Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
EK413
Topic Author
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Tue Aug 05, 2014 12:22 pm

Hi A.netter's,

The previous discussion thread has gone in a flash!

Time to kick off Part 103 as the previous discussion had 200+ response's & slow to load for users so please continue the conversation here... Australian Aviation Thread - Part 102 (by EK413 Jul 29 2014 in Civil Aviation)

Here's a short summary of what was discussed in Australian Aviation Part 102...

* Discussions continued surrounding flights operating via war effected area's
* LAN to implement the new bilateral codeshare agreement on certain QF operated flights
* 2 new hotels for BNE airport to be located between the Control Tower and the domestic terminal car park & open late 2016
* Qantas B73H fleet to receive a cabin upgrade and reconfiguration adding additional 6 Y/C seats
* QF B787 options and time to firm B789 orders
* QF International A330's to get brand new Y/C seats, brand new IFE & configuration for the A333 will be 28J/269Y
* QF VH-VXC modified cabin fit out with a after-market 'BSI' over head lockers & decission to shelve the idea
* QF & the A330NEO a potential A330 / B744 replacement
* CX bringing the 77W into SYD commencing 3rd of December 2014 3-weekly initially then daily from 1st February 2015
CX139 HKG0850 – 2100SYD 77W D & CX138 SYD2220 – 0500+1HKG 77W D
* Tigerair safety incidents that include pilots being issued a drastically wrong flight plan, a collision between a tug and an Airbus A320 and "heated" disputes between flight crews and other staff, leaked documents
* The Age putting subliminal messages in their URLs http://www.theage.com.au/business/av...t-tigerair-20140801-zzjij.html
* Tigerair and rebranding
* Google LOON/balloon spotted off the east coast of Tasmania
* Qantas indicate that it has 'temporarily' rerouted flights to avoid Iraqi airspace
* Qantas A330-300 VH-QPC arrives back in Sydney sporting the revised Qantas livery
* QantasLink announce that it will discontinue its nonstop Sydney to Gladstone 74 seat Q400 services, with the last flight scheduled for 29 August 2014
* Our Airline changed its name to Nauru Airlines on Friday 1 August 2014 and began dedicated cargo services between Brisbane and Nauru with its new dedicated 737-300F VH-VLI
* Accor sign deal to operate two new Hotels under construction near the Domestic terminal at Brisbane Airport
* CX & additional Australiasia slots or potential upgauge of equipment
* QF's full year results to be announced end of August and expecting to report $750m loss
* JQ BNE-HKG and BNE-SIN rumour discussions
* QF looking at the feasibility of using 230t A332s on BNE-LAX-JFK as a replacement for 744s. Is this a realistic option?
* QF Group simplified fleet plans
* On going discussion surrounding Qantas A330 fleet utilisation
* New QF product on A332/A333 creating a flexible & consistent fleet of 30 x A330 aircraft
* The new revised 'Spirit of Australia' title's on QF A333 are way too small as opposed to A332 fleet being far to large
* Hong Kong bi-laterals discussions
* A350XWB touches down in Sydney 5th of August
* Qantas 'Planes' B767 VH-OGG withdrawn from revenue service and ready for retirement
* QF's newest B737-838 VH-XZL Flinders operates its first commercial service 4th of August from Brisbane to Sydney as QF570. Qantas next delivery is B737-838 VH-ZXM Coonawarra.
* QF going for smaller aircraft with more frequency
* Chile full OS agreement with the UAE and UAE carriers permitted to operate cabotage flights within Chile

Enjoy the Journey

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:07 pm

Quoting EK413 (Thread starter):
* Chile full OS agreement with the UAE and UAE carriers permitted to operate cabotage flights within Chile

This would be good, but a better option would be a more open skies regime for South America. An open skies with CHile really offers nothing right now to Australian carriers.

And yes, I agree with Sydscott. The SCL route is different to JNB in that NZ is a viable competitor. Especially if there is some sort of tie up/acqusition of the 2nd Chilean carrier Sky by the Avianca group and SCL will have some coordinated StarAlliance presence. SCL767 do you know more about this?

Also, SCL767, im interested to know more about the premium lounge! I use Mistral and Neruda from time to time and they are not bad for South American standards, so anything better is a bonus!

Quoting (Thread starter):
* New QF product on A332/A333 creating a flexible & consistent fleet of 30 x A330 aircraft

Do we really think that this is the right idea? Wouldnt some routes justify slightly more premium (eg HKG) and some slightly less (eg BKK). Would a subfleet of A332s and A333s in a more premium slanted mix be better and the rest in less premium? Yes there would result in 4 subfleets but perhaps they would be better suited to the quite varied routes in the QF Asia and Domestic route map?
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:17 pm

Quoting zeke,reply=previous thread:
I have not seen one shred of evidence to support restrictive access between the two is in the public interest. I have seen numbers to suggest the restriction on trade has already cost hundreds of million of dollars in lost exports, and some Australian export companies have failed as a result.


Can you please provide sources and examples so we can assess these claims.

In my own unavoidably biased view (I am Australian and my username is a giveaway) but one that I am concious of and take into account when making comments, the HK bilateral has been very liberal and generous to CX, moreso than QF/VA. If CX wants more rights, all it needs to do is compromise and allow Australian airlines more beyond rights to places where they want to fly, eg mainland China. At this point in time, lifting the cap for CX returns nothing to Australian carriers so they are obviously not interested. If we also consider the options that pax have to use carriers like SQ through SIN as one example amongst many, there are many options for trade to develop if there was such a constraint and therefore the evidence for any additonal public benefit that you beleive is possible through allowing CX more access, I cannot see. Happy to be corrected if you have the data.
 
eaglefarm4
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:33 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:38 pm

VH-XZM due BNE at 4pm today on delivery.BNE rather than MEL now gets all 737 deliveries due to maintenance now done here.
tourismman
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:28 pm

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 1):
Do we really think that this is the right idea? Wouldnt some routes justify slightly more premium (eg HKG) and some slightly less (eg BKK). Would a subfleet of A332s and A333s in a more premium slanted mix be better and the rest in less premium? Yes there would result in 4 subfleets but perhaps they would be better suited to the quite varied routes in the QF Asia and Domestic route map?

I tend to think that subfleets create unnecessary complexity. What QF will be able to do with the consistent Business Product, which is probably the more important cabin from a profit point of view anyway, is to swap the A332 and A333 around alot more which effectively gives them the option to upgrade or downgrade premium capacity. So sort of like having a subfleet but a bit more easier to manage within the network.
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:14 am

Based on actual fact, not speculation or rumour, can anyone shed light on how JQ's 787 ops are going in terms of reliability? Given the constant stories of TOM, DY, BA etc and the unreliable nature of there 787's (I am aware this is largely a media beat up), how is JQ finding their 787's - purely reliability wise?  

Thx
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:30 am

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 1):
Do we really think that this is the right idea? Wouldnt some routes justify slightly more premium (eg HKG) and some slightly less (eg BKK). Would a subfleet of A332s and A333s in a more premium slanted mix be better and the rest in less premium? Yes there would result in 4 subfleets but perhaps they would be better suited to the quite varied routes in the QF Asia and Domestic route map?

The fleet isn't that big, so having too many sub fleets could well be an operational headache.

Quoting eaglefarm4 (Reply 3):
VH-XZM due BNE at 4pm today on delivery.BNE rather than MEL now gets all 737 deliveries due to maintenance now done here.

Excellent. You must be a proud man  
 
VA82
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:35 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:31 am

Found this today regarding Cebu Pacific (and their soon to commence flights to SYD):

Quote:
However, further expansion to Sydney or other the other three major Australian ports – Perth, Brisbane or Melbourne – are on hold as Philippine carriers have used up all available 6,000 available seats per week into those four gateways.

Reyes said the Philippine government supported a lifting of the cap and initial efforts looked promising.
“It’s been received favourably,” Reyes said on Tuesday.

“Right now it is a matter of being able to schedule the air panels of both sides.”

Reyes noted that while the Philippines-Australia air services agreement had just 6,000 seats, the figure was about 38,000 for Malaysia and more than 28,000 for Thailand.

The Philippines was also currently negotiating new air services agreements with a number of other countries, he said."

Source: http://australianaviation.com.au/201...cific-keen-to-expand-in-australia/

Hopefully they get more seats, I know there's over capacity to/from SE Asia, but as a consumer I'm always one for more cheap fares!
 
carryon
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:28 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:10 pm

While on the ground in Sydney yesterday Airbus finally confirmed it is seeking 420-minute ETOPS approval for the A350 http://www.carry-on.com.au/blog/a350landsinsydney/

 
bunumuring
Posts: 2531
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:20 pm

Mate, that is one seriously good photo! Well done!
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:17 pm

Quoting VA82 (Reply 7):

Given that MNL is apparently low yeild, if competition lifts I can see QF deploying the two brand strategy here and putting JQ onto MNL instead.
 
carryon
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:28 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:58 pm

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 9):
Mate, that is one seriously good photo! Well done!
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Thanks mate! Uploaded some others to Flickr if you're interested https://www.flickr.com/photos/theoverheadlocker/with/14833514064/
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:02 pm

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 10):
Given that MNL is apparently low yeild, if competition lifts I can see QF deploying the two brand strategy here and putting JQ onto MNL instead.

While it has been long rumoured the mitigating factor against deployment of Jetstar is the amount of Corporate traffic QF has going to MNL to look after their outsourced arrangements. I know Macquarie is constantly flying Execs between SYD and MNL and there are plenty of other brand names, like Telstra, who have operations up there. Where I believe QF should be deploying JQ is on MEL-MNL.
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:19 pm

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 12):

Perhaps a HNL type operation then? QF3pw and JQ 4pw? Perhaps a TPE service could operate on a similar basis?
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:50 pm

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 12):
While it has been long rumoured the mitigating factor against deployment of Jetstar is the amount of Corporate traffic QF has going to MNL to look after their outsourced arrangements. I know Macquarie is constantly flying Execs between SYD and MNL and there are plenty of other brand names, like Telstra, who have operations up there. Where I believe QF should be deploying JQ is on MEL-MNL.

Agreed - business process outsourcing is big in The Philippines. Even JQ itself uses a Filipino call centre!
QF likely fills its J cabin with decent fares given PR is a poor competitor and one-stop options via HKG/SIN add 4-5 hours to the travel time. Where QF may struggle is discount Y.

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 13):
Perhaps a HNL type operation then? QF3pw and JQ 4pw? Perhaps a TPE service could operate on a similar basis?

JQi is usually more successful on routes that have strong outbound demand ex-Australia, or strong inbound demand from a market with higher cost airlines (e.g. Japan). TPE isn't strong on outbound demand from Australia apart from some VFR, and CI/BR likely have lower costs than JQi.
MNL would be a contender with PR being so weak and no more seats available to 5J to start MEL. Places like Boracay are getting more popular but MNL itself has little leisure demand.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 12:31 am

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 14):
JQi is usually more successful on routes that have strong outbound demand ex-Australia, or strong inbound demand from a market with higher cost airlines (e.g. Japan). TPE isn't strong on outbound demand from Australia apart from some VFR, and CI/BR likely have lower costs than JQi.

Agreed. TPE is best served through codeshares.

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 14):
MNL would be a contender with PR being so weak and no more seats available to 5J to start MEL. Places like Boracay are getting more popular but MNL itself has little leisure demand.

As I said above, if I was JQ I would start MEL-MNL and, potentially, BNE-MNL. There is plenty of room on the Australia side of the bilateral for that and there is also plenty of VFR and tourism type traffic that can be stimulated. The Phillipines is one of those markets that is generally under-served from Australia so QF should get in while the bilateral is tight and establish themsleves in MEL and BNE. If the bilateral is lifted we can expect Cebu to be quite aggressive in adding service so if QF/JQ aren't in there then it will be a lost opportunity.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:03 am

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 2):
In my own unavoidably biased view (I am Australian and my username is a giveaway) but one that I am concious of and take into account when making comments, the HK bilateral has been very liberal and generous to CX, moreso than QF/VA. If CX wants more rights, all it needs to do is compromise and allow Australian airlines more beyond rights to places where they want to fly, eg mainland China. At this point in time, lifting the cap for CX returns nothing to Australian carriers so they are obviously not interested.

I agree. In fact, I would have no problem if such bilaterals were a 1 for 1 basis to send out a message. 1 flight in and out of Australia to HK / China for Australian registered airlines per 1 flight in and out of HK / China to Australia for Chinese / HK airlines. Let the whingers whinge...

Quoting carryon (Reply 8):
While on the ground in Sydney yesterday Airbus finally confirmed it is seeking 420-minute ETOPS approval for the A350

7 hrs... Wow... One begins to wonder the real value in ETOPS or if it is serious... What is the number that would allow any two points in the globe to be connected over the most direct / remote route? ETOPS 420 / 7hrs must be getting close...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:33 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
As I said above, if I was JQ I would start MEL-MNL and, potentially, BNE-MNL.

I agree that MNL has potential for JQ, but MNL itself has little to offer apart from VFR. JQ pax would need to make their own way to KLO (for example) and I don't see 5J/PR/Z2 wanting to interline JQ pax. BNE-HKT should be easier for JQ.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:23 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 16):
I agree. In fact, I would have no problem if such bilaterals were a 1 for 1 basis to send out a message. 1 flight in and out of Australia to HK / China for Australian registered airlines per 1 flight in and out of HK / China to Australia for Chinese / HK airlines. Let the whingers whinge...

I have to point out that Australian Carriers cannot fly between Hong Kong and China because of not only the Hong Kong bilateral but also the China one. So linking the ability of Australian carriers to fly beyond Hong Kong into China, to us giving Hong Kong more frequencies is not a good idea. Where further liberalisation can work is if Hong Kong wanted to match what we can do through SIN and fly to places like India, remove caps on the number of pax Australian carriers can pick up on intra-asia services and more beyond rights into Europe. Those are all things that are within the power of Hong Kong to grant.

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 17):
I agree that MNL has potential for JQ, but MNL itself has little to offer apart from VFR. JQ pax would need to make their own way to KLO (for example) and I don't see 5J/PR/Z2 wanting to interline JQ pax. BNE-HKT should be easier for JQ.

I don't know, the way the domestic market is in the Philippines at the moment with just about everyone bleeding I'm sure JQ could find a way to convince someone to interline with them. But even if it is VFR traffic from MNL that is still an under-tapped market to and from Australia.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2591
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:27 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 18):
Where further liberalisation can work is if Hong Kong wanted to match what we can do through SIN and fly to places like India, remove caps on the number of pax Australian carriers can pick up on intra-asia services and more beyond rights into Europe. Those are all things that are within the power of Hong Kong to grant.

The only issue is that VA are unlikely to be particularly interested in beyond rights past HKG into Europe and QF have basically excluded themselves from such routes due to the EK partnership which requires all of QF's European services to transit through DXB.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5092
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:41 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 19):
due to the EK partnership which requires all of QF's European services to transit through DXB.

Do you have a source for that? The ONLY place I have seen that said is your posts. Of course I could have missed it, which is why I'm asking.

gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
sq256
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
As I said above, if I was JQ I would start MEL-MNL and, potentially, BNE-MNL.

My suggestion for JQ would be to triangulate MEL/BNE with MNL. Primarily ex-MEL, though have 1 p/w go via BNE in both directions. Similar to the old QF19/20 SYD-BNE triangulated arrangement prior to QF scrapping the MNL-BNE-MNL leg.
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 18):
But even if it is VFR traffic from MNL that is still an under-tapped market to and from Australia.

5J will mop up most of that with their 436Y seat A330. Filipino VFR traffic is very price sensitive (less so ex-AU than ex-DXB or ex-HKG) so many will probably self connect at SYD from MEL/BNE to get the low 5J fares (approx $350 rt at the moment).

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 19):
The only issue is that VA are unlikely to be particularly interested in beyond rights past HKG into Europe and QF have basically excluded themselves from such routes due to the EK partnership which requires all of QF's European services to transit through DXB.

Agreed - Australia probably doesn't have much use for beyond rights from HKG unless it is to China. However just because QF don't require beyond rights from HKG to EU right now doesn't mean they never will.
If I recall correctly the QF-EK alliance was only approved for 5 years to start with. So if for some reason it weren't to continue QF could see a use for HKG-EU rights. I highly doubt this though.
I haven't included VA in the equation as they don't have much desire to fly internationally on their own metal (QF is losing that desire too).
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2591
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:49 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 20):
Do you have a source for that? The ONLY place I have seen that said is your posts. Of course I could have missed it, which is why I'm asking.

I obviously do not have access to the formal agreement which has never been disclosed but it was fairly clear at the time of the JV's announcement that going forward QF would only be using DXB on the way to Europe. Many have suggested that QF could've protected some of the market it is rumoured to have lost by continuing to offer an Asian alternative alongside DXB (even if that just meant a continuation on BA beyond HKG) but most believe such an alternative is forbidden for the remainder of the current contract term at least.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
VA82
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:35 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 6:22 am

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 22):
5J will mop up most of that with their 436Y seat A330. Filipino VFR traffic is very price sensitive (less so ex-AU than ex-DXB or ex-HKG) so many will probably self connect at SYD from MEL/BNE to get the low 5J fares (approx $350 rt at the moment).

Precisely what I've done, and my mate from MEL is doing the exact same thing. Got the first lot of fares so $270 return including BNE-SYD flights.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 6:48 am

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 22):
Quoting tullamarine (Reply 19):The only issue is that VA are unlikely to be particularly interested in beyond rights past HKG into Europe and QF have basically excluded themselves from such routes due to the EK partnership which requires all of QF's European services to transit through DXB.
Agreed - Australia probably doesn't have much use for beyond rights from HKG unless it is to China. However just because QF don't require beyond rights from HKG to EU right now doesn't mean they never will.
If I recall correctly the QF-EK alliance was only approved for 5 years to start with. So if for some reason it weren't to continue QF could see a use for HKG-EU rights. I highly doubt this though.
I haven't included VA in the equation as they don't have much desire to fly internationally on their own metal (QF is losing that desire too).

As much as VA isn't interested, QF would definitely be interested in having the option to utilise more beyond rights out of a place like HKG. While I agree the current EK/QF arrangement precludes that, there is nothing to say in future that a joint QF/EK couldn't launch competitive services from places like SIN and HKG and I actually see that as a strategic way of EK using the QF partnership to diversify its own route network away from DXB by adding more options for direct Asia/Europe travel. It also nicely uses the 787's QF has on order.

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 22):
5J will mop up most of that with their 436Y seat A330. Filipino VFR traffic is very price sensitive (less so ex-AU than ex-DXB or ex-HKG) so many will probably self connect at SYD from MEL/BNE to get the low 5J fares (approx $350 rt at the moment).

I agree it is price sensitive traffic but it's also a fairly restricted and under-served market even with 5J coming in.

Quoting VA82 (Reply 24):
Precisely what I've done, and my mate from MEL is doing the exact same thing. Got the first lot of fares so $270 return including BNE-SYD flights.

The promo airfares won't last long. Cebu will land at a price point above that eventually.  
 
VA82
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:35 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:33 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 25):
The promo airfares won't last long. Cebu will land at a price point above that eventually.  

Yeah absolutely, they're already $100 more.

Could be interesting seeing VA and JQ trialed together!

Quote:
Lawyers for the ACCC yesterday told the Federal Court the cases should be heard separately because each airline had “different websites” and so made the disclosures of the additional charges in different ways.

The ACCC later said it was open to running the cases concurrently after the presiding judge suggested the regulator would need to “come up with ... a better reason than that” to run the cases separately.

Source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...ction/story-e6frg8zx-1227015862068
 
vhebb
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Thu Aug 07, 2014 10:37 pm

Qantas looks at PER-SIN relaunch options:

http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-tips-...elaunch-of-perth-singapore-flights

Qantas Operation/Financial Analysis:

http://www.aspireaviation.com/2014/08/07/qantas-defining-moment/

Interesting times ahead...
 
bwwt
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:45 am

Quoting vhebb (Reply 27):

Qantas looks at PER-SIN relaunch options:

http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-tips-...ights

What does a different approach mean? 737s perhaps?

It also appears that in addition to the A330 flights, QF is adding an extra SYD-HNL flight bringing it up to 4 weekly.
http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-repla...ith-airbus-a330s-on-honolulu-route

[Edited 2014-08-07 17:51:53]
 
User avatar
kaichinshih
Posts: 531
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 9:51 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:38 am

CI SYD services go daily this winter
3x weekly services TPE-SYD-CHC starts in December and ends in March
Complementing the 4x weekly TPE-SYD-AKL services
Seems like the SYD-CHC route is only seasonal though.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8472
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:55 am

Quoting bwwt (Reply 28):
t also appears that in addition to the A330 flights, QF is adding an extra SYD-HNL flight bringing it up to 4 weekly.

About bloody time! 4x weekly, 5x weekly at peak times/school holidays.

I actually read this as a good time. This was a route that - at a casual glance - it looked like Qantas were trying their hardest to kill. It looks like they have finally recognised its merits. That indicates that they are now looking at a smarter balancing of capacity between Qantas and Jetstar, as opposed to "farming out" all "leisure" routes to Jetstar.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 1:59 am

Quoting bwwt (Reply 28):
What does a different approach mean? 737s perhaps?

That's the first thought I had too. Fingers crossed it comes off!
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:37 am

Quoting bwwt (Reply 28):
What does a different approach mean? 737s perhaps?

My first thought is that it's going to be a 738. It's a long shot, but "different approach" might mean a PER-SIN-DXB A330.

Quoting kaichinshih (Reply 29):
CI SYD services go daily this winter
3x weekly services TPE-SYD-CHC starts in December and ends in March
Complementing the 4x weekly TPE-SYD-AKL services
Seems like the SYD-CHC route is only seasonal though.

Does that mean the flight will be daily year round with only SYD-CHC seasonal? Or the TPE-SYD-CHC service is seasonal?

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 30):
About bloody time! 4x weekly, 5x weekly at peak times/school holidays.

I actually read this as a good time. This was a route that - at a casual glance - it looked like Qantas were trying their hardest to kill. It looks like they have finally recognised its merits. That indicates that they are now looking at a smarter balancing of capacity between Qantas and Jetstar, as opposed to "farming out" all "leisure" routes to Jetstar.

   It looks like QF may see that there is a difference between discount leisure & premium leisure, and that JQ isn't serving premium leisure pax.
 
User avatar
EK413
Topic Author
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:51 am

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 198):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 184):
Quoting Sydscott (Reply 176):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 184):
QF's newest B737-800 VH-XZL Flinders operated its first commercial service 4th of August from Brisbane to Sydney as QF570. Qantas next delivery is B737-838 VH-ZXM Coonawarra, which is set to touch down in Australia on Wednesday 6th of August before entering service the following week.

Awesome... So does that take the 738 fleet up to 75 (including Jetconnect)? With the 767 retirement, and 737's and A330 heading to Qantas, is it safe to say that the QF fleet is actually not shrinking?

On another note, is there a website where we can see a historical snapshot of an airlines fleet at a particular time? EG, Like if I wanted to see what the QF fleet was in say 1996?

From the previous discussion thread. A great source would qffleetsource.com

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 1):
Do we really think that this is the right idea?

Consistent product offering across the A332 / A333 fleet just brilliant! QF will be able increase / decrease capacity and provide a consistent product.

Quoting vhebb (Reply 27):

Brilliant! Let there be light! To date couldn't comprehend how QF neglected the PER-SIN route. Let's pray ADL is on the radar too. (Hopeful thinking I know)

Quoting bwwt (Reply 28):
It also appears that in addition to the A330 flights, QF is adding an extra SYD-HNL flight bringing it up to 4 weekly.
http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-repla...route

More good news for the flying Roo!  

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
benjjk
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:35 am

Hello all. I'm a long time lurker to a.net (about 7-8 years now!) and finally decided to take the plunge. Got sick of saying "If I was a member I would definitely say ___"!

I look forward to joining the conversation. We're lucky in Australia to have such a vibrant aviation industry and community. Rarely a dull moment!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:24 am

Quoting bwwt (Reply 28):
What does a different approach mean? 737s perhaps?

It also appears that in addition to the A330 flights, QF is adding an extra SYD-HNL flight bringing it up to 4 weekly.
http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-repla...route

You may not be far wrong. I've always thought the logical move for QF was to take off the A330 and go with a 738 for PER-SIN but do it double daily. That would mean you could have a morning and afternoon departure to SIN on QFI with a late evening and very early morning departure from JQ.

Either that or it'll be an A332 route with the new product on. Either way a great move for PER. Now we just need them to take JNB seriously as a destination from PER and we're back in business!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 30):
I actually read this as a good time. This was a route that - at a casual glance - it looked like Qantas were trying their hardest to kill. It looks like they have finally recognised its merits. That indicates that they are now looking at a smarter balancing of capacity between Qantas and Jetstar, as opposed to "farming out" all "leisure" routes to Jetstar

Exactly! HNL has grown in popularity as a holiday spot and their premium resorts etc certainly attracts a clientelle that is willing to pay more for comfort. So hopefully this is the start of more things to come. (I also think the potential PER-SIN re-start is a result of this sort of thinking as well. Fingers crossed!)
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:33 am

I thought this was noteworthy in the following article and confirmed, finally, something which alot of us suspected.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviat...ments-in-asia-20140808-101rmq.html

Fair use excerpt:

"Mike Mrdak, the secretary of the Australian Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, said the government was seeking the ability for local carriers to use Hong Kong as a hub, along with regulatory approval of Jetstar Hong Kong, before it will allow Cathay Pacific to increase flights to Australia."

So we now have this in black and white from someone who would know. So if Hong Kong wants more traffic rights it needs to, basically, match what Australian carriers can do at SIN. Interesting times ahead for Hong Kong if they want more traffic rights.

Further to this:

http://australianaviation.com.au/201...ctionism-starting-to-emerge-mrdak/

Fair use excerpt:

"Mrdak said Australian airlines have been forced to operate to and beyond Hong Kong under some very onerous restrictions in the past.

“Hong Kong remains one of the most protectionist regimes in the region, if not globally,” Mrdak said."

[Edited 2014-08-07 23:40:26]
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:00 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 36):
“Hong Kong remains one of the most protectionist regimes in the region, if not globally,” Mrdak said."

Is that true though really?

It seems one of the most competitive locations to fly to as it is, along with having an airport that is approaching capacity without additional runways, particularly at peak periods.
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2531
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 9:13 am

Quoting benjjk (Reply 34):
Hello all. I'm a long time lurker to a.net (about 7-8 years now!) and finally decided to take the plunge. Got sick of saying "If I was a member I would definitely say ___"!

I look forward to joining the conversation. We're lucky in Australia to have such a vibrant aviation industry and community. Rarely a dull moment!

Welcome, mate!
Enjoy the discussions!
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8472
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:12 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 37):
It seems one of the most competitive locations to fly to as it is, along with having an airport that is approaching capacity without additional runways, particularly at peak periods.

So what? If your baseline is PRC then HKG might appear to have a liberal aviation policy, but it doesn't really. It is absolutely appropriate that the Australia-Singapore agreement is the starting point for negotiations with Hong Kong. If we look at the historical development of Australia-Europe links, and look at the markets that have pivotal role in those routes, we are talking about Singapore, Hong Kong, maybe Thailand and Malaysia, and the UAE. Of those, our most restrictive bilateral is with Hong Kong.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:48 pm

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 32):
It looks like QF may see that there is a difference between discount leisure & premium leisure, and that JQ isn't serving premium leisure pax.

I think theyve always seen that HNL has both, QF has been on the route all this time...

Quoting EK413 (Reply 33):
Consistent product offering across the A332 / A333 fleet just brilliant! QF will be able increase / decrease capacity and provide a consistent product.

I agree on the consistent product offering, my comment was if some of the fleet should be more premium heavy and some less. To cater for different route characteristics. Though someone else answered, the use of 333s and 332s should arrive at the same answer.
 
ben175
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 1:47 am

Interesting article on Australia - Hawaii travel

Note that Perth is pegged as a potential Hawaiian A330NEO destination. Rather far fetched at this point in time, but who would have thought 5 years ago PER would see five daily 11 hour flights to the Middle East? Anything is possible!
 
eaglefarm4
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:33 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:15 am

Yes Ben anything is possible and this was mooted a year or 2 ago as well i can recall, and don't forget Kenya Airways is also planning Perth flights by 2018 i recall.
tourismman
 
eaglefarm4
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:33 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:28 am

Sydney airport today had fog and although CAT 2 ILS was introduced earlier this year to help reduce diversions, there were still diversions.BNE had 12 international diversions as well as a few domestics as well.Sydney was down to single airport runway arrivals only on 34L as 34R does not have cat 2 fitted.So basically although more aircraft can land in foggy conditions only 1 runway can accommodate these aircraft, which means extensive holding is in place (60 mins holding) some aircraft still have to divert anyway.Interesting !!!!
tourismman
 
Airvan00
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:06 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 4:14 am

Quoting eaglefarm4 (Reply 43):
BNE had 12 international diversions as well as a few domestics as well.Sydney was down to single airport runway arrivals only on 34L as 34R does not have cat 2 fitted.So basically although more aircraft can land in foggy conditions only 1 runway can accommodate these aircraft,

34R is a bit short and unsuitable for most international aircraft.
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 5:11 am

Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 44):
34R is a bit short and unsuitable for most international aircraft.

Not really,

16L/34R at SYD is 2,438m
09/27 at MEL is 2,286m - often seen international GA/VN/FM arrivals and departures with A330 and TG/NZ/UA departures and arrivals on the 777.
14/32 at OOL is 2,492m - sees high-density A330 ops to KUL and NRT and 772 ops to SIN.

So really only unsuitable for A380, 747 & A340 ops and some of the longer 777 flights. Most flights into SYD can use 34R/16L if they had to.
 
 
skyhawkmatthew
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 6:03 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 45):
So really only unsuitable for A380, 747 & A340 ops and some of the longer 777 flights. Most flights into SYD can use 34R/16L if they had to.
Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 46):
When I worked there, 34 R was restricted to 767 and below.

From the ERSA:

Quote:
ACFT up to & including A300/B767 size may be processed to land on either of the parallel RWYs 16L/R or 34L/R.

A330 type aircraft operating domestic legs may be processed to land on either of the parallel RWYs 16L/R or 34L/R.

A340-600/B777-300/ER OPR RESTRICTIONS. In circumstances where no other RWY is AVBL, RWY16L/34R is AVBL for landings.
Qantas - The Spirit of Australia.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 6:09 am

Quoting ben175 (Reply 41):
Note that Perth is pegged as a potential Hawaiian A330NEO destination. Rather far fetched at this point in time, but who would have thought 5 years ago PER would see five daily 11 hour flights to the Middle East? Anything is possible!

PER-HNL makes very little sense even if the A330NEO can make it. Yields on that long-haul mission to a leisure destination would make it a challenge at the best of times.

It would need to rely on people willing to pay a premium to fly the route to transfer to HA's mainland US destinations, which is unlikely.

Looking at a market in its peak can be very misleading. Whether or not PER can sustain the amount of capacity it has today in a few years time, especially when the real tapering off from the mining industry occurs, will be very interesting to watch.
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread - Part 103

Sat Aug 09, 2014 6:25 am

Quoting skyhawkmatthew (Reply 47):
Quoting Airvan00 (Reply 46):

Was not aware, but the question then is why? Why restrict a runway, especially given MEL successfully uses its shorter runway for ops of aircraft larger.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos