Qantas A220 to do trips to Asia opening new opportunities (rumor)

[dajop]

Canada has given it 180 minutes, but in any case, I doubt SYD-SIN really needs that much. There's quite a few places on the way.

Yeh I don’t think ETOPS is a problem on SYD-SIN, ETOPS 30 according to great circle mapper:

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Have you ever flown on an A220? There are 737-Max 8’s doing 7 hr journeys, I think I’d prefer an A220 to those. But I don’t think we”ll see them doing Asia journeys anytime soon.

I have flown on the MAX from New York Newburgh to Edinburgh back in January 2019, I've flown on the A321 XLR from Lisbon to Toronto and have flown a trans-continental on Air Canada on the C Series. One thing is clear in all of these experiences, it ain't fun compared to a nice wide body, especially in business class. For instance for my trip from Lisbon to Toronto on TAP, I was in business class and they had lie flat seats. Yes the seats do go flat but the J cabin is arranged in a 2 x 2 configuration, meaning the seat width is not sufficient to get either good quality sleep or even in the upright position for 8 hours on end. The MAX was even worse, especially since I was flying Norwegian where all leg room is cut out. C Series was manageable but I wouldn't want to venture out more than 4 maybe 5 hours tops on it

 

[sqrt()]

I have flown on the MAX from New York Newburgh to Edinburgh back in January 2019, I've flown on the A321 XLR from Lisbon to Toronto and have flown a trans-continental on Air Canada on the C Series. One thing is clear in all of these experiences, it ain't fun compared to a nice wide body, especially in business class. For instance for my trip from Lisbon to Toronto on TAP, I was in business class and they had lie flat seats. Yes the seats do go flat but the J cabin is arranged in a 2 x 2 configuration, meaning the seat width is not sufficient to get either good quality sleep or even in the upright position for 8 hours on end. The MAX was even worse, especially since I was flying Norwegian where all leg room is cut out. C Series was manageable but I wouldn't want to venture out more than 4 maybe 5 hours tops on it

Yeah, I think I mentioned up-thread, but I've done BOS-AUS on the 220 a few times, which is slated at ~4h. Absolutely fine in US F/J. In Y+extra legroom it's alright. Significantly better than 737/320 however you dice it. I got rerouted BOS-MSP-AUS with a 220 on the second leg, and I think that's around the sweet spot when in Y. Would be cool to see a premium-configured version with 1-1, 2-2, and 3-2 in F, Y+, Y respectively. I dread boarding 737/320s in the US now. I think it's the nice big windows.

 

[RSVKanga]

I know I’ve posted this in the other thread but the frequent use of the ‘Australia’ outline at yesterday’s A220 inaugural flight is more than just for branding purposes, QF is telling us that it won’t be flying international routes anytime soon - and that’s a good decision as any international routes on the A220 could and should be flown by mainline QF with international-grade interiors.

 

[jase05]

and that’s a good decision as any international routes on the A220 could and should be flown by mainline QF with international-grade interiors

QF fly International now with non “non international grade interiors” so why would the A220 be any different. And TBH the A220’s are a replacement for the 717’s so they will stick to the types of routes that the 717 fleet currently operate

 

[Ansett]

Yet they use the 737 for international routes, so why would the A220 not be used in a similar way on skinny routes?

 

[RooFlyer]

B737 to and from DPS ( returning overnight) comes to mind!

I wouldn’t get too fixated on the map of Australia, here and in the other thread rvskanga. It will be weird for them to also add various bits from around the region and clutter an otherwise fairly clean imagery. Just commemorative artwork for the commercial launch.

as any international routes on the A220 could and should be flown by mainline QF with international-grade interiors.

Not sure what you are getting at, with your comment on the the other thread

Also, QantasLink is an international airline these days. It surprises me how many people are unaware that they now fly frequently to NZ, East Timor, Solomon Islands and are starting flights to SIN soon

 

[RSVKanga]

Not sure what you are getting at, with your comment on the the other thread

First quote is an opinion, second quote is a fact. I have mixed views on QLK operating international services.

Not sure what you are on about as well.

 

[RichardMEL]

Yes, QFlink fly those E190s to NZ and other places as you say. Is a BNE-CHC/ZQN THAT different to MEL-TSV or ADL-CNS? Not really imo. For the pax, it's more or less on par with the 737 or NZ A320s(yes all Y). DRW-SIN is pushing it, but clearly QF see this as the only economically viable way to.fly this route.

At least the 220s have wifi (unsure how yseable outside of Oz) which is a glaring omission from the 190s imo.

This whole idea of "international interiors" just for international flights is a bit old school thinking imo. A 3-4 hour flight is the same thing if it be between two domestic points as international imo.

The issue for QF is costs which why mainline will mever fly the 220. Now that whole argument re costs, QF moving as much as possible to lower cost operations (going back to JetConnect) is quite separate - on terms of tge PAX experience, none of that is relevant. Will one get roughly the same paxex on an A220 or E190 vs a 737? Roughly yes.

A lot of ppl (rightly) bemoan about the lack of QF int serive from ADL and limited from PER - if an aircraft like the 220 can enable some of this flying, isn't that a net benefit to the flying public.

I know, we all want widebodies going everywhere with lie flat in J. Me too. Is it realistic? Not for QF for various reasons long discussed.

Remember the customer can pick say SQ for that if they wish, or the likes of Scoot or AirAsiaX, or yes.. JQ(where I would probably prefer a 321neo iver a 335 seat 788 tbh).

It is a different world now. These aircraft, for better or worse, open up these possibilities. Most pax woukd prefer a nonstop iver connection of course, and having these as options can enable that.

As for the Australia motif in the launch stuff. Initially the 220s will just replace 717s on dom service. That's obvious. QF has 29 on order which is far more than the 717 fleet - so clearly expansion is in the medium term. Will it mean international vs frequency adds to dimestic going forward? Time will tell. I wouldn't read a whole lot into it. Cpuld be as simple as being first A220 service IN Australia, for example.

 

[jb747]

They will be operated to as many places as they can get away with. It‘s not about the passengers, but rather about denuding mainline of as much as possible, until it becomes irrelevant.

 

[RichardMEL]

They will be operated to as many places as they can get away with. It‘s not about the passengers, but rather about denuding mainline of as much as possible, until it becomes irrelevant.

Can't disagree with you there. Very much seems QF management have long tried to get around the legacy contracts for tech and cabin crew. From a bisiness POV, sure it makes sense. From the way long term employees have been treated and tgeir prospects going forward.. not so good.

A few months ago I spoke with a commuting QF 737 FO. He said he was a bit iver donestic as it's hard work and was thinking to go international. I asked him if he would consider moving up to the 787. He said no, and actually said the 330 which surprised me until he explained his thinking was that the 330 would provide a pathway to the 350, and he saw that as futureproofing his career (plus the ULH ops would likely mean a couple of trips a month and he's done). The 220 came up in convo and he of course noted not mainline and pretty clear his thoughts on THAT which is understandable.

 

[wandering_fred]

4000 mile range would open up almost all of SE Asia to PER or DRW
That would be interesting for wandering
Fred

 

[AIRwin]

4000 mile range would open up almost all of SE Asia to PER

I was in PER the last few days and noticed JQ advertisements on new routes to BKK, HKT and SIN

 

[RichardMEL]

airBaltic do use them on some pretty long flights up to 7h duration.. .

 

[elanshin]

Can't disagree with you there. Very much seems QF management have long tried to get around the legacy contracts for tech and cabin crew. From a bisiness POV, sure it makes sense. From the way long term employees have been treated and tgeir prospects going forward.. not so good.

A few months ago I spoke with a commuting QF 737 FO. He said he was a bit iver donestic as it's hard work and was thinking to go international. I asked him if he would consider moving up to the 787. He said no, and actually said the 330 which surprised me until he explained his thinking was that the 330 would provide a pathway to the 350, and he saw that as futureproofing his career (plus the ULH ops would likely mean a couple of trips a month and he's done). The 220 came up in convo and he of course noted not mainline and pretty clear his thoughts on THAT which is understandable.

My friend is type rated on both 330 and 787. I think it's because he flies to Asia for trips as his ideal destination (as many Japan as he can get away with) and with QF previously using 787 to Japan he got type rates on that too.

 

[exceladdict]

I was in PER the last few days and noticed JQ advertisements on new routes to BKK, HKT and SIN

Yes, I think out of PER it's more leisure to BKK and HKT, though the 220 could open up more QF frequencies to SIN or introduce DPS, CGK, KUL or SGN. But all are served by LCCs so I'm not sure how differentiated a QFlink 220 would be from these, other than lounge access and a meal/bag included. Without/until 220s are based here to replace the 717s (less likely given the 320s and age old f100s) it's probably all a moot point though.

A first step might be QF codesharing on more JQ routes, including these new ones (noticed recently they don't on JQ sin<>mnl which is a pain for an upcoming itinerary).

 

[jb747]

My friend is type rated on both 330 and 787. I think it's because he flies to Asia for trips as his ideal destination (as many Japan as he can get away with) and with QF previously using 787 to Japan he got type rates on that too.

Nobody in QF holds simultaneous endorsements on the 330 and 787. They aren't removed from your licence when you move to another type, but they're no longer current, and can't be used.

 

[RichardMEL]

Nobody in QF holds simultaneous endorsements on the 330 and 787. They aren't removed from your licence when you move to another type, but they're no longer current, and can't be used.

This is what I was thinking.

Do you think QF might look to utilise CCQ between 339 (yes ceo) and 350 or even 321xlr and 350? If that's a thing for those specific types? I know airlines like LH use it but they have about every model of airbii there is or was

 

[HS-TQE]

Yes, I think out of PER it's more leisure to BKK and HKT, though the 220 could open up more QF frequencies to SIN or introduce DPS, CGK, KUL or SGN. But all are served by LCCs so I'm not sure how differentiated a QFlink 220 would be from these, other than lounge access and a meal/bag included. Without/until 220s are based here to replace the 717s (less likely given the 320s and age old f100s) it's probably all a moot point though.

QFlink will really be competing with Batik on the Indonesian/Malaysian routes, but point of difference between QFLink and Batik would be the included "meal" (food) in Y and lounge access for those with status (whereas Batik only provides (third party) lounge access to those booking J)

VietJet is basically a clone of AirAsiaX (the A330s are ex-D7), if it wasn't for VietJet, I'd think AirAsia would've had set up in Vietnam.

The rest, including a potential VA entry, are really LCCs/Glorified LCCs (some with a recliner J added on and free water/tea) with their base fare being carry on only.

 

[AIRwin]

VietJet is basically a clone of AirAsiaX (the A330s are ex-D7), if it wasn't for VietJet, I'd think AirAsia would've had set up in Vietnam.

Speaking of which:

AirAsia Seeks to Start Units in Singapore, Vietnam: The Edge

Low-cost budget carrier AirAsia is seeking to start units in Singapore and Vietnam, the Edge reported.

www.bloomberg.com