Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:01 am

Quoting sq256 (Reply 149):
I know QF/CX's relationship is like SQ/UA (both frosty and both in the same alliances), but I can see QF objecting if the unlikely rumour of CX buying a VA stake does occur.

I'd suggest most of the airports and tourism industry would do the same. Having one airline own VA would be terrible for the Australian economy.
 
TN486
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:08 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:31 am

Quoting timtam (Reply 143):
The reality is the grounding had very little long term impact on Qantas and its loyal passengers. The vast majority did not blame Qantas for the grounding and understood the reasons for it. In fact in many peoples eyes Qantas earnt respect for making a difficult but correct decision.

The grounding was a huge disaster for Qantas unions - it was one of the biggest own goals in Australian industrial relations history. It handed Joyce a board mandate to restructure the workforce and he has very successfully done this and pretty much eliminated the cost advantage VA used to have.

I agree with every word. Also VA saw it as "manna from heaven", another own goal.
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
 
aerohottie
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:55 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 150):
I'd suggest most of the airports and tourism industry would do the same. Having one airline own VA would be terrible for the Australian economy.

Why? How would CX buying a share and partnering with VA instead of QF on the Aus-HKG route make a difference... if anything it is currently a OneWorld monopoly, CX siding with VA would add frequencies and increase competition.

Nobody was suggesting CX would be a sole shareholder (at least not from what I saw).
I think VA re-aligning with CX for Northern Asia, SQ for SE Asia and indian subcontinent, EY for ME and Europe/Africa, and UA for North America, ala NZ would make a great deal of sense
What?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 1:10 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 152):
I think VA re-aligning with CX for Northern Asia, SQ for SE Asia and indian subcontinent, EY for ME and Europe/Africa, and UA for North America, ala NZ would make a great deal of sense

so are you suggesting the present inconclusive ownership of VA is a good thing? Sugar Daddies willing to sign at the Bank while JB plays them off against each other with the aid of Elizabeth Byrne and continues to pursue his Qantas 2 dream
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 2:06 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 150):
Having one airline own VA would be terrible for the Australian economy.

At the moment, there can't be a sole owner, but Singapore could be a majority owner, assuming Branson sides with them.

The only share bundle for sale - that we know of - is Air NZ's 26% or 25.9% to be exact. Singapore has 23% so buying the NZ black would give them 49%. They would need the support of at least Branson (10%) for control.

Alternatively, Singapore could buy 3% of the free float on the open market, giving them over 50%. They already have approval of the FIRB for that.

Cathay couldn't achieve majority control if it only buys the NZ block unless they had Branson and pretty much all of the free float onside - unless Singapore or Etihad decided to sell to, or side with, Cathay.

I think it's unlikely, but not impossible (at the right price), that Singapore would sell to Cathay, but who knows what Etihad would do?

This is all assuming that anyone wants to buy the total Air NZ block, or that anyone wants majority control, but everything has its price.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
timtam
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:02 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 2:20 am

CX seeking to buy into VA could create a huge diplomatic issue after Jetstar HK was blocked.

Qantas would have a very strong and compelling argument it could put to the Australian government about inequality and unfair competition. CX might struggle to get past FIRB.

It would be very foolish of CX to pursue VA after Jetstar HK was blocked. CX is a smart operator and is not that foolish.

Most likely this is a merchant banker's rumour to give the impression that there is more competition for the stake than there really is in order to push the price up for those parties that really want the stake.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 4:31 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 152):
Why? How would CX buying a share and partnering with VA instead of QF on the Aus-HKG route make a difference... if anything it is currently a OneWorld monopoly, CX siding with VA would add frequencies and increase competition.

....but you would have the two Australian airlines controlled by two strong entities. For example who would SIA code share with if CX owned VA? Think of all of the other airlines that fly into Australia and need a partnership with a domestic airline
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3513
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 4:58 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 154):
Cathay couldn't achieve majority control if it only buys the NZ block unless they had Branson and pretty much all of the free float onside - unless Singapore or Etihad decided to sell to, or side with, Cathay.
Quoting timtam (Reply 155):
CX seeking to buy into VA could create a huge diplomatic issue after Jetstar HK was blocked.

The CX rumour is just a garbage rumour. Consider the history and background:

1. CX's largest airline shareholder is Air China. Ergo, indirectly, Air China would be investing in VA. I doubt the Government would think that in Australia's national interest.
2. Australia and Hong Kong have been at loggerheads consistently over the last 20 to 25 years on air rights negotiations;
3. Australia has ignored Hong Kong requests for both a Free Trade Agreement and a Double Tax Agreement;
4. Australia is currently being sued by Big Tobacco via the 1993 Hong Kong Investment Treaty.

Contrast that to the Australia - Singapore relationship, or the Australia - New Zealand one, and it's easy to see who would get approval and who would not.
 
aryonoco
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 1:51 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 7:47 am

I think at the moment the FIRB would be positively inclined to approve most foreign entities investing in VA, bar anyone from HK.

I'm generally as pro free trade, anti nationalism and anti protectionism as it gets, and yet even I would have a problem with CX buying into VA after the Jetstar HK disaster.

(And yes I do blame the HK Government for that. It was the wrong decision, unbecoming of HK's image, but the HK government is doing a lot of things now that are unbecoming of HK's image, so no surprise).
 
Nouflyer
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:38 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 8:45 am

Quoting aryonoco (Reply 158):
I'm generally as pro free trade, anti nationalism and anti protectionism as it gets, and yet even I would have a problem with CX buying into VA after the Jetstar HK disaster.

What has that got to do with it? Are you suggesting tit-for-tat retribution?

Jetstar Hong Kong was a disaster for one reason and one reason only. Qantas had left countless pieces of documentation around the world showing that all Jetstar franchises are controlled from Melbourne and use local flags of convenience.

As such, it was impossible to put together a coherent application which was compliant with Hong Kong law. Qantas tried it on with a non-compliant application and then threw their toys from the cot when the rule of law prevailed.
 
QF175
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 8:59 am

FlyCorporate will commence flights from Brisbane to Armidale on Monday 1 August 2016. Flights will be operated by the airline's fleet of Saab 340 aircraft with fares to go on sale tomorrow. FlyCorporate recently commenced services between Brisbane and Coffs Harbour:

Source - FlyCorporate
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 9:34 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 152):
I think VA re-aligning with CX for Northern Asia, SQ for SE Asia and indian subcontinent, EY for ME and Europe/Africa, and UA for North America, ala NZ would make a great deal of sense
Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
The CX rumour is just a garbage rumour. Consider the history and background:
CX in the same bed as SQ is as likely as QF in bed with CX. They're fierce competitors to say the least. It'll be one or the other owning VA, but not both together.
SQ would not cede any potential VA feed to CX to any part of Asia. It's a surprise that SQ currently allows VA European traffic to go to EY rather than with them (albeit their network in Europe is smaller than EY).

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 152):
if anything it is currently a OneWorld monopoly, CX siding with VA would add frequencies and increase competition.

It may look a monopoly on appearance, but in reality they are just 2 competitors, QF and CX don't co-operate on scheduling/pricing and there are very few code-shares that QF and CX put on each others flights.

[Edited 2016-05-10 02:40:13]
319_320_321_332_333_359_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W_788_789
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10117
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 9:36 am

Since changing from NZ Airpoints to QF FF, I've noticed that QF offered recently double status points after reading the Australian Frequent Flyer forums. It appears this offer is done yearly, but is it only offered once per year or twice per year?
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
747m8te
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 11:18 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 162):

Since changing from NZ Airpoints to QF FF, I've noticed that QF offered recently double status points after reading the Australian Frequent Flyer forums. It appears this offer is done yearly, but is it only offered once per year or twice per year?

They also offer it randomly throughout the year to individual frequent flyers of all tiers (myself and various FF friends often get personal offers via email offering double status always at different times to one another), usually towards the end of the renewal period as a way to entice FFs to top up and book some flights to reach the next level.
Flown on:
DHC8Q200,DHC8Q300,DHC8Q400, EMB145,E170,E175,E190, A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A380, MD80, B712,B733,B734,B737,B738,B743,B744,B744ER,B762,B763,B77W
 
TN486
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:08 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:38 pm

With EY's new management structure imminent, is it possible a rethink of the VA stake could also be in the mix?
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:51 pm

I don't know if EY will sell its stake as that could leave it exposed if VA's owners decided to cut their codeshares. It just would leave things far more uncertain for them.

IF SQ decided to take over VA, through buying the NZ and EY stakes, how could that work in terms of its split international and domestic structure? With the small stock holding on the stock exchange and Branson's stake, it would be interesting to see how that could be achieved.

At this stage though, there's still a fair few outcomes that could occur which do cause more uncertainly for VA at a time it desperately needs to focus on gaining traction and finding a way forward.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15292
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 12:54 pm

Quoting allrite (Reply 148):
Though CX are said to be interested in using VA to get more capacity to Australia via the back-door Qantas would surely fight it as anti-competitive. And there must still be the issue of slots.

That is one aspect of it, but I think what most airlines are starting to realise is that due to the cost cutting in airlines, and excessive regulation for low capacity and general aviation is that the aviation industry is dying. Airlines will be forced to invest into airlines that have the necessary training capacity to generate the pilots needed for the 10,000+ large capacity airliners on order.

Quoting timtam (Reply 155):
Qantas would have a very strong and compelling argument it could put to the Australian government about inequality and unfair competition. CX might struggle to get past FIRB.

I doubt that. For a start, between QF, NZ, EY, SQ, and CX which does not have government ownership (either directly or via their state sovereign investment fund) ?

From the outset I had explained on here why the application in Hong Kong would fail. Qantas is used to working with regulators for their Jetstar franchises that require majority local ownership in order to be granted international traffic rights. Qantas through service agreements still runs the backend airline operations in Australia for these franchises. On paper it is shown there is majority local ownership on the first level of shareholding, however if you look deeper the actual local ownership levels are very murky. For example if a large locally incorporated institutional fund is the first level investor (ie the investor that owns shares in the airline), however if that fund is 100% foreign owned, is that a local or overseas ownership ? I have seen arguments both ways.

The law in Hong Kong allows 100% foreign ownership, what is required is for the airline to be based in Hong Kong ("principle place of business"). Qantas/Jetstar thought incorporating an off the shelf company with a Hong Kong address ticked that box. It does not, Hong Kong wants like every other government to broaden its tax base, it wants to employ people locally, train people locally, and to have sustainable industries.

What Jetstar HKG was about was a franchise model where a lot of the high value back end operations that are required to run an airline were not being performed locally, they were required to enter a service agreement with Qantas that takes that revenue out of Hong Kong. The aircraft also were to be leased outside Hong Kong, leaving Jetstar HKG as nothing much more than a shell. The simply could not demonstrate that the principle place of business was in Hong Kong.

The principle place of business test has been around since the 1980s introduced by ICAO mainly as a response to the EU. Airlines in the EU needed a way to be able to work in different countries to operate domestically (within the same country or within the EU) and internationally outside the EU. It became impractical to think of a way to make a majority ownership rule work, but the principle place of business test is easier to demonstrate.

Since Hong Kong was handed over around this time back to China, the "Basic Law" which is like the mini Hong Kong constitution adopted the most recent ICAO recommendations, that was the principle place of business test. Qantas just had bad advice when they tried then to transform the application from 100% overseas ownership to majority local control. The shareholding register did not determine their fate, it was their business model.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
1. CX's largest airline shareholder is Air China. Ergo, indirectly, Air China would be investing in VA. I doubt the Government would think that in Australia's national interest.

Cathay and Air China basically have the same level of investment in each other, around 25%.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
2. Australia and Hong Kong have been at loggerheads consistently over the last 20 to 25 years on air rights negotiations;

Yes and no. Hong Kong has always wanted a true open skies agreement whereby airlines of both countries would have unlimited between and beyond rights. Australia (Qantas) has insisted on beyond rights from Hong Kong, however has never been willing to grant beyond rights to Hong Kong. I dont think that attitude has changed much, the response is why should we give you that, you use more of the capacity than we (Qantas) do.

Someone who is trade focused will one day realise this is directly impacting on Australias growth and competitiveness. There is 3 times the Australian population living in the equivalent area of the greater Sydney basin around Hong Kong, and Hong Kong is the second largest international air freight hub in the world.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
3. Australia has ignored Hong Kong requests for both a Free Trade Agreement and a Double Tax Agreement;

This is news to me, do you have a source ? Cathay is the second largest employer of international airline pilots in Australia behind Qantas. The current taxation arrangements are unworkable, the pilots have to pay tax in both Australia and Hong Kong.

A free trade agreement would also be very welcome, there are literally hundreds of Australian companies that have the "China" office in Hong Kong.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
4. Australia is currently being sued by Big Tobacco via the 1993 Hong Kong Investment Treaty.

If there was no merit to a case one would think the courts would throw it out ? The whole idea of the Australian democracy is the government makes the law, the police/regulators enforce them, and the courts rule on the law.

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 159):
As such, it was impossible to put together a coherent application which was compliant with Hong Kong law. Qantas tried it on with a non-compliant application and then threw their toys from the cot when the rule of law prevailed.

Jetstar HKG was by no means impossible, it was just impossible using the franchise framework it had used elsewhere.

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 161):
CX in the same bed as SQ is as likely as QF in bed with CX. They're fierce competitors to say the least. It'll be one or the other owning VA, but not both together.
SQ would not cede any potential VA feed to CX to any part of Asia. It's a surprise that SQ currently allows VA European traffic to go to EY rather than with them (albeit their network in Europe is smaller than EY).

There is a significant changing in the tides in SE Asia, Singapore , Malaysian, and Thai have had the brunt of loss of market share on the Europe/Australia-New Zealand traffic as a result of the ME3 increase in capacity. The landscape is being forced to change.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 1:14 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 166):
Hong Kong has always wanted a true open skies agreement whereby airlines of both countries would have unlimited between and beyond rights. Australia (Qantas) has insisted on beyond rights from Hong Kong, however has never been willing to grant beyond rights to Hong Kong

IMHO Australia would have more to gain (if Australian airlines were innovative enough and had vision) by getting beyond rights from Hong Kong than Hong Kong would have to gain by getting beyond rights from Australia. Where would it make sense for Hong Kong airlines to fly beyond / from Australia? A one-stop to New Zealand? CX already does New Zealand non-stop. South America? Maybe. A one-stop to South Africa? Non-stops already exist. If Australia has insisted on beyond rights from Hong Kong, how would Australian airlines most likely take advantage of this? Why is Australia not willing to grant beyond rights to Hong Kong? What are the reasons and possibilities?

I can understand unlimited frequencies being more of an issue for Australia, but not so much allowing beyond rights.
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
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 1:23 pm

Beyond rights seemed to be more of a concern when routes like SYD-LAX were gold mines, but the added competition has changed that dramatically.

Opening up South America or South Africa via Australia would appear to be a risky proposition but it may be appealing for CX at some stage.

I agree though that Australia appears to have more to gain by gaining beyond rights, but at the same time Hong Kong carriers will benefit far more from increased Hong Kong-Australia frequencies.

The Hong King carriers can benefit from their better positioned hub more effectively than QF or VA will be able to achieve with their own metal.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15292
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 10, 2016 1:37 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 167):
Why is Australia not willing to grant beyond rights to Hong Kong?

Qantas

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 167):
What are the reasons and possibilities?

To stop true hard and soft product competition, it would open up the possibility of eastern routes like HKG-SYD-JFK-SYD-HKG or going westbound from Perth, e.g. HKG-PER-LHR-PER-HKG.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=vhhh-yssy-kjfk,vhhh-ypph-egll&MS=wls&MR=1800&MX=720x360&PM=*
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Wed May 11, 2016 1:29 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 167):

The way I see it, HK wants additional frequency into Aus, and Aus wants beyond rights. Aus doesn't see the value in additional frequency to HK for Aus carriers , and HK doesn't see the value in beyond rights for HK carriers (despite Zekes views).

It appears that neither party can agree on a level of increased frequency for HK carriers into Aus that is equivalent in value to beyond HK rights for Aus carriers. Id suspect negotiations are stuck on that basis.

Quoting zeke (Reply 169):

I think some of your route examples are wishful at best.
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2641
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Wed May 11, 2016 1:31 am

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 157):
The CX rumour is just a garbage rumour. Consider the history and background:

1. CX's largest airline shareholder is Air China. Ergo, indirectly, Air China would be investing in VA. I doubt the Government would think that in Australia's national interest.
2. Australia and Hong Kong have been at loggerheads consistently over the last 20 to 25 years on air rights negotiations;
3. Australia has ignored Hong Kong requests for both a Free Trade Agreement and a Double Tax Agreement;
4. Australia is currently being sued by Big Tobacco via the 1993 Hong Kong Investment Treaty.

I agree. I think that it's more likely that the Hainan Group will end up with the shareholding.

Hong Kong Airlines is already operating into Australia.
VA could send some of its A330s there given it has the rights to do so.
This would diminish CX's request for further rights.
VA gains access to HK Airlines China and north asia network.

I suspect the CX rumour was started to try an up the interest of HNA.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Wed May 11, 2016 2:40 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 169):
it would open up the possibility of eastern routes like HKG-SYD-JFK-SYD-HKG or going westbound from Perth, e.g. HKG-PER-LHR-PER-HKG.

On CX or Hong Kong airline metal???

Why would pax fly HKG-PER-LHR when they can already fly HKG-LHR non-stop in much less time? Why would pax fly HKG-SYD-JFK when they can already fly HKG-JFK in much less time? Such routes don't make sense for HK airlines to even try and... there is not an aircraft that can fly those routes (PER-LHR and SYD-JFK) yet without the hardest penalty... CX doesn't have the right equipment for such ULH routes - could the 359 do those routes with a penalty??? It would make more sense for a pax to fly PER-HKG-LHR or SYD-HKG-JFK because no where near as much backtracking would be involved than the routes you propose. Do you really think somebody like CX would be able to make such a route work? The only way CX might be able to make such a route work is if the beat QF into that sector (PER-LHR and SYD-JFK) and had the equipment to do so first.

Also, didn't QF used to fly to LHR via HKG? If so, would they be able to resume that beyond HKG route if they ever wanted or are Australian airlines not able at all to fly beyond Hong Kong at all as it stands?

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 170):
Quoting zeke (Reply 169):

I think some of your route examples are wishful at best.

  

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 170):
The way I see it, HK wants additional frequency into Aus, and Aus wants beyond rights. Aus doesn't see the value in additional frequency to HK for Aus carriers , and HK doesn't see the value in beyond rights for HK carriers (despite Zekes views).

Nice summary.

[Edited 2016-05-10 19:42:45]

[Edited 2016-05-10 19:44:39]
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
Zkpilot
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Thu May 12, 2016 11:20 pm

Anyone know why there are at least 3 (that I can see) AA flights from LAS-SYD? Feb 13,14,15. Conference? Charter?
AA73... weirdly it is showing as a 738 also...
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2876
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 4:27 am

Coming as no surprise, Solomon Airways has suspended the recently inaugurated once weekly Honiara-Sydney service.
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 4:39 am

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 174):

Is this just because their A320 aircraft has been delayed in a heavy maintenance check, or is this a more permanent suspension?
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2876
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 4:55 am

Is this just because their A320 aircraft has been delayed in a heavy maintenance check, or is this a more permanent suspension? [/quote]
More permanent- in the sense the word "more" can possibly be deleted altogether. IE have issued a statement saying the market conditions are not good (were they ever for once weekly?)
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8468
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 6:30 am

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 174):

This doesn't surprise me, routes to Melanesia from anywhere other than Brisbane have traditionally struggled (CNS-POM being an exception) which is why Air Niugini and Nauru Airlines also serve BNE and not SYD. I would assume that this is because the diaspora from those countries is disproportionately centred in Brisbane but that is just a guess.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
Bluebird191
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:51 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 7:13 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 177):
which is why Air Niugini and Nauru Airlines also serve BNE and not SYD

PX actually do fly to SYD, albeit 2x weekly IIRC (I could be wrong) with the 737-800.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 7:14 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 177):
This doesn't surprise me, routes to Melanesia from anywhere other than Brisbane have traditionally struggled (CNS-POM being an exception) which is why Air Niugini and Nauru Airlines also serve BNE and not SYD. I would assume that this is because the diaspora from those countries is disproportionately centred in Brisbane but that is just a guess.

Pretty much in the same way that the South Pacific Islands work, many have double daily services to AKL yet very little to SYD. BNE and AKL are the 'two' service hub ports of the Pacific, and through that have an local population from the Islands along with an market to supply the Islands.
 
ZuluAlpha
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:22 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Fri May 13, 2016 9:58 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 173):
Anyone know why there are at least 3 (that I can see) AA flights from LAS-SYD? Feb 13,14,15. Conference? Charter?
AA73... weirdly it is showing as a 738 also...

AFAIK .. the AA73 / AA72 Rotation it is the same flight number LAS/LAX/SYD/LAX/LAS has occurred since the inception of the AA metal into Australia. It just has an equipment change in LAX

Think QF11 / QF12 rotation SYD/LAX/JFK/LAX/SYD Where the SYD/LAX/SYD is an A380 and the LAX/JFK/SYD is a 744.

Hope this helps
Flown on:_CRJ, CR7 D10 DHT DH8, DH2, DH3, DH4, EMB, E45, E75, E90, F28 J32 M80 SH6 320, 32B, 332, 333, 380, 717, 732, 733, 734, 73H, 743, 744, 752 762, 763, 772, 77W
 
Thai77w
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 10:56 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Sat May 14, 2016 9:56 am

Well I decided last night I should go to Perth to see the An225, so here I am in Perth now! Arrived at lunch time on VA, fly back tomorrow arvo on QF. Should be awesome!
Aircraft types I've been on: PA31,Q300,AT75,AT76,717,733,738,739ER,763,772,77E,773,77W,788,789,744,319,320,332,333,346,359,380
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Sun May 15, 2016 2:24 am

Quoting Thai77w (Reply 181):
Well I decided last night I should go to Perth to see the An225, so here I am in Perth now! Arrived at lunch time on VA, fly back tomorrow arvo on QF. Should be awesome!

News reports of traffic chaos around the airport - the spotters are out in force!

I hope you do a trip report on this short adventure  
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
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11163
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Sun May 15, 2016 2:56 am

AN-225 is due to arrive at 1150 now, about 1 hour from now
Forum Moderator
 
Thai77w
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 10:56 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Mon May 16, 2016 1:54 am

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e303/OZJIM/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsz9ycnoir.jpeg

Here is the An225.

777jet- yes I will do a trip report up, and absolute chaos. We went approx 2km from the rwy threshold to avoid the crowd.
Aircraft types I've been on: PA31,Q300,AT75,AT76,717,733,738,739ER,763,772,77E,773,77W,788,789,744,319,320,332,333,346,359,380
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11163
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Mon May 16, 2016 8:01 am

TT joins seven other Asian LCC to create new alliance, Value Alliance

http://australianaviation.com.au/201...n-asian-low-cost-carrier-alliance/
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Mon May 16, 2016 10:45 am

Quoting qf789 (Reply 185):

So what is this going to mean, more booking options on the respective websites of the various carriers? Better purchasing power of the carriers?
 
Thai77w
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 10:56 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Mon May 16, 2016 11:49 am

For those interested, I posted a trip report over in the TR section on my mad weekend!



Last Minute Madness, BNE-PER-BNE To See The An225 (by Thai77w May 16 2016 in Trip Reports)
Aircraft types I've been on: PA31,Q300,AT75,AT76,717,733,738,739ER,763,772,77E,773,77W,788,789,744,319,320,332,333,346,359,380
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 12:01 am

Quoting qf789 (Reply 185):
TT joins seven other Asian LCC to create new alliance, Value Alliance
Quoting QF2220 (Reply 186):
So what is this going to mean, more booking options on the respective websites of the various carriers? Better purchasing power of the carriers?

Alignment of backend systems to enable connecting flights and purchase of extras across the networks. Kind of like what you can do on AirAsia or Jetstar across their franchises. Makes sense for isolated LCC's who are too late to the multinational franchise party or who are operating in countries where franchising is not possible. Might be a good model for cooperating with Chinese LCCs, for instance.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 12:08 am

Do you mean flights that you can book at the same time? Im not aware that LCCs do connections, even in Australia JQ to JQ is two flights and they don't care that much if the first flight is late (or so I thought)?
 
sq256
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 12:26 am

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 189):
Do you mean flights that you can book at the same time? Im not aware that LCCs do connections, even in Australia JQ to JQ is two flights and they don't care that much if the first flight is late (or so I thought)?

The AirAsia group has done it for a long time now between their own stable of carriers, at the main hub in KUL as well as DMK and DPS.

TZ and TR had also recently introduced through-tagging within their own flights (or from TR to TZ and vice-versa) at their SIN hub as well with both boarding passes issued at the point of origin (previously both carriers had a manual through-check product which required re-checking in at the airside transfer desk in T2).
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 12:48 am

Here is a little bit more info

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviat...-for-alliance-20160513-gou9bn.html

At the moment covers:
- Bookings
- Add ons
- Distribution

A FFP might come down the track, as might competition approval (antitrust).
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 12:59 am

Quoting QF2220 (Reply 189):
Do you mean flights that you can book at the same time? Im not aware that LCCs do connections, even in Australia JQ to JQ is two flights and they don't care that much if the first flight is late (or so I thought)?
Quoting sq256 (Reply 190):
The AirAsia group has done it for a long time now between their own stable of carriers, at the main hub in KUL as well as DMK and DPS.

Both AirAsia and Jetstar have connecting flights through the one booking across their regional brands and have done for a long time.

Domestically on Jetstar, for instance, you are offered bookings SYD-MEL-PER. Internationally with them there are plenty of examples, such as SYD-MYJ (Japan) may actually be SYD-MEL/OOL/CNS-NRT-MYJ or SYD-SGN is SYD-MEL-SIN-SGN. From experience, if one of those legs is delayed or cancelled then they will try to rebook you on a different flight to make the connect.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 3:04 am

Quoting allrite (Reply 192):

Thanks for this. This can be the 'thing I learned today' for today!
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 3:55 am

Quoting Thai77w (Reply 184):

Nice pic!

I'll check out your trip report - gotta make a quick dash up to OOL now...
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 140

Tue May 17, 2016 5:47 am

Quoting allrite (Reply 188):
Alignment of backend systems to enable connecting flights and purchase of extras across the networks. Kind of like what you can do on AirAsia or Jetstar across their franchises.

I'm not sure that they're offering connecting itineraries at this stage. They have merely stated "interline" itineraries. So I would take that as selling each other's fares, not necessarily offering a connection service.

Quoting allrite (Reply 192):
Domestically on Jetstar, for instance, you are offered bookings SYD-MEL-PER.

JQ will sell you that fare but you will need to collect luggage and re-check at your "connection" point. JQ only transfers baggage on International flights that connect to a partner airline. GK however does offer connecting flights for Domestic flights connecting to a partner airline.
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2614
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 6:09 am

Quoting qfvhoqa (Reply 195):
JQ will sell you that fare but you will need to collect luggage and re-check at your "connection" point.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of this as I've only done domestic to international and vice versa connections where you always need to check in again no matter who you fly with in Australia, unless all legs are via the international terminals. I'd imagine that it would be much the same for the LCC Alliance as well as most of the traffic between airlines will be international/domestic or international/international connections.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
qf002
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 7:44 am

Quoting allrite (Reply 196):
Thanks, I wasn't aware of this as I've only done domestic to international and vice versa connections where you always need to check in again no matter who you fly with in Australia, unless all legs are via the international terminals.

QF (and most carriers assuming both flights are on the same ticket) will check luggage straight through on a domestic-international connection, it's only coming back that everybody has to take their luggage through customs at the first port of arrival.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11163
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 10:44 am

TT has signed a two-year heavy maintenance contract for its Airbus A320 fleet with SIA Engineering Company Limited (SIAEC), with the work to be carried out by SIAEC and its joint venture company, SIA Engineering (Philippines) Corporation, at their facilities in Singapore and Clark, Philippines respectively

http://australianaviation.com.au/201...maintenance-contract-in-singapore/
Forum Moderator
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5092
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread Part 140

Tue May 17, 2016 11:19 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 197):
it's only coming back that everybody has to take their luggage through customs at the first port of arrival.

Just to make sure there is no confusion, this is only the case IF you are transferring from an international to a domestic flight. If the same aircraft continues on as an international flight OR you transfer to another international flight you go through Customs st the final port of international arrival.
Granted this is not that common these days but it was how QF8 operated until the BNE stop was eliminated. And will operate again if stops happen on inbound international flights.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85

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