Qantas: 'one of the worst airlines in the free world'

[mannej]

re wifi it is rolled out on a lot of 737's and some 330's but I think QF really missed the boat in not spending the $$$ to have it on the 787's.. poor choice there. Hope someone realises this and retrofits. Specially for flights like MEL-LAX and PER-LHR.

I believe JB747 has mentioned previously that the performance penalty of having WiFi on the 787 would preclude it from being able to operate QF9/10 from memory.

 

[RichardMEL]

Of course the irony is that the QC in SYD was closed for regular cleaning, which they do at this time of year. Of course SFO777 already had access to the J lounge anyway due to both CoS and status.

and sorry but making an excuse that the OTT headline was due to the day being coughpy (I am no fan of super early flights, so I don't schedule them unless it can't be avoided ) is pretty poor. Perhaps in hindsight he can amend the title. I get it it was a bad day but I don't think it excuses the title fully.

And no I'm not upset QF is being bashed (among the various good points)... man there are times they really deserve it.. such as some of the catering fails, the state of the SYD J lounge(discussed ad nauseum already) and the various other issues. Absolutely need to be called out. They run a far from perfect operation, but in terms of airline transport they do a pretty decent job imho ... not the bestbut definitely not the worst, or even in the bottom dozen imho.

oh and I don't think anyone actually answered this regarding the bar opening at 12noon - it is, as he suggested in his TR, a liquor licensing issue (which doesn't apply to international as they're technically not "in" the state, or something like that).. so it's not a QF choice but a license thing and unfortunately SFO777 never seemed to go through a lounge in the afternoon (he may have been more impressed with the bar and cooked to order asian dishes in that case!!). Anyone craving a UA or AA domestic club in that situation would have rocks in their head IMHO.

 

[Vic]

Indeed there is an escalator at MEL. But how is non-regular to know where it leads? It was in the middle of the terminal with no apparent signage that I saw. It could have led to a bus gate or the airport prison for all I know. (Hint: hyperbole on the prison thing)

lol.
you pose an important question. I took it to understand you're a regular flyer, a very regular and highly seasoned flyer. I thought that would include some skills at navigating new airports. As a wet behind the ears undergrad visiting melbourne for the first time I managed to work out the mid-food court escalators are on a direct pathway to boarding gate 1 from the Qantas lounge. I guess I just assumed someone with your experience would also pick this up. My bad
Having made the walk from terminal 2, I also assumed you'd know there wasn't a bus. One great advantage of MEL, compared to BNE, is the connectedness. All in the same timezone.

 

[drron]

Though when bashing US domestic lounges remember that the OP despite living in the USA does get Flagship lounge access flying AA due to his BA OWE status.Flagship lounges are a step up from the QF domestic J lounges IMHO.

 

[RichardMEL]

Though when bashing US domestic lounges remember that the OP despite living in the USA does get Flagship lounge access flying AA due to his BA OWE status.Flagship lounges are a step up from the QF domestic J lounges IMHO.

mmm some of them are yes specially since the revamp.. some others not o much. I used ORD a year or so back and while it was "OK" with self serve alc and snacks I would still consider a QF dom J lounge to be better over all.. but absolutely far better than the usual US domestic lounge experience.

However I'd also note that this is a savvy flyer with the ability to leverage OWE perks which MOST pax cannot. Also if one is flying domestic F in the US (apart from 3 class transcon) they can't access the lounge on CoS alone, unlike QF J ticket holders.. so again there's a difference there.

Yes, therse are all minor points, but if one is going to pick apart or compare these should all be taken into account IMHO.

 

[serfty]

. I used ORD a year or so back and while it was "OK" with self serve alc and snacks I would still consider a QF dom J lounge to be better over all..

Not these days ... the K lounge is closed and there is a very nice replacement at the G/K juncture.

In fact none of the F/L's of 2+ years ago exist as they did back then. All are better than any Qantas club, domestic or international business (Not First) lounge for F&B.

There is nothing to stop Qantas changing their QP/JL licence to serve liquor earlier if they chose. Back in the late 90's generally the bar would open after 3pm, so it has already been done at least once.

 

[RichardMEL]

of course the volumes of *domestic* passemgers using the AA Flagship F lounges would be quite ssmall relative and compared to the numbers through say SYD and MEL domestic J lounges. Again it's perhaps unfair to compare the two offerings (not that anyone specifically was per se ).

While you can't compare a AAdmiral's Club to a domestic J lounge (more a Q imho) it's perhaps closer.. and in that case the F&B (well food, such as it is) is far superior IMHO from Barista coffee to even the beloved toastie but specially the open bar offering more premium options... definitely better than your average domestic club offering of UA/AA and DL.

 

[Lynda2475]

re wifi it is rolled out on a lot of 737's and some 330's but I think QF really missed the boat in not spending the $$$ to have it on the 787's.. poor choice there. Hope someone realises this and retrofits. Specially for flights like MEL-LAX and PER-LHR.

In flight wifi on Qantas domestic flights is provided by nbn satellite service, so there is no coverage outside the nbn satellite footprint (so wouldnt make it all the way to the USA). I understand this wifi service is still being progressively added on aircraft serving the domestic routes.

If Qnatas want to offer wifi on international services, they would need to partner with someone other than NBN, or only offer it only on the portion of the flight that was over Aussie airspace serviced by nbn satellites).

 

[RichardMEL]

Yes, I underdstand the resitrictions of the current QF offering and why.

They are also not alone in long haul airlines who do not offer inflight wifi (free or otherwise) - eg: NZ

They'd have to invest in Ku band equipment (and a supplier/partner) on their longer haul fleet to make it happen and then that would cost

I just think they would have been smarter to go with having the equipment installed to offer it as the 787's were built. A380's could then be modded during the refurb starting this year.

It just seems strange to not invest in this (though perhaps conservative QF were hoping to find the best solution overall?) because not only would it be so welcome and useful for so many long haul pax ex-AU, but also a real extra revenue source.

Really hope someone at QF changes their mind and works to make this available on long haul aircraft... I mean as coughpy as UA is, it's one of the great features on transpac services that is useful.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

and sorry but making an excuse that the OTT headline was due to the day being coughpy (I am no fan of super early flights, so I don't schedule them unless it can't be avoided ) is pretty poor. Perhaps in hindsight he can amend the title. I get it it was a bad day but I don't think it excuses the title fully.

This thread was created by an established AFFer levelnine. This thread was NOT created by the author of the trip report, SFO0777.

The original author did not in any way refer to Qantas being the 'world's worst' in any of their headlines or trip report titles. That falls squarely on AFF.

 

[RichardMEL]

This thread was created by an established AFFer levelnine. This thread was NOT created by the author of the trip report, SFO0777.

The original author did not in any way refer to Qantas being the 'world's worst' in any of their headlines or trip report titles. That falls squarely on AFF.

I recall seeing it in the TR linked to, though it now seems to have been edited out (which is fair enough if so). Plus in Post #114 the Author, or at least someone using the account SFO777 on here, but I assume the original author agreed he wrote that:

To anyone on FT, my reference to QF "as one of the worst in the free world" was clearly hyperbole. But I guess it worked as click bait. However, my characterization came after brutal day with QF which started with a 4:30am wake up call in Hobart. Between the comical HBA lounge, inedible breakfast on HBA-SYD, dire SYD lounge, no priority boarding anywhere despite Priority boarding signage that gate agents dutifully roll out for no apparent reason, breakfast offered on a lunch flight, uncomfortable 717 J seats and no Wifi, I was probably a little cranky.

so.... ?

When I first read this post the OP (levelnine) was quoting the post (see the ' marks in the subject).

so, i disagree this is only an AFF thing.

Happy to be corrected.

 

[Lynda2475]

Really hope someone at QF changes their mind and works to make this available on long haul aircraft... I mean as coughpy as UA is, it's one of the great features on transpac services that is useful.

I presume (maybe incorrectly) that Qantas has done market research wrt how many of its passengers are willing to pay for international in-flight wifi and what rate they are willing to pay, looked at cost to provision and decided it isn't profitable for them?

Remember when there were credit card phones on airplanes so you could make in-flight calls, noticed they were removed on newer planes (and refurbs) as not enough people were using the service. Aussies in general don't like paying a lot for internet, unless your companies expense policy is willing to pick up the tab (and its specifically called out as a no no where I work) or you are super rich. Your average Y flyer wont want to pay $5/mb or whatever crazy cost Qantas would need to charge to recover costs.

 

[Lynda2475]

The original author did not in any way refer to Qantas being the 'world's worst' in any of their headlines or trip report titles. That falls squarely on AFF.

The TR has been edited several times since it was first linked to from here, the reference to being worlds worst was on of the last lines when I first read it - thus the conclusion (and i maintain a dirty lounge doesnt make an airline the worlds worst). All the Hamilton island and other things are newer edits, changing the conclusion of a now much longer TR.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I recall seeing it in the original post, though it now seems to have been edited out (which is fair enough if so). Plus in Post #114 the Author, or at least someone using the account SFO777 on here, but I assume the original author agreed he wrote that:



so.... ?

When I first read this post the OP (levelnine) was quoting the post (see the ' marks in the subject).

so, i disagree this is only an AFF thing.

Happy to be corrected.

AFAIK the reference to 'world's worst' in the title only appears here on AFF - with that quote selected by the AFF's OP.

SFO777 was agreeing, I guess, that it served as 'click bait' here on the AFF website.

The FT title is simply: Tasmania and the Great Barrier Reef via Qantas First Class

There is no record on FT that the post containing the title has been edited.

 

[Paddy55]

Firstly, I've only read Pages 1, 11 and 12 of this review, so apologies if I've covered something already dealt with.
Second, I have read SFO777's TR on FT... and found it pretty OK although I don't agree with all SFO777's opinions.

Having said that I agree that QF's standards have slipped in the past decade, for the hard product at least, and for the state of the QPs. F on the A380 has rotted on the vine - great when first introduced, tired, very tired now. QF have developed the technique in recent years of announcing upgrades, improvements, etc a number of times and way before implementing, and then taking their own sweet time to implement.

QF however continues to be saved by their staff - always great, and exactly what I as an Australian appreciate. Might not be particularly great for people from different cultures, but we're all entitled to our favourites and opinions.

Mind you as tired and not inspired QF F is these days it just beats the pants of LOTFAP carriers' offerings. You have to go to Asia or Middle East to find better than QF.

 

[Lynda2475]

There is no record on FT that the post containing the title has been edited.

All i know is when i read it a few minutes after the original post on here the Qualia bit and beyond was not there.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

All i know is when i read it a few minutes after the original post on here the Qualia bit and beyond was not there.

There's been no edit to the title on FT that I can see. So it would suggest levelnine selected that bit to add? I guess it's possible the title was edited within the short two or three minute window (where it is not recorded) - but don't know how that stacks up given the time of posting on FT and the time it appeared here on AFF.

 

[Lynda2475]

Im talking about SFO777's post (the link itself), he was editing it throughout his trip. When I first read it (a few minutes after levelnine linked to it) none of the stuff after the flight to Hamilton Island was in it, he added that later on. So the original post ended on a negative, then more positive Qualia stuff was appended later.

Your fixated on the title, Im talking about the content of the TR which did have the worst comment in it; and if it no longer does then has been edited again.

 

[levelnine]

In my defence, I selected that quotation because it was the final line (ie SFO777's overarching comment/summary) of the trip as the report existed when I visited the website. It did not, therefore, appear to be overly 'clickbaity' to select that as the title for the forum post.

The quotation continues to exist in the trip report, but it is no longer the final line as SFO777 has subsequently added further parts to the trip report.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Your fixated on the title, Im talking about the content of the TR which did have the worst comment in it; and if it no longer does then has been edited again.

Indeed I am talking only about the title - because that's what we're discussing!

The line does appear in the trip report itself, but never in the title as is being suggested by some.