Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 1): EK flying BNE-NAN would absolutely slaughter FJ and VA on the route, and not sure if the demand is there on the BNE-NAN section to make it work, let alone NAN-DXB. |
Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 1): Continuing the conversation about an additional EK |
Quoting 777ER (Reply 2): Would QF really want to upset its partner FJ with codesharing on a NAN service, unless of course FJ was pulling out of BNE? EK have stated in the past they really want to serve WLG but the A380 is simply too big |
Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 4): A re-timed EK432/433 flight with a ~7am arrival into BNE could serve WLG with a 777. The problem being a) gate space in BNE and b) EK432 would be at the same time at QF52 |
Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 5): I can't see it happening until WLG extends their runway, the risk of having to divert or offload 100s of passengers due to weather is going to be far too high. |
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 6): WLG has plenty of foggy days which wouldn't help not too mention that it is one of the toughest places to land a plane let alone a big 77W. |
Quote: ^^ AKL has mainly had that level of service to give EK additional revenue raising opportunities during the downtime they would have had at MEL/SYD/BNE. |
Quoting csturdiv (Reply 11): |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 10): The fact that they have in very short order upgraded the AKL-DXB nonstop service from a 77L to an A380 has to say something about the level of demand. |
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 12): Canberra is a pretty decent diversion point as it has a long runway and is much closer than BNE and MEL, but lacks the facilities to process 300 unannounced passengers. |
Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 13): C |
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 12): And by "random foreign government 747" you no doubt mean Air Force One |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 10): This another of those A-net myths that has gained status through repetition. With 3x daily MEL, SYD and BNE, EK has no need to park an aircraft all day on the ground at those ports just to keep to a reasonable schedule. That they serve AKL (and CHC) is a choice, not an afterthought. |
Quoting csturdiv (Reply 16): |
Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 17): I for one do not feel that this is an a-net myth |
Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 186): Lots of diversions due to weather from OOL this afternoon/evening. JQ VH-VGA diverted on two separate occasions: JQ967 CNS-OOL diverted to BNE JQ410 SYD-OOL diverted to BNE Apart from that, the following diversions to BNE JQ440 MEL-OOL VA753 MEL-OOL JQ494 NTL-OOL TT618 SYD-OOL VA535 SYD-OOL VA1691 CBR-OOL VA735 MEL-OOL Likely there were more, these are just the ones I found. Glad I'm not working at OOL today... |
Quoting csturdiv (Reply 11): If you live near Sydney, you know that from last Friday until early Monday morning it rained buckets and had some howling wind. SYD was down to 1 runway much of the weekend and there were a few interesting diversions. |
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 20): However, the final approach and landing at OOL was Spectacular! The Captain said the winds were from the East at 40-45 kms. We landed towards the North. I've never seen so much runway out of my window during a final (when the plane was horizontal), and I've never been in a plane that rocked from side to side so much before. The view went from ground to sky, ground to sky... The rudder was in overdrive on the short final and during the touchdown! If only all landing were so exciting. |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 21): Sounds like pretty standard fare for a landing at WLG! I looked it up recently, and WLG is apparently officially the windiest city in the world, with an average wind speed of 29 km/h. So much for Chicago - average there is only 18 km/h! |
Quoting coolian2 (Reply 15): Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 13):Chttp://gulfnews.com/business/aviatio...a380-flights-to-auckland-1.1839712 |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 19): If EK wanted to avoid parking an aircraft at SYD, MEL or BNE during the day, they could easily advance the departure time from DXB to (say) 2200 and arrive in Australia between 1600 and 1800, turning around and running the same schedule Australia-DXB as they do at present. |
Quoting a7ala (Reply 7): Rubbish, you must be thinking of CHC for fog days! The diversion rate at WLG is 0.09% around half that of CHC and double that of AKL. The fact that SQ is bring in the B777-200 shows that there is no problem with smaller widebodies into WLG. Agree the -300ER might be a bit of a stretch but plenty of B777-200 or B787-8/9 or A330 or A350 options available. |
Quoting csturdiv (Reply 11): I saw that a QF A330 diverted to RAAF Richmand and a QF B744 diverted to Canberra. Other than the random foreign government B747 that might have paid a visit to CBR, when was the last time a B747 was there? |
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 12): Canberra is a pretty decent diversion point as it has a long runway and is much closer than BNE and MEL, but lacks the facilities to process 300 unannounced passengers. |
Quoting Sydscott (Reply 14): This video from CBR still cracks me up. |
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 24): You've obviously not seen how bad WLG can be. Can be closed for days on end by fog. AKL is usually only affected in the morning but has a CATIII system so isn't too bad. CHC also is usually only in the morning then it burns off. |
Quoting ben175 (Reply 27): I flew MEL-PER on VA last night (Sunday 5/6) and the airport was chaos with flights to Sydney being delayed and then eventually cancelled. |
Quoting ben175 (Reply 27): The flight was even worse. I cannot believe VA don't do a full meal service on the VA697 rotation to Perth just because it departs after 8:30pm. Handing out a salty quiche that tastes like rubber in a paper bag with a water bottle is not acceptable for the price you pay. If QantasLink can manage a full hot breakfast on a 40 minute Geraldton sector, I don't see why Virgin wouldn't provide a meal on a 4 hour 10 minute transcon, no matter what time of the day. 8:35-9:05pm isn't even that late. |
Quoting a7ala (Reply 26): I know WLG very well and its not the case and nowhere near as bad as AKL and CHC is for fog. Infact the situation below was less than a month ago and followed another day which was fog affected: http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/7959...rport |
Quoting ben175 (Reply 27): The flight was even worse. I cannot believe VA don't do a full meal service on the VA697 rotation to Perth just because it departs after 8:30pm. Handing out a salty quiche that tastes like rubber in a paper bag with a water bottle is not acceptable for the price you pay. If QantasLink can manage a full hot breakfast on a 40 minute Geraldton sector, I don't see why Virgin wouldn't provide a meal on a 4 hour 10 minute transcon, no matter what time of the day. 8:35-9:05pm isn't even that late. |
Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 31): I totally agree, and I think the onboard service will be VA's downfall if they don't get their stuff together. Too bad for anyone who might've had a 1-2 hour drive to the airport before that flight, they've just driven through dinner time. That said, your departure time is my normal dinner time! |
Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 31): Too bad for anyone who might've had a 1-2 hour drive to the airport before that flight, they've just driven through dinner time. That said, your departure time is my normal dinner time! |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 19): They would pick up traffic from Europe on one of their main banks (mid-morning departures from Europe), and to Europe the offerings would be as now. |
Quoting CXfirst (Reply 35): So, at the time, it made sense to have the longer ground stays in Australia, and therefore, made sense to send the planes to AKL. |
Quoting CXfirst (Reply 35): So, at the time, it made sense to have the longer ground stays in Australia, and therefore, made sense to send the planes to AKL. |
Quoting mariner (Reply 37): But if the trans-Tasman flights were not profitable, then it would have been cheaper, simpler - altogether more sensible - to keep the aircraft on the gerund in Australia. The new non-stops DXB-AKL-DXB may change the equation by cannibalising the one-stops and if they do then we may see some realignment of the trans-Tasman services, but that hasn't happened yet. |
Quoting Sydscott (Reply 38): Also keep in mind that as part of the approval for QF/EK there was a capacity commitment for the Tasman. |
Quoting davidbyrne (Reply 19): This strongly suggests that flying the Tasman is a conscious choice |
Quoting Sydscott (Reply 38): |
Quoting mariner (Reply 39): Now, with Qantas, I've no idea, but if he cannibalisation is too strong I'd be pretty sure it's not beyond the wit of Clarke and AJ to dream up some "realignment", even if only on a couple of days a week, that might keep everyone happy. They know a lot more about it all than I do. |
Quoting VapourTrails (Reply 25): If a diversion happens for a more than say two hours, they will be allowed off the aircraft into the terminal? |
Quoting qf2220 (Reply 40): Sydscott you beat me to it. I think it was a requirement to keep the frequencies in place. |
Quoting a7ala (Reply 26): Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 24): You've obviously not seen how bad WLG can be. Can be closed for days on end by fog. AKL is usually only affected in the morning but has a CATIII system so isn't too bad. CHC also is usually only in the morning then it burns off. I know WLG very well and its not the case and nowhere near as bad as AKL and CHC is for fog. Infact the situation below was less than a month ago and followed another day which was fog affected: http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/7959...delays-flights-at-Auckland-Airport The only time WLG gets fog is sometimes during the summer when a seas mist rolls in when there is a North-Easterly and when its still, but usually the wind blows any fog away. |
Quoting mariner (Reply 42): Quoting qf2220 (Reply 40): Sydscott you beat me to it. I think it was a requirement to keep the frequencies in place. I thought the debate was about why the trans-Tasman routes happened in the first place and I agree with the poster who said it was rather more than just a use of aircraft down time. |
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43): Provided you carry enough payload to cover the variable operating costs of the Tasman sectors, you're better off as you're instantly making a contribution to the fixed costs (that in most part) you'd still be up for without those two flights. Incremental revenue I guess. That was the meaning I aways took from the reference "cheaper than parking them in Sydney" |
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43): Provided you carry enough payload to cover the variable operating costs of the Tasman sectors, you're better off as you're instantly making a contribution to the fixed costs |
Quoting mariner (Reply 42): However, Emirates has been discussing the eventual possibility of the non-stop for some time, so I'd assume they've taken any effects of cannibalisation into account. |
Quoting qf2220 (Reply 45): Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43): Provided you carry enough payload to cover the variable operating costs of the Tasman sectors, you're better off as you're instantly making a contribution to the fixed costs If youre redirecting existing flights 1:1, the fixed cost shouldn't change. |
Quoting mariner (Reply 44): But there has to be that proviso, and it isn't a cheap one. |
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 41): I don't see why not. They would need to be re-screened if they left the aircraft, but given that SQ is going to using CBR as a transit then it will presumably be set up for transit screening. At least they will be able to stretch their legs and use a real bathroom. |
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 41): As ridiculous as it sounds at CBR, one consideration might be ramp space. Does anyone know if the bays at CBR are wide enough to accommodate a 777/747 sized aircraft, or would they need to block adjacent gates? |
Quoting VapourTrails (Reply 47): I didn't even look when I was around that way, to see where the 744 was parked for those few hours. |
![]() |
Quoting VapourTrails (Reply 47): Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 41): As ridiculous as it sounds at CBR, one consideration might be ramp space. Does anyone know if the bays at CBR are wide enough to accommodate a 777/747 sized aircraft, or would they need to block adjacent gates? I was so pre-occupied with things non-aviation later in the morning, and the weather that day, I didn't even look when I was around that way, to see where the 744 was parked for those few hours. Good point. International will be Gate 6 is it, maybe they have allowed more space there.. |