Qantas Project Sunrise goes ahead, 12 new A350-1000s ordered

[MEL_Traveller]

Did anyone from Qantas say that the light will be on for the first 10 hours? All I have read is that they will be on for a 10-hour block. I expect that finding the right 10-hour block will depend on the flight direction and departure/arrival times.

On an evening departure from JFK, my preference would be dine and stay awake for as long as I can, and then try to time sleeping such that I wake for breakfast around 2 hours before arrival. Then I should be good for the day when I arrive. But that is just my personal preference and as noted previously, there is no one pattern that will work for everyone.

Yes… the article I read said the 10 hour block would be after takeoff. Economy pax would be served food after takeoff that encouraged ‘wakefulness’ (my word) like food with chilli, and lots of coffee. The lights would stay on and the second meal would be served at the 7-hour mark. After the second meal lights would go off to allow pax an overnight sleep based on SYD time.

Fine if the flight was leaving at 8am-12pm during the day JFK time… but an evening departure with bright lights would be very hard, It would probably make me choose another airline.

 

[mviy]

For all the hype of Project Sunrise, if it’s not priced much the same as flying with a stop along the way I’m likely to fly with the stop to save a bit of money more often than not, I suspect.

 

[elanshin]

For all the hype of Project Sunrise, if it’s not priced much the same as flying with a stop along the way I’m likely to fly with the stop to save a bit of money more often than not, I suspect.

This is part of the business case that qantas has been building with PER <> LHR. The price will likely command a slight premium when compared with a 1 hop and QF will likely continue to offer the 1 hop flights.

The people that need the speed will opt for the direct flights and those on leisure or budget will continue to look for the best value. Its really targeted more at business travellers than leisure.

 

[Cognac]

This is part of the business case that qantas has been building with PER <> LHR. The price will likely command a slight premium when compared with a 1 hop and QF will likely continue to offer the 1 hop flights.

The people that need the speed will opt for the direct flights and those on leisure or budget will continue to look for the best value. Its really targeted more at business travellers than leisure.

Having done PER <> LHR, not having to stop along the way is pretty fantastic, and worth the extra few dollars to avoid deplaning and re-planing somewhere along the way. Even for leisure travel.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Having done PER <> LHR, not having to stop along the way is pretty fantastic, and worth the extra few dollars to avoid deplaning and re-planing somewhere along the way. Even for leisure travel.

Being Sydney based, I'd prefer a transit in DXB or SIN into SYD, rather than a PER transfer and change of craft.

But then again, I'm also of the opinion that DRW should be the gateway into Australia if they want to make us all transfer domestically, but thats why I don't run an airline

 

[Lynda2475]

I would not do PER-LHR outbound but have done LHR-PER-SYD inbound and the advantage it has over coming home via SIN is that it is a night arrival in SYD, so one can go home and pretty much straight to bed, immediately being on the right timezone so had zero jet lag even though I flew whY.

Article in todays SMH stated the direct SYD-JFK would be approx 20% more expensive than SYD-LAX.

 

[docjames]

I would not do PER-LHR outbound but have done LHR-PER-SYD inbound and the advantage it has over coming home via SIN is that it is a night arrival in SYD, so one can go home and pretty much straight to bed, immediately being on the right timezone so had zero jet lag even though I flew whY.

Article in todays SMH stated the direct SYD-JFK would be approx 20% more expensive than SYD-LAX.

Agree, really like EK 407 late departure ex-MEL, connecting for afternoon/evening arrival into europe then a circa midday departure ex-LHR ,arriving evening time in MEL via QF10.

The QF9 and QF1 and QF2 arrival times are awful. They only make sense if connecting elsewhere in the network from LHR/SYD. But then there’s now a plethora of options connecting in the Middle East, Asia or direct.

 

[dajop]

The people that need the speed will opt for the direct flights

I think as last few comments allude to, it's not so much speed, but a desire for the convenience. When you're travel time is approaching 24 hrs +/- a couple of hours is not going to make much difference. However, there is an inconvenience to transiting, and in many cases it can actually make jetlag management more difficult too, so a single flight, in which you can manage your activities according to your own schedule/needs is often better than one where you are forced to transit a time that doesn't suit (eg. when you want to be sleeping).

 

[jase05]

For all the hype of Project Sunrise, if it’s not priced much the same as flying with a stop along the way I’m likely to fly with the stop to save a bit of money more often than not, I suspect.

The price doesn’t phase me I just have little interest in sitting on a flight of that length with any airline. Give me a stop over anytime.

 

[MooTime]

Just our of interest, what's the diff in SC's for the PER / SYD comparison?
Different miles table?

Just curious.

 

[Melburnian1]

Yes… the article I read said the 10 hour block would be after takeoff. Economy pax would be served food after takeoff that encouraged ‘wakefulness’ (my word) like food with chilli, and lots of coffee. The lights would stay on and the second meal would be served at the 7-hour mark. After the second meal lights would go off to allow pax an overnight sleep based on SYD time.

Fine if the flight was leaving at 8am-12pm during the day JFK time… but an evening departure with bright lights would be very hard, It would probably make me choose another airline.

MEL_Traveller, many won't know until they're on board from 2025 if this policy sees the (to use a very bad pun, as it's the anithesis) light of day.

I bet more than a few will complain on Google, TrustPilot, TripAdvisor and QF's Facebook and other social media pages.

I contacted a gent in another state who works for a mining company, and who has been on shift work for many years.

He's not facing different time zones in the same way of airline passengers and crew, but he said this.

"...Having quite a bit of experience in the fatigue management field since the late 90’s and (as) a shift worker since the early 90’s, IMO the steps that they are going to take (such as leaving cabin lighting on and altered meal times) will have little to no impact at all.

I reset my clock by 12 hrs twice every 12 days. I have my own strategies that work. They don’t include leaving lights on or having breakfast at midnight."

Given his years of experience, I'd take his view over any 'Professor' of 'sleep management', any of their trial subjects or what AJ thinks.

 

[PineappleSkip]

@Melburnian1, I'm with him. I spent 10 years working FIFO with time changes between 5 and 8 hours between home and work.

Nothing I tried - and I tried many things - made much difference. It was the same number of days - and it always took days - to get over it every time. The main thing I tried to do was switch to local time ASAP. These were 5-12 week trips, not short visits. Flight lights were often out of sync with my desires, particularly on daylight sectors from SE Asia to Australia. But if the lights were on and I wanted to sleep, I put my eyeshades on. If they were off and I was wide awake, I turned on my reading light. I reckon cabin lighting made doodly squat difference.

Some good tips here. I didn't take the don't drink tip - although I tried it a couple of times - because I was mostly travelling to dry countries. I avoided dryness for as long as possible, and stepped out of it as quickly as possible

cheers skip

 

[JohnK]

I still cannot get my head around 16-18 hour flights in economy. Personally I think 8-9 hour flights can be too long.

Travelling to Europe I would much rather have stop in SE Asia or even Middle East and do an 8 hour flight followed by a 12 hour flight. I don't mind getting out and having a stretch mid-flight.

 

[jase05]

I still cannot get my head around 16-18 hour flights in economy. Personally I think 8-9 hour flights can be too long.

Travelling to Europe I would much rather have stop in SE Asia or even Middle East and do an 8 hour flight followed by a 12 hour flight. I don't mind getting out and having a stretch mid-flight.

I personally think that length of time is too long even in J. I love a stop over or two to break up the flight and over the years it has allowed us to dip our toes into the water of destinations we may never have otherwise visited and in many cases we enjoyed them and have returned for longer

 

[SCM]

I can't imagine many people will pay for the privilege of an 18 hour flight in economy... but maybe we are not the typical target demographic for those.

I also reckon Qantas wants to give away at least a few reward seats on these flights for show - but obviously they wouldn't want to give away anything premium so... economy ticks a lot of boxes for them.

 

[half-hour]

I also reckon Qantas wants to give away at least a few reward seats on these flights for show - but obviously they wouldn't want to give away anything premium so... economy ticks a lot of boxes for them.

Would SYD to LHR be the same cost in points as the current flights via Singapore?

But with less taxes, as there's no stopover taxes to pay?

 

[levelnine]

I can't imagine many people will pay for the privilege of an 18 hour flight in economy... but maybe we are not the typical target demographic for those.

Who is the target demographic for 18-20 hour flights in economy? Especially those willing to pay more than a one stop flight?

I can't imagine it's many business people as that length of time in a seat would make many less fit for work at the end compared to breaking up the trip and getting a proper chance to stretch your legs and work out any leg cramps, etc.

I can't imagine it's many tourists who will save the money and go one stop.

I can't imagine it's many families as most people with children want to break up the trip and let them work out some of the energy before the second flight.

 

[downgraded]

Who is the target demographic for 18-20 hour flights in economy? Especially those willing to pay more than a one stop flight?

I can't imagine it's many business people as that length of time in a seat would make many less fit for work at the end compared to breaking up the trip and getting a proper chance to stretch your legs and work out any leg cramps, etc.

I can't imagine it's many tourists who will save the money and go one stop.

I can't imagine it's many families as most people with children want to break up the trip and let them work out some of the energy before the second flight.

Isn't that the point though. QF is going after a niche - going from double daily A380s (eg MEL/SYD-LHR) to several times a week flying pencils. Their market is getting smaller as the demand gets bigger.

 

[Quickstatus]

Nothing I tried - and I tried many things - made much difference.

Agree, any mitigation trick that people try are only that - mitigation and mostly they don't work or only partially.

LHR and JFK require a 10 time zone crossing from SYD. It's mentioned that it takes a day to correct for 1 time zone crossing. So a 2hr layover at an intermediate transit point won't make any difference. But a day or 2 at an intermediate stop would make a difference.

 

[docjames]

The other factor noting the AKL-JFK flight path will be medical emergency / diversions to ”unexpected” locations and how that impacts onward flight - feels inevitable there will eventually be a diversion to somewhere less than ideal.

The QF1 diversion to Baku being a good example or the challenges involved. So imagining a landing in Mexico or one of the pacific islands would bring some challenges.