, it appeared as though the manual nature of that event would favour miles/points. However, this would often just be a function of how the airlines defined the priority in their waitlists.

Amadeus were one of the first to offer this module to airlines but now most of the revenue and yield management software providers offer similar systems. It absolutely makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, but no airline would clear any points upgrades if they had better revenue and yield improving options. The goal is to get customers to spend those points on the lowest opportunity cost possible rather than high opportunity cost seats that they can monetise. FWIW, Virgin use a Sabre tool for this. I'm not sure about Qantas. They operate on a lot more in-house native systems but often use GDS tools as part of this. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same Sabre tool since Qantas have been taking on a lot of Sabre software in recent years.

I wasn’t aware that Qantas have been adopting Sabre software. That’s interesting to learn. A few years ago pretty much everything that wasn’t proprietary was Amadeus.

RyanairGuru wrote:

I wasn’t aware that Qantas have been adopting Sabre software. That’s interesting to learn. A few years ago pretty much everything that wasn’t proprietary was Amadeus.

Indeed, Qantas were an early adopter of Amadeus and are still very reliant on them. I think we need to distinguish between using GDSs to distribute inventory and what software and tools one uses internally - and this is not just what software and tools one uses for your own reservations agents, but for inventory management, etc. For distribution, Qantas now use Amadeus, Sabre and Travelport (Galileo). For this purpose, Sabre is important for the US market and AA JV.

However, on the "supplier side", it's no longer a single continuous piece of software and many airlines use tools from multiple players and larger airlines like Qantas have scale to build software using tools from multiple providers into their systems. For example, Qantas don't use the Amadeus revenue accounting tools, but use Accelya.

Amadeus and Sabre both have "bid for upgrade tools", but what tullamarine describes sounds a little more like the Sabre one (now that I say that, I'm almost certain that I'm wrong )

tullamarine wrote:

One thing both QF and VA are both now into is the UpgradeMe bidding system for upgrades. Apart from the obvious question as to whether it just makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, I do notice both airlines tend to overprice their suggested bids. Recently I received an offer from Qantas to bid for an upgrade on MEL-SYD with 4000 points + $100. At the same time, a traditional upgrade with points was quoted at 5400 points. VA is no better, a points upgrade was 4900 points for SYD-MEL but the suggested bid on their UpgradeMe platform was $350!!

I have heard of some people overseas getting very good deals with their bidded upgrades but I don't think QF or VA are offering much at the moment and the bid system is just a great way for them to boost revenue.

It’s always about boosting revenue. I find the bid now process a bit of a PITA. I can upgrade for 27500 point Perth Adelaide for example on a red e deal but if I use the bid now and allocate 19600 points I’m still being asked for a few hundred bucks.

So I don’t bother. If it was say 50 bucks and 15000 I’d be in…

VA passengers with status flying QR on a VA codeshare flight no. has access to the NZ lounges in BNE, SYD and PER provided the lounge invitation is collected with the QR boarding pass and the VFF card is shown

Looks like it's back to the 'bad old' days of the haphazard lounge access rules for international VFF/VA customers for the foreseeable future until either a common contract lounge is either sorted (VA was using no.1 (now Aspire) Lounges in BNE/SYD/MEL for all their own international and partner flights) pre-covid or the unlikely medium term scenario of *A membership occurs.

https://www.australianfrequentflyer.com ... ng-issues/

jrfspa320 wrote:

ben175 wrote:

angusjt wrote:

Biggest shock is that it's Qantas and not Jetstar flying this route - I suspect they'll takeover for 2024. BQB is also overdue for some expansion, I have no doubt SYD-BQB say 2x weekly would be equally successful.

I actually think it makes sense as a QF route - Exmouth is similar to Broome in its target market.

Agreed. JQ only has a minor presence in WA compared to the east coast (QF won’t let them in to lower the yield)

In fact, because of the pent up demand for "low cost" flights, right now, QF flights from Perth-East Coast are actually calculated to be cheaper by the GDS than JQ flights, by a significant margin.

I see HA isn't flying BNE-HNL in W22/23. Any plans for them to get back on the route?

HA to BNE was publicly cancelled during COVID and all local staff terminated. Never say never, but it will be awhile before they return- I think SYD performs much better for them.

SCFlyer wrote:

VA passengers with status flying QR on a VA codeshare flight no. has access to the NZ lounges in BNE, SYD and PER provided the lounge invitation is collected with the QR boarding pass and the VFF card is shown

Looks like it's back to the 'bad old' days of the haphazard lounge access rules for international VFF/VA customers for the foreseeable future until either a common contract lounge is either sorted (VA was using no.1 (now Aspire) Lounges in BNE/SYD/MEL for all their own international and partner flights) pre-covid or the unlikely medium term scenario of *A membership occurs.

https://www.australianfrequentflyer.com ... ng-issues/

Not just VA codeshare, its QR operated. And the lounges are provided for QR pax not VA, so this is nothing to do with VA's lounge agreements.

BNEFlyer wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

VA passengers with status flying QR on a VA codeshare flight no. has access to the NZ lounges in BNE, SYD and PER provided the lounge invitation is collected with the QR boarding pass and the VFF card is shown

Looks like it's back to the 'bad old' days of the haphazard lounge access rules for international VFF/VA customers for the foreseeable future until either a common contract lounge is either sorted (VA was using no.1 (now Aspire) Lounges in BNE/SYD/MEL for all their own international and partner flights) pre-covid or the unlikely medium term scenario of *A membership occurs.

https://www.australianfrequentflyer.com ... ng-issues/

Not just VA codeshare, its QR operated. And the lounges are provided for QR pax not VA, so this is nothing to do with VA's lounge agreements.

Apparently it's a technology issue with the lounge pass not currently being printed on the boarding pass of the eligible Velocity members when they check in for a QR flight who instead need to ask for a physical lounge invitation at check-in. Obviously, if they forget, the lounge dragons may choose to not let them in and it's too late to go back by that stage. QR and VA are working to resolve the technology issue which shouldn't take that long you'd think.

TG ramps MEL up to x2 daily from 01DEC! This is an amazing recovery for TG in MEL to ramp up flights so quick especially with additional competition from XT coming. TG will be at pre-COVID levels and MEL-BKK route total capacity will be higher too with 3 airlines flying the route (TG, JQ & XT)

TG461 BKK 8:20 - 21:20 MEL A359 D
TG465 BKK 18:20 - 07:20+1 MEL A359 D

TG462 MEL 00:30 - 05:40 BKK A359 D
TG466 MEL 09:30 - 14:40 BKK A359 D

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ok-flights

Anyword on TG looking to return to BNE?

vhebb wrote:

Anyword on TG looking to return to BNE?

Unlikely for the foreseeable future. TG's local BNE offices were closed permanently during COVID.

On a related note, TG's short lived rival XJ also pulled out of BNE-DMK prior to COVID due to not meeting targets for the continuation of flights past the AAIF subsidised period.

SCFlyer wrote:

vhebb wrote:

Anyword on TG looking to return to BNE?

Unlikely for the foreseeable future. TG's local BNE offices were closed permanently during COVID.

On a related note, TG's short lived rival XJ also pulled out of BNE-DMK prior to COVID due to not meeting targets for the continuation of flights past the AAIF subsidised period.

BNE is a interesting market for both TG and MH, I wouldn’t say it’s the most lucrative market for them.

kriskim wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

vhebb wrote:

Anyword on TG looking to return to BNE?

Unlikely for the foreseeable future. TG's local BNE offices were closed permanently during COVID.

On a related note, TG's short lived rival XJ also pulled out of BNE-DMK prior to COVID due to not meeting targets for the continuation of flights past the AAIF subsidised period.

BNE is a interesting market for both TG and MH, I wouldn’t say it’s the most lucrative market for them.

I think in TG's case (and their financial situation), their current fleet may likely make more money elsewhere (including the x3 weekly PER), hence leaving little room for BNE (which was cut from daily to 4x weekly prior to the Covid shutdowns).

MH is an interesting case, though I suspect D7 continuing the suspension of OOL-KUL indefinitely for the foreseeable future may have pushed BNE over the line for MH (currently 2x weekly turning 3x weekly).

For an unrelated reason I was watching Perth on FR24 tonight and noted that QF9 had a hefty delay out of MEL. But as of typing, the aircraft has been on the ground at Perth for 3 hours now before the continuing flight to LHR, which I thought was a bit odd. Is it due LHR arrival constrictions or are there operational constraints? Presumably the crew would have been told to delay clocking in for the flight, so duty hours shouldn't be an issue.

On another note, at this rate it'll be a full daytime flight all the way.

tullamarine wrote:

One thing both QF and VA are both now into is the UpgradeMe bidding system for upgrades. Apart from the obvious question as to whether it just makes it harder to get a traditional points upgrade, I do notice both airlines tend to overprice their suggested bids. Recently I received an offer from Qantas to bid for an upgrade on MEL-SYD with 4000 points + $100. At the same time, a traditional upgrade with points was quoted at 5400 points. VA is no better, a points upgrade was 4900 points for SYD-MEL but the suggested bid on their UpgradeMe platform was $350!!

I have heard of some people overseas getting very good deals with their bidded upgrades but I don't think QF or VA are offering much at the moment and the bid system is just a great way for them to boost revenue.

I've had a VA upgrade bid accepted at $89 before.

CPH-R wrote:

For an unrelated reason I was watching Perth on FR24 tonight and noted that QF9 had a hefty delay out of MEL. But as of typing, the aircraft has been on the ground at Perth for 3 hours now before the continuing flight to LHR, which I thought was a bit odd. Is it due LHR arrival constrictions or are there operational constraints? Presumably the crew would have been told to delay clocking in for the flight, so duty hours shouldn't be an issue.

On another note, at this rate it'll be a full daytime flight all the way.

According to some reports/comments online the flight last night got cancelled. Going by the comments it was handled pretty poorly which seems to be the normal for post covid QF.

T way airlines will start flying to Sydney from Seoul 4 per week from 23 December so more competition on the way.

https://m.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20221017000326

Despite the various financial subsidies from the State of NSW's Aviation Attraction Investment Fund (AAIF) towards attracting new entrants on the Australia-Korea market, to go from KE/OZ (pre-merger) to basically 5 carriers or 3 airline groups post-COVID (KE/OZ, QF/JQ and T'Way) has to be pretty impressive growth.

SCFlyer wrote:

Despite the various financial subsidies from the State of NSW's Aviation Attraction Investment Fund (AAIF) towards attracting new entrants on the Australia-Korea market, to go from KE/OZ (pre-merger) to basically 5 carriers or 3 airline groups post-COVID (KE/OZ, QF/JQ and T'Way) has to be pretty impressive growth.

Indeed.

What about Jin Air - are they resuming CNS?

Some much needed competition, prices have been rather ridiculous and KE/OZ used to milk the route during the Northern Winter both sending their A380.

I hope Air Premia can jump into the fray too.

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

SCFlyer wrote:

Despite the various financial subsidies from the State of NSW's Aviation Attraction Investment Fund (AAIF) towards attracting new entrants on the Australia-Korea market, to go from KE/OZ (pre-merger) to basically 5 carriers or 3 airline groups post-COVID (KE/OZ, QF/JQ and T'Way) has to be pretty impressive growth.

Interesting though, the removal of QF codeshares with the dominant partner on a route can lead to different outcomes.

On this one, once OZ was absorbed by KE and the QF codeshare could not continue, we are seeing interesting growth.
On the South African routes however, we've seen QF consolidate its dominance in the face of a financially weak carrier in SA.

Id be interested to see what the market reaction would be on a market like Chile if QF and LA could not codeshare.

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Not quite, KE left MEL in 2013

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Census data shows over half of Koreans in Australia live in NSW with QLD slightly edging out VIC. Theres no doubt there is a market and OZ was likely testing the waters, KE/OZ have a tendency of trialing routes as charters beforehand like VCE and BCN for OZ. I reckon there is scope for KE to launch at least seasonal flights to MEL post-merger once we get more of a sense of normalcy and connecting traffic from Europe recovers well and truly.

I found it interesting that KE122 was shifted to a redeye with the A330 parked all day in SYD during covid. This meant no need for a overnight layover in Seoul before the midday departure bank for Europe. A similar schedule would be required for MEL to work.

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

I noticed this the other day. Bizarre.

ben175 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

I noticed this the other day. Bizarre.

Apparently has been out of the booking system for 3 days but still no official word from the company?

Any new on El Al firming up Melbourne too?

Also hearing rumours of some slight changes for NZ PER…

Last figure I saw was international capacity into AU will hit 60% pre covid come Dec. Lot would be Chinese capacity, so still along way to go. Good luck to all airports winning business back.

smi0006 wrote:

Any new on El Al firming up Melbourne too?

Also hearing rumours of some slight changes for NZ PER…

The rumours going around re NZ PER is that there is an upcoming wet-lease from Hi-Fly, aircraft yet to be confirmed (either the sole A330neo or Hi-Fly Malta's older A330-200/300s).

SCFlyer wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Any new on El Al firming up Melbourne too?

Also hearing rumours of some slight changes for NZ PER…

The rumours going around re NZ PER is that there is an upcoming wet-lease from Hi-Fly, aircraft yet to be confirmed (either the sole A330neo or Hi-Fly Malta's older A330-200/300s).

The rumours I've seen all say A330 but not from Hi-Fly.

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Census data shows over half of Koreans in Australia live in NSW with QLD slightly edging out VIC. Theres no doubt there is a market and OZ was likely testing the waters, KE/OZ have a tendency of trialing routes as charters beforehand like VCE and BCN for OZ. I reckon there is scope for KE to launch at least seasonal flights to MEL post-merger once we get more of a sense of normalcy and connecting traffic from Europe recovers well and truly.

I found it interesting that KE122 was shifted to a redeye with the A330 parked all day in SYD during covid. This meant no need for a overnight layover in Seoul before the midday departure bank for Europe. A similar schedule would be required for MEL to work.

KE schedule during Covid would have allowed the same crew to operate the return sector without needing to overnight.

ZK-NBT wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Census data shows over half of Koreans in Australia live in NSW with QLD slightly edging out VIC. Theres no doubt there is a market and OZ was likely testing the waters, KE/OZ have a tendency of trialing routes as charters beforehand like VCE and BCN for OZ. I reckon there is scope for KE to launch at least seasonal flights to MEL post-merger once we get more of a sense of normalcy and connecting traffic from Europe recovers well and truly.

I found it interesting that KE122 was shifted to a redeye with the A330 parked all day in SYD during covid. This meant no need for a overnight layover in Seoul before the midday departure bank for Europe. A similar schedule would be required for MEL to work.

KE schedule during Covid would have allowed the same crew to operate the return sector without needing to overnight.

It wasn't unusual for the aircraft to stay longer than 24 hours. Realistically, they were only carrying freight, so as mentioned, it was about scheduling around crew rest periods.

Obzerva wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Not quite, KE left MEL in 2013

In 2011 a mate & I rode the Trans Siberian in to VVO. To get home were flew KE to ICN but could not get a seat into SYD within a week/10 days of our desired date but we immediately got on the 3 days a week ICN - MEL flight, which was a A333 v a B773 into SYD. The 333 was around half full [my favorite airline big jet, a half full one! I think that shows why ICN - MEL got the chop less than 18 months later!
Which raises the question, has anything changed in the market to suggest a replacement flight would be more successful?

Gemuser

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

CGK on ice too

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ta-flights

Obzerva wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Not quite, KE left MEL in 2013

Oh I thought it was longer.. still, a long time

IndianicWorld wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Not quite, KE left MEL in 2013

Oh I thought it was longer.. still, a long time

yeah agree still a while, and like Gemuser's post above, when I travelled on the A330, it was only half full, very comfortable flight for economy, but passenger comfort doesn't equal profitable!

Gemuser wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Amazing that all these airlines crowd onto one route and leave a route like MEL-ICN with no service. Goes to show the dominant position that SYD holds in the Korean travel market.

It certainly is a priority market for MEL, but for all their trying, the most they have had in the last decade has been the short season of charters by OZ just prior to COVID.

Not quite, KE left MEL in 2013

In 2011 a mate & I rode the Trans Siberian in to VVO. To get home were flew KE to ICN but could not get a seat into SYD within a week/10 days of our desired date but we immediately got on the 3 days a week ICN - MEL flight, which was a A333 v a B773 into SYD. The 333 was around half full [my favorite airline big jet, a half full one! I think that shows why ICN - MEL got the chop less than 18 months later!
Which raises the question, has anything changed in the market to suggest a replacement flight would be more successful?

Gemuser

Honestly no idea if year round demand has grown for MEL-ICN, but it’s hard to imagine that it can’t sustain some service.

Let’s also remember that around that time MEL was struggling to get Japan service, yet by the end of the decade had increased to 2 x daily, but then again there appears to be far stronger business links between Japan and Victoria than for Korea.

smi0006 wrote:

Last figure I saw was international capacity into AU will hit 60% pre covid come Dec. Lot would be Chinese capacity, so still along way to go. Good luck to all airports winning business back.

MEL reported its September stats this week with nearly 600K pax moving through T2 alone. Total terminal movements were just on 1.9M pax. This is a large recovery but is still only 84% of domestic capacity for September 2019 and 60% of international capacity for same period.

F100Flyer wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

CGK on ice too

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ta-flights

I admit that when I first saw the delay in these 2 new PER services that I thought QF and PAPL were having another blue. Looks like that is not the case thankfully.

tullamarine wrote:

F100Flyer wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Has the QF PER JNB route been delayed? Meant to start in less than two weeks but flights have suddenly disappeared from the booking system?

CGK on ice too

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ta-flights

I admit that when I first saw the delay in these 2 new PER services that I thought QF and PAPL were having another blue. Looks like that is not the case thankfully.

That’s a shame - wonder what the hold up is? Sounds like ABF, and Biosecurity are unhappy the facilities are handling an increase in volume, or maybe staffing? Hopefully it is resolved soon!

smi0006 wrote:

That’s a shame - wonder what the hold up is? Sounds like ABF, and Biosecurity are unhappy the facilities are handling an increase in volume, or maybe staffing? Hopefully it is resolved soon!

QF international flights from T3 would be the SIN departing around 1145 and LHR at 1920. Arrivals from SIN 0025 and LHR at 1225.

The JNB times are departure at 1500 and arrival at 1355. CGK departure at 1920 and arrival at 0510.

So the new times that Border Force staff would be required would be dissimilar to the current times ABF staff are rostered to be at T3, especially the CGK arrival. So either a dispute between parties over the cost for extra staff at those times or the ABF being unable to provide extra staff at those times, in my opinion.

One thing that would resolve this would be more QF international flights in and out of T3 to justify ABF staff being there round the clock. Good for travellers too!

tullamarine wrote:

I admit that when I first saw the delay in these 2 new PER services that I thought QF and PAPL were having another blue. Looks like that is not the case thankfully.

The old Perth Airport CEO left the role a few weeks ago. So hopefully a new era where QF and Perth Airport aren’t constantly butting heads.

These routes are also being supported and promoted by the WA state governments they will step in and resolve any differences (maybe chip in some money for more ABF staff if needed) to ensure these routes are successful.

Apparently bookings are quite strong from reports.

smi0006 wrote:

Sounds like ABF, and Biosecurity are unhappy the facilities are handling an increase in volume, or maybe staffing?

Perhaps concern about risks from the Foot and Mouth outbreak in Indonesia could be a factor around CGK - but what's the issue for JNB? Pure resourcing? Pretty disappointing if that was the sole hold-up!

sierrakilo44 wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

That’s a shame - wonder what the hold up is? Sounds like ABF, and Biosecurity are unhappy the facilities are handling an increase in volume, or maybe staffing? Hopefully it is resolved soon!

QF international flights from T3 would be the SIN departing around 1145 and LHR at 1920. Arrivals from SIN 0025 and LHR at 1225.

The JNB times are departure at 1500 and arrival at 1355. CGK departure at 1920 and arrival at 0510.

So the new times that Border Force staff would be required would be dissimilar to the current times ABF staff are rostered to be at T3, especially the CGK arrival. So either a dispute between parties over the cost for extra staff at those times or the ABF being unable to provide extra staff at those times, in my opinion.

One thing that would resolve this would be more QF international flights in and out of T3 to justify ABF staff being there round the clock. Good for travellers too!

My understanding is it’s not costs- as ABF are funded through taxes and Passenger movement charges - so it’s the customer that picks up the tab.

Surely we are heading towards the point where international pier will need to be expanded anyway and QF moved over? Even if domestic isn’t ready. It then airport pricing would mean current international operators would pick ip the tag for QFs expansion before the facility is completed….