Quoting bunumuring (Reply 148): Qantas will be replacing 3 engines with time-expired engines off the '747' fleet (no distinction given between the -400 and -400ER, sorry) as they become available. The fourth engine will stay on the plane in situ.

They will be RR engines from RB211 equipped 744s. Apart from looking substantially different from the RR's, the mounting of the GE's is different

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 156): They will be RR engines from RB211 equipped 744s. Apart from looking substantially different from the RR's, the mounting of the GE's is different

Thanks for that. Of course, we perfectionists would want four exact RR -400 engines on -OJA. I always preferred the look of RR engines: personal taste. I am glad that Qantas is ensuring that the correct engines go onto -OJA to ensure authenticity.

Qantas really is kicking goals at the moment with everything it is doing, and with -OJA specifically. Way to go!

Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 146): Quoting thai77w (Reply 150):There's a tweet being shared on Facebook today from a Perth news reporter stating QF will start 5x weekly to SIN, to be announced very soon. I think in an earlier thread, there was discussion that QF would re-start using 738's?

Honestly this has been so on-again-off-again that I'd wait to see it in a Qantas media release before I gave it any credence. 5x weekly doesn't really seem worth it to me, to be honest, but stranger things have happened.

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 153): Honestly this has been so on-again-off-again that I'd wait to see it in a Qantas media release before I gave it any credence. 5x weekly doesn't really seem worth it to me, to be honest, but stranger things have happened.

This is now official and it is indeed a 5 * weekly service with a 738. I doubt SQ are particularly worried about this very token effort.

i think it will increase to daily once its established

http://www.watoday.com.au/business/a...internal-memo-20150416-1mmciq.html

Has anyone seen this? About the poor on-time performance of QF at LHR

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): But that's the thing. In terms or roads this does not involve an assumption on my part. Look at what has been delivered:

This has been delivered for now, it doesn't have much to do with a greenfields airport that isn't yet built. There will need to be more works done by that stage

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): The good thing is that it is much less dense in terms of people around the airport and the Government has to deal with the geography with its initial construction of the runways etc anyway. So I don't see this as an issue. Nimbyism is always present unfortunately. That's why SYD has a curfew.

Im referring more to the areas where people are a problem, like trying to build more rail connections in the centre of Sydney etc.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): For alot of people on the Northern Beaches its easier to get to Newcastle by road and fly out of there. But in terms of population of Sydney you're not talking about significant numbers of people.

Northern beaches, North Shore, all of it, probably contains 1M people more or less (I would guess without checking). That's a lot of people to move to SWZ.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): Again, I'm not advocating closing it overnight. This should be a 15 to 20 year process to build capacity up at Sydney West. Why write that investment off? Because the land SYD sits on is in a prime location for all sorts of re-development. From an expanded port and bringing the freight rail line all the way to the port, to a new Naval Base, to a cruise ship terminal facility, to residential and mixed use housing there are so many uses for a prime piece of land that close to Sydney.

That is a valid point and in time there may be other uses for the land that may be profitable.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): As for the London / New York arguments about complimentary airports, I prefer the Hong Kong example. If we're going to do something, lets do it properly, lets build it with growth in mind and lets put it in a place where it can be expanded while we use the old airport site, which is prime Hong Kong land, for other things.

HKG is exceptional, like SIN. There is just no space. The first time I flew in there I was blown away by how dense it is. They have to even reclaim the sea to build their airport! Sydney has the space and the spread that would support a multi airport model.

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 143): . I reckon the redevelopment of the latter site for medium/high density housing, with outstanding transport links already existing including two underground heavy rail stations

I think there is a perception that the public transport links in the inner city areas are good and so redevelopment of SYD will be ok. I think they are poor, which speaks volumes to what I think it is like out further. Sydney is a low density city and its public transport network is hard to get viable with low traffic volumes (hence the reliance on a car). Lots of people wont want to walk more than 10mins to public transport and wait for 5 more, let alone more than these figures. Go get your car out they say. But that is what we see in Sydney a lot. Its a catch 22 situation, they wont build it unless the demand is there, and to get the demand they need it. No, the public transport system in Sydney isn't great. And connectivity is terrible. Eg, to get from my house in the North Sydney area to SYD, I need to walk 10 mins, get a bus to Wynyard, train to Central and then train to SYD. All up about 60 mins and lots of walking, where a car takes about 25-35.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 144): SWZ will be way off the bottom left corner of this map, which shows us where the vast, vast (ie 90%+) of Sydney's global economy activity is based.

Awesome image, thanks!

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 147): CBD by something like the second harbor tunnel or bridge

He already has a freeway close to the bridge, lets not confuse the issue by giving him something else in that general area!

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 153):

Here you go!

http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/med...s-part-of-wa-schedule-improvements

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 156):

Pretty interesting article. Im pleased to hear the A380 fleet is being used at the higher end of utilisation (assuming this is across airlines). But surprised they didn't already fly faster when they were late to avoid this issue in the first place?

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 154): I doubt SQ are particularly worried about this very token effort.

Except that now all the QF frequent flyers are going to use the service. And perhaps QF can charge the Qantas premium, cutting the cream off SQ's drink?

On the AKL route, could the 738s operate it and allow PER-AKL to move to a year round service?

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 158): Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 153): Here you go! http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/med...ments

Indeed!

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 159): Quoting tullamarine (Reply 154):I doubt SQ are particularly worried about this very token effort. Except that now all the QF frequent flyers are going to use the service. And perhaps QF can charge the Qantas premium, cutting the cream off SQ's drink?

Very true... and with all the 737s QF has at hand there's not much keeping them at 5x weekly longer term. Nor any reason A330s couldn't sub in at peak times.

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 159): On the AKL route, could the 738s operate it and allow PER-AKL to move to a year round service?

No chance. Even if it could be done on paper (which I doubt) there's the alternate issue at the PER end which complicates things and would push it beyond what the type can do.

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 160): No chance. Even if it could be done on paper (which I doubt) there's the alternate issue at the PER end which complicates things and would push it beyond what the type can do.

What about the -900ER?

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 161): What about the -900ER?

Nope.

Re Sydney West...
Has anyone 'official' or even an a.netter suggested closing nearby Camden Airport and selling it off for redevelopment to help fund a larger Sydney West? I guess Camden's heavy 'use' of gliders precludes its operations being simply transferred to Sydney West? I am familiar with the airport and have flown joy lights from it but know very little about the GA side of things...
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

737-800 range fully loaded is approx. 5,700km when equipped with winglets, 737-900ER approx. 6,045km when equipped with the optional 2x aux. tanks.

Great circle distance PER-AKL is 5,348km so your -900ER might just be possible eastbound, but you have to remember the westbound sector is against the wind and then you're having to carry additional fuel to meet flight planning requirements (alternates, contingencies, etc). The latter would be a thing that would stop you eastbound as well.

Great circle PER-SIN, by way of comparison, is only 3,896km.

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 159): perhaps QF can charge the Qantas premium, cutting the cream off SQ's drink?

Do you think there are many premium flyers who would pay a premium to fly on a lesser product with inferior frequency options?.... methinks not.

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 160): On the AKL route, could the 738s operate it and allow PER-AKL to move to a year round service? No chance. Even if it could be done on paper (which I doubt) there's the alternate issue at the PER end which complicates things and would push it beyond what the type can do.

Apart from the obvious issue of range for the 738s, you also have a major product issue. PER-AKL is a red-eye service. There wouldn't be a lot of premium pax queueing up for a 7 hour overnight flight in a 738 when the alternative is a flat-bed on a 789. If QF are going to be serious with PER-AKL, it has to be year round using the A332.

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 159): On the AKL route, could the 738s operate it and allow PER-AKL to move to a year round service?

Maybe more of an a321NEO-LR route?

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 166): Apart from the obvious issue of range for the 738s, you also have a major product issue. PER-AKL is a red-eye service. There wouldn't be a lot of premium pax queueing up for a 7 hour overnight flight in a 738 when the alternative is a flat-bed on a 789. If QF are going to be serious with PER-AKL, it has to be year round using the A332.

Good point... I know which flight I'd be on!

Quoting zkncj (Reply 167): Maybe more of an a321NEO-LR route?

Perfect for a 757!?    Probably more of a less-than-daily A332 is my guess.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 165): Do you think there are many premium flyers who would pay a premium to fly on a lesser product with inferior frequency options?.... methinks not.

If it was a daytime flight I'd choose Qantas - even at a (very slight) premium. Only time I'd pick Singapore would be a night flight where a bed is important to me.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 165):

There are those in the crowd that will pay because it is QF, oneworld, Australian, part of Qantas Frequent Flyer. Yes, I think there are some that will pick QF over SQ in this case.

QF reinstating the PER-SIN makes me think about a dual strategy for QF, post EK.....

Have 2 flights to LHR as now, (maybe more as 2 slots are leased out) but 1/2 via Middle east , 1 A380 from SYD and 789 from BNE, going through DOH - codeshare with QR, thereby giving QR a SYD service) which is preferable for people flying to Europe and 1/2 via SIN, (A380 from MEL and 789 from ADL) (maybe dare i say codeshare with BA) for people flying to LHR. thereby giving the 4 main ports an option to fly to europe on QF metal.

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 158): Quoting Sydscott (Reply 141): For alot of people on the Northern Beaches its easier to get to Newcastle by road and fly out of there. But in terms of population of Sydney you're not talking about significant numbers of people. Northern beaches, North Shore, all of it, probably contains 1M people more or less (I would guess without checking). That's a lot of people to move to SWZ.

The population of the said Northern area alone would not justify keeping SYD open, not even close. But, if you include the entire population of Sydney that would be either closer to SYD or find SYD more convenient than the new second airport then you would have a much larger chunk of Sydney's population which would be a different story.

As for Sydscott's claim that ""For alot of people on the Northern Beaches its easier to get to Newcastle by road and fly out of there"" that itself is kind of laughable. By the time the said people get to St. Ives, Gordon / Pymble, Wahroonga (depending on the route they take to get to the M1) they are not very far from the M2 which will get them to SYD (via M2 / LCT / Warringah Freeway / SHT / ED) in about 50 mins give or take depending on the time of day. I can't see how driving up to Newcastle would be "easier" for those from Sydney's Northern Beaches. Furthermore, when they consider the flight options / destinations / flexibility / etc. they have out of SYD v. Newcastle SYD instantly becomes a no-brainer  

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 146): Quoting bunumuring (Reply 148): I really want Sydney West to be given a better name. And not something like 'Greater Western Sydney Airport' (apologies to the AFL: I can't stand the naming of the GWS Giants) or 'Badgerys Creek'. My suggestion would be an indigenous one such as 'Sydney Eora Airport' to recognise the indigenous lands it sits on, or even 'Sydney ANZAC International Airport' ... The Daily Telegraph article mentioned that "John Bradfield" (designer/engineer for the Harbour Bridge) airport has been touted as an early candidate name.

How about naming it after the guy who was PM at the time it was finally given the green light to go ahead after decades of debate... 'Abbott Airport' or 'Captain's Airport'      

BTW that was a joke for those with thick skin...  

I hope the public will be allowed to submit ideas or get to vote on the name though...

[Edited 2015-04-17 03:02:53]

Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport is called such because it is located at .... Tullamarine.
Sydney's Badgery's Creek should be called Badgery's Creek. Why? 'cause it will be located at......Badgery's Creek.
Ask most Aussies the name of the current airport in Sydney. They shall answer MASCOT......Why? 'cause that's where it is located.

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 172): Have 2 flights to LHR as now, (maybe more as 2 slots are leased out) but 1/2 via Middle east , 1 A380 from SYD and 789 from BNE, going through DOH - codeshare with QR, thereby giving QR a SYD service) which is preferable for people flying to Europe and 1/2 via SIN, (A380 from MEL and 789 from ADL) (maybe dare i say codeshare with BA) for people flying to LHR. thereby giving the 4 main ports an option to fly to europe on QF metal.

That's probably not going to work well at all. QF couldn't make PER/BNE/ADL-SIN connecting with SYD/MEL-LHR via SIN work. Splitting your traffic via DOH/SIN further dilutes the ability of QF to pool/hub via their stopover point. QF previously had their LHR services going through HKG/SIN (and prior to that BKK and SIN) and neither worked. Going through DOH only works if QF suddenly gets into bed with QR (and exits the relationship with EK).

All this talk of a Sydney West is good, but IMHO the first priority for anything aviation related to benefit the economy is to make all flights between New Zealand and Australia as a domestic flight. Fares would drop as the Customs/international fees would be removed and more passengers would fly as for NZL and Australian pax, a passport wouldn't be needed.

Yes there would be a problem with non NZL/Aussie residents using the flights so maybe make those residents only carry their drivers licence and give them a separate exit with a 'D' stamp or something similar on their boarding passes?

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 165): Do you think there are many premium flyers who would pay a premium to fly on a lesser product with inferior frequency options?.... methinks not.

There are an awful lot of people who would do absolutely that. QF charge a premium on almost every single route they fly because there are people who fly them no matter what. SQ have always had a superior product to QF, and yet QF holds its own in SIN, even post-LHR (PER being the notable exception).

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 172):

I'd like to try whatever it is you are smoking. This is one of the most bizarre theories I've read since the days of Koruman's hair-brained ideas.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 176): there would be a problem with non NZL/Aussie residents using the flights

That wouldn't so much be an issue as the only feasible way in which 'domestic' flights could work would be to form a common immigration market, similar to the Schengen Zone. There is probably zero chance of Australia agreeing to such an arrangement unless New Zealand really tightened its visa requirements, as it is substantially easier to migrate to New Zealand than Australia. Then there is the small issue of bio-security. I guess they could still encompass this like how Tasmania and Hawaii do, but there is no chance of Australia allowing people arriving from abroad to not be subject to AQIS screening. You took us to the WTO for crying out loud because we refused to import your apples!

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 165): Do you think there are many premium flyers who would pay a premium to fly on a lesser product with inferior frequency options?.... methinks not.

Most of these status frequent flyers don't get any say in the matter. It's their employers who decide who they fly with.

Those who do have a choice obviously don't care, otherwise they wouldn't be status frequent flyers in the first place. As RyanairGuru mentioned, QF's fare are already fairly inflated right across the network.

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 172): QF reinstating the PER-SIN makes me think about a dual strategy for QF, post EK.....

I think you'd find that QF's strategy in the hypothetical world where the EK partnership falls apart would involve rather a lot more of this rather than anything else you're suggesting:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 177): That wouldn't so much be an issue as the only feasible way in which 'domestic' flights could work would be to form a common immigration market, similar to the Schengen Zone.

I don't think that treating SYD-AKL the same as SYD-MEL is feasible, but I do think the existing process has a lot of room for streamlining and improvement.

It shouldn't be hard to automatically pre-clear most passengers (ie AU/NZ passport holders, those from nations who we share data with, those with confirmed visas etc) then deal those few who are flagged at check-in (with immigration officers on hand to deal with any issues).

Then it's just a matter of doing a quick passport/ticket check at the gate during boarding and off we go. While you would still need a passport to travel initially, longer term I would expect NFC-enabled drivers licenses/photocards to be acceptable for AU/NZ citizens.

I'm sure that there would be some leaks, but I think the huge benefits that such a move would offer would far outweigh them.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 178): I don't think that treating SYD-AKL the same as SYD-MEL is feasible, but I do think the existing process has a lot of room for streamlining and improvement.

Or even get rid of the requirement to complete they stupid pre-depature cards and questioning!

Re the Qantas Perth-Singapore flights:
Is this the furtherest from Australia that QF 737-800s fly? Just curious...
Also, have there been any whispers of any other international destinations from Perth, now that QF is in very cautious expansion mode... I know posters here over the years have suggested QF fly Perth-Dubai but considering Emirates has just dropped a Dubai-Perth service, it would seem unlikely to me.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 173): The population of the said Northern area alone would not justify keeping SYD open, not even close. But, if you include the entire population of Sydney that would be either closer to SYD or find SYD more convenient than the new second airport then you would have a much larger chunk of Sydney's population which would be a different story.

Fair point, agreed.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 176): All this talk of a Sydney West is good, but IMHO the first priority for anything aviation related to benefit the economy is to make all flights between New Zealand and Australia as a domestic flight.

IMO, and some Kiwis will flame me for it, but Aus and NZ should really be much more integrated in so many ways. NZ was offered a vote to become part of the Australian federation the first time it was run, imagine what it would have looked like if the WA voters were a little less secessionist at the time!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 177): Quoting 777ER (Reply 176):there would be a problem with non NZL/Aussie residents using the flightsThat wouldn't so much be an issue as the only feasible way in which 'domestic' flights could work would be to form a common immigration market, similar to the Schengen Zone. There is probably zero chance of Australia agreeing to such an arrangement unless New Zealand really tightened its visa requirements, as it is substantially easier to migrate to New Zealand than Australia. Then there is the small issue of bio-security. I guess they could still encompass this like how Tasmania and Hawaii do, but there is no chance of Australia allowing people arriving from abroad to not be subject to AQIS screening

One thing I don't like over our Customs arrival is the fact its easier for others to arrive here who Australia don't want. IMHO if Australian don't want them in the first place then its saying something. We provide a back door entry system once they become Kiwis. I agree we need to tighten up over that but I believe our bio security requirements are up there among the best as such a small thing could destroy a big economy like the kiwifruit industry which is big.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 177): You took us to the WTO for crying out loud because we refused to import your apples!

And look who won over what was proven to be simply outdated Australian excuses. The crying from the farmers proved it was simply a protecting Australian farmers income issue and not really over bio security.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 178): I'm sure that there would be some leaks, but I think the huge benefits that such a move would offer would far outweigh them.

Fully agree. Look at how well the USA/Canada entry requirements for each country works well. Only need a certain drivers licence to enter each others countries with the rest requiring the normal visa entry rules

Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 182): Quoting 777ER (Reply 176):All this talk of a Sydney West is good, but IMHO the first priority for anything aviation related to benefit the economy is to make all flights between New Zealand and Australia as a domestic flight.IMO, and some Kiwis will flame me for it, but Aus and NZ should really be much more integrated in so many ways. NZ was offered a vote to become part of the Australian federation the first time it was run, imagine what it would have looked like if the WA voters were a little less secessionist at the time!

This is certainly one thing that can be looked at IMHO like talk of a single currency since we are both countries biggest visitors.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 183): Quoting Qf2220 (Reply 182):Quoting 777ER (Reply 176):All this talk of a Sydney West is good, but IMHO the first priority for anything aviation related to benefit the economy is to make all flights between New Zealand and Australia as a domestic flight.IMO, and some Kiwis will flame me for it, but Aus and NZ should really be much more integrated in so many ways. NZ was offered a vote to become part of the Australian federation the first time it was run, imagine what it would have looked like if the WA voters were a little less secessionist at the time! This is certainly one thing that can be looked at IMHO like talk of a single currency since we are both countries biggest visitors.

My own personal view is that the whole Australian federation needs simplification. If what I think should happen happens, NZ would be easy and fairly integratable into the overall Federation. But that is one for the pub.

Oh PER-SIN......... That will never come back.....       

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 185):

Was it as you expected? Ie 5pw on a 738? Or were other iterations considered (can you say)?

Quoting bunumuring (Reply 181): Is this the furtherest from Australia that QF 737-800s fly? Just curious...

yes, although BNE-PER is only 120 miles less...

Quoting qf789 (Reply 188): I do wonder if they could operate a seasonal service to JNB over the weekend using one of the A332's that would normally just sit around. They have been successful with AKL of which they will be starting earlier in latter part of this year, so I do wonder if they can do something similar with JNB. What's everyone's thoughts on that?

I wonder how far off they are from being able to base an A330 in PER to do some sort of split op. Eg 3pw JNB, 4pw Asia (maybe up to two Asian ports, eg HKG and NRT, though preferably just one).

Quoting qf789 (Reply 188): as their A330 fleet is pretty stretched at the moment

Had a return flight on the BNE-SYD-BNE sectors with QF today on QF503 and QF546 and I if today was anything to go by I had the impression that the A332 fleet was underutilised. I know the A333 fleet is very stretched, but the A332's were a different story - I know just one day isn't anything to go by, but having been on an A332 on QF503 today, I knew -EBM was sitting at BNE overnight to be able to operate the 6.30am departute to position to Sydney. It was a good use of positioning for it, but there were so many spare seats it was laughable, plus breakfast was a joke. What made up for it was my first time on an A332 and that we arrived at the gate in SYD 20 minutes early.

In my honest opinion, I would see a better use for the 737-900ER in the QF fleet (amd VA too) over the A332 except WHEN the capacity is really only necessary - would have made a loss making flight on todays QF503 potentially into a profitable one if a 737-800 or -900ER had been used. The return 546 would definitely have been able to have utilised a 739ER - barely a spare seat in economy.

Quoting Bluebird191 (Reply 190): but the A332's were a different story - I know just one day isn't anything to go by, but having been on an A332 on QF503 today, I knew -EBM was sitting at BNE overnight to be able to operate the 6.30am departute to position to Sydney

EBM has actually done a series of rotations between BNE and SYD today so I'm wondering if it was a last minute sub for an unavailable B73H?

Either that, or the flights might have been really chockers from SYD-BNE.

G'day

Quoting Bluebird191 (Reply 190): return flight on the BNE-SYD-BNE sectors with QF today

Where I live Sundays are not necessarily the busiest days in any airlines schedule.  

I doubt this is any different down under ...   


Cheers

Peter

Quoting Bluebird191 (Reply 190): I know the A333 fleet is very stretched, but the A332's were a different story - I know just one day isn't anything to go by, but having been on an A332 on QF503 today, I knew -EBM was sitting at BNE overnight to be able to operate the 6.30am departute to position to Sydney.

Weekends are quiet times for the domestic fleet, the A332 no exception. Monday-Friday they are busy plying the SYD-BNE-MEL triangle along with the transcontinental services to PER.

Quoting Bluebird191 (Reply 190): In my honest opinion, I would see a better use for the 737-900ER in the QF fleet (amd VA too) over the A332 except WHEN the capacity is really only necessary - would have made a loss making flight on todays QF503 potentially into a profitable one if a 737-800 or -900ER had been used.

Which is really only weekends, which is kind of pointless. The 739 wouldn't be that much of a capacity jump over the 738's and can't match the A332 in terms of capacity, a 739 wouldn't cut it on a peak hour SYD-MEL-BNE service currently serviced by a A332. The only way you could match a A332 is by deploying a 738 in tandem with a 739 (which would give you more capacity than a single A332) but would QF/VA be able to necessarily have the necessary slots/gate space in SYD/MEL/BNE during the morning/evening peak?

It's not just purely about costs, it also about revenue. QF/VA wouldn't be able to deploy their revised business class product on the 738/9 and also can't match the number of business class seats offered. You use a 739 and that's an awful lot of missed revenue opportunities. In the current situation, low load factors on weekends are a small price to pay in the overall scheme of things.

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 192): Where I live Sundays are not necessarily the busiest days in any airlines schedule.

Actually, I would have thought that this particular Sunday should be rather busy inbound to SYD as it marks the end of the NSW school holidays. Maybe all the kids flew to Japan instead as our QF 747 flights back on Friday night were chockers.  

Quoting qf789 (Reply 195): The original poster mentioned the flight to SYD left BNE at 630am. I wouldn't imagine that there would be many families wanting to catch a flight of that duration at that time of the morning.

Missed that, sorry. Then positioning it must be. In one of the earlier threads it was said that JQ will sometimes fly their 788s empty on positioning flights rather than carry the additional staffing and catering costs associated with passengers (I have been a victim of this), but I would imagine that as the A332 and the staff on board are providing other domestic services during the day (unlike the JQ flights which are repositioning for international purposes and departing from the international terminal) that it might as well carry passengers.

Quoting Singapore 777 (Reply 191): so am wondeing if it wad a last minute sub

Believe it or not but it wasn't - had been scheduled on for a few months, hence why I had booked the particular flight. No last minute subs - purely a regularly scheduled flight with -EBM.

Australian Aviation Thread Part 119 is now up and running, please direct all discussion to this new thread.