Qantas aircraft servicing MEL PER

[nessjez]

If the issue regarding seating product is that important, they should be making further efforts to avoid any 734 that may be operating the route.

No you guys are missing the point. These aircraft shouldn't be servicing this route at all when, for the same price, Qantas offer far superior aircraft on the same route at most other times. Why is a 734 with convertible seats regarded as still good enough? That's my point.

 

[NM]

I suggested they might have got away with these convertible seats 10 years ago, but times change and newer aircraft arrive and when you fly people 3000km across the country at $1700 a pop you can't exactly get away with that sort of thing these days. Expectations change over time and convertible seats are just not good enough on one of the country's longer routes.

But they ARE getting away with it! If you don't like what Qantas offers, then go to another airline. Ooops ... they do it because they can and there is no competition offering domestic business class with better seating. So while I acknowledge that you don't like it, I disagree with your statement that they "can't exactly get away with it". They clearly are getting away with it.

Either you set a standard of service you can maintain, or you recognise that you don't have the fleet to provide the consistency customers such as myself are looking for, and you price it accordingly.

One of the factors behind the variation is that business travellers also want/demand schedule choice. If Qantas was to only operate A330 aircraft on the route, they would operate less flights and provide less schedule choice. Passengers are demanding more choice of flight times so the only thing Qantas can do is to operate a mix of aircraft types or operate flights with lower passenger loads (which is economic disaster).

Apologies to pauly7 if I got the MEL AKL aircraft wrong. I've only ever seen 734s on that route. But it's not so easy to avoid the 734 out of Perth. If you don't want to waste half a day there then QF480 is the only option. It's not like they have flights going every half hour.

My last two Trans-Tasman services (in July) were 734 one way and 738 the other. The 738 had in-seat IFE and on the 734 I was provided a portable DVD player. I assume this was the same for those sitting in Business Class on those flights. Again the reason for Trans-Tasman moving away from 767 to more 737 services is to offer greater schedule choice in order to compete with Pacific Blue and Air NZ who operate 737/A320 aircraft with increased frequency.

 

[ejb]

No you guys are missing the point. These aircraft shouldn't be servicing this route at all when, for the same price, Qantas offer far superior aircraft on the same route at most other times. Why is a 734 with convertible seats regarded as still good enough? That's my point.

However as you have freedom of choice when it comes to booking you are in control of the planes you travel on (except when last minute changes occur which is rare).

I travel SYD-PER often and I try to select A333's or the new A332's to ensure comfort.

I agree the 734 J seats are bad however.

ejb

 

[medhead]

No you guys are missing the point. These aircraft shouldn't be servicing this route at all when, for the same price, Qantas offer far superior aircraft on the same route at most other times. Why is a 734 with convertible seats regarded as still good enough? That's my point.

I don't think anyone has said the 734 is good enough. But I think your missing the facts of the situation. That is the aircraft that qantas puts on that route. You don't have to like it. But that's the fact, take it or leave it.

As for the idea that the 734 shouldn't operate any route that has better product. That would mean it can't operate any route. Even I understand that qantas can't just axe 17 aircraft, without suitable replacements and without even considering other business factors.

 

[markis10]

Again the reason for Trans-Tasman moving away from 767 to more 737 services is to offer greater schedule choice in order to compete with Pacific Blue and Air NZ who operate 737/A320 aircraft with increased frequency.

I think its more likely to compete with PB and AirNZ with cheaper crewing costs - but I will leave that for a court to decide .

 

[markis10]

As for the idea that the 734 shouldn't operate any route that has better product. That would mean it can't operate any route. Even I understand that qantas can't just axe 17 aircraft, without suitable replacements and without even considering other business factors.

Qantas should be letting people know the product advertised is not available on around 1/4 of their services at any given time because 17 of their 74 fleet of domestic aircraft flying on any given day dont supply whats advertised as the minimum offering, its deceptive and misleading when its on that sort of scale rather than being a one off temporary measure.

 

[medhead]

Qantas should be letting people know the product advertised is not available on around 1/4 of their services at any given time because 17 of their 74 fleet of domestic aircraft flying on any given day dont supply whats advertised as the minimum offering, its deceptive and misleading when its on that sort of scale rather than being a one off temporary measure.

I don't disagree about providing full information. The proposal however was that it shouldn't operate on a route at all when there is better product on that route. I'm not sure if that position would be changed by being fully informed about the differences.

 

[nessjez]

As for the idea that the 734 shouldn't operate any route that has better product. That would mean it can't operate any route

Where did I say that? Put 'em on MEL CBR or MEL HBA. Not on 3-4 hour flights across the Nullarbor when you're charging 1700 bucks one way. I don't see why this is so hard to grasp? If you need to fly this aircraft, keep them on shorter routes with lower fares and put the 738 back on PER MEL.

 

[medhead]

These aircraft shouldn't be servicing this route at all when, for the same price, Qantas offer far superior aircraft on the same route at most other times.

Here is where you said that.

You don't like a 734 on your route why should put up with it? The fare might be lower on those other routes but it will still be the same fare as te "superior" product, so it still fails on your standard for not using the aircraft. I really think the best you can do is fly business with another airline.

 

[jsd]

Put 'em on MEL CBR or MEL HBA

I disagree, HBA MEL flights are almost ALWAYS full, with only 2 return flights per day putting a 734 on the route would only make the QF HBA seat shortage worse, leave them as 738 and give another 24 people the chance of a seat

A little off topic, but still, I've mad my point.... Resume to your normal programming folks:mrgreen:


Josh

 

[NM]

I think its more likely to compete with PB and AirNZ with cheaper crewing costs - but I will leave that for a court to decide .

I doubt there is anything forcing JetConnect to only operate 737. They could operate 767 if they thought they would make more profit.

 

[markis10]

I doubt there is anything forcing JetConnect to only operate 737. They could operate 767 if they thought they would make more profit.

Or the A330, one moment, they do



The 737s and crew had to do something when they got taken off the domestic routes in NZ, once the dreamliners come in I think you find they get most of the first deliveries.

 

[mannej]

I am not disputing that the 734 has an inferior J product compared to other QF a/c, but in the eyes of Qantas, I guess that they would justify using the 734 on the route as part of the fleet utilization jigsaw.

Whether the customer agrees with Qantas' logic is another story.

 

[nessjez]

Here is where you said that

If you look closer, you'll see I'm speaking specifically about the MEL PER route. I said nothing about using them on other routes, that's your generalisation.

I don't have an issue with 734s flying shorter, lower fare routes where comfort isn't such an issue. A 734 on a 60 minute flight? Big deal.

They shouldn't be using them on longer routes with higher fares, where comfort levels and in-flight entertainment offerings are more critical, and where the gap between the 734 and more modern aircraft is far more obvious to the customer.

Don't you agree?

And I don't want to fly business with any other airline (if there WERE any other airline). I like Qantas, I like my Platinum member privileges, but I'll point it out to them when they do something that makes no sense - such as this terribly backward step of replacing a 738 with a 734.

 

[mannej]

And I don't want to fly business with any other airline (if there WERE any other airline). I like Qantas, I like my Platinum member privileges, but I'll point it out to them when they do something that makes no sense - such as this terribly backward step of replacing a 738 with a 734.

I doubt that the average person would not be able to pick the difference between the two apart from the J seats.

Qantas would justify this as a part of the fleet utilization management, as PER has very few routes served by it (ADL-PER vv and PER-MEL vv it seems).

 

[medhead]

If you look closer, you'll see I'm speaking specifically about the MEL PER route. I said nothing about using them on other routes, that's your generalisation.

I don't have an issue with 734s flying shorter, lower fare routes where comfort isn't such an issue. A 734 on a 60 minute flight? Big deal.

They shouldn't be using them on longer routes with higher fares, where comfort levels and in-flight entertainment offerings are more critical, and where the gap between the 734 and more modern aircraft is far more obvious to the customer.

Don't you agree?

And I don't want to fly business with any other airline (if there WERE any other airline). I like Qantas, I like my Platinum member privileges, but I'll point it out to them when they do something that makes no sense - such as this terribly backward step of replacing a 738 with a 734.

I understand that you are talking about one route from Mel- Per. I am applying the *logic* of your argument to other routes. That is not a generalisation!!!

I do not agree with your reasonings above at all. Those reason are equally valid for other routes. By your logic everyone can claim that a 734 should be operating some other route. Comfort is always important regardless of flight length.

 

[nessjez]

I understand that you are talking about one route from Mel- Per. I am applying the *logic* of your argument to other routes. That is not a generalisation!!!

You can't apply the logic of my argument to other routes. I'd be happy to catch a minibus on a 30 minute trip into the city, but I wouldn't take one on a 3 hour interstate trip. Doesn't mean minibuses shouldn't exist, just that they're not suitable for such long trips.

A 734 is not a suitable business class option for a route like MEL PER. Not in this day and age anyway. If Qantas need to use it, they should charge less for it. That probably opens up all sorts of other issues. So maybe just stop offering business on these flights altogether and give those seats to economy FFs.

 

[docjames]

True. And when you fly this route every week like I do these things become more important.

I'll go back to my original post which was that Qantas have made a number of changes to aircraft on this route and while some services have been upgraded, others have been downgraded.

And will continue to change as they manage their fleet upgrades, bringin in 330s and 789s and removing 763s and 734s (eventually). This would have happened 2 years ago but for delays with the 787 and 380.

Perhaps you'll just have to put up with it until the fleet changes are completed.

 

[medhead]

You can't apply the logic of my argument to other routes. I'd be happy to catch a minibus on a 30 minute trip into the city, but I wouldn't take one on a 3 hour interstate trip. Doesn't mean minibuses shouldn't exist, just that they should only be used on short journeys.

Ohh so now it is short journeys. Go back to post #21. You said nothing about journey length. Therefore I can apply your logic to any route.

The minibus analogy is not valid as a 734 compared to a 738 is not like a minibus to an interstate coach.

And the bit you added about the suitability of the 734 for that route is only your opinion. The logical conclusion if we accept your opinion is that the business product on the 734 isn't suitable on any route. Basically, if you wish to exclude that from the MEL-PER route because it is uncomfortable then you are saying that someone else must suffer being uncomfortable for 60 minutes on another route. Remember they are paying the same as for the so called superior product on that same route.

 

[pauly7]

Or the A330, one moment, they do.

Wait another moment... Nope!

Jetconnect does not operate the A330. Jetconnect currently only operate the 734 and next gen 73H.