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

[Kiwi_Flyer]

Not really any different to the lax flights.

 

[jakeseven7]

It’s funny, I remember when Perth London was scheduled for launch and then Perth Rome (plus some even longer overseas routes on other carriers of course) - how many people were absolutely adamant that no one would pay a premium for ULH non connecting flights.

Several years later it’s very clear that there is a market for them, a very profitable one if you pick the right route.

Of course it’s a very personal if you are able to afford such a premium yourself, whether you value the benefits of a direct flight at that premium, what class of travel you can afford to travel etc etc.

With corporates / governments / businesses paying for a decent whack of the plane on a lot of these routes, many won’t blink and will pay, especially those with direct contracts with QF which brings the cost down not insignificantly.

 

[SYD]

It’s funny, I remember when Perth London was scheduled for launch and then Perth Rome (plus some even longer overseas routes on other carriers of course) - how many people were absolutely adamant that no one would pay a premium for ULH non connecting flights.

Several years later it’s very clear that there is a market for them, a very profitable one if you pick the right route.

Of course it’s a very personal if you are able to afford such a premium yourself, whether you value the benefits of a direct flight at that premium, what class of travel you can afford to travel etc etc.

With corporates / governments / businesses paying for a decent whack of the plane on a lot of these routes, many won’t blink and will pay, especially those with direct contracts with QF which brings the cost down not insignificantly.

Peeps probably thought the same when SYD-LAX went nonstop….

 

[jb747]

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.

Worse than that. There were two 747s AND two 380s before Alan started the big downsize. I’m sure Sunrise could be nicely done with a couple of big bizjets….

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.

That route will be no worse than the myriad other flights to the USA. Lots of places to stop in the USA; not many over the Pacific, but most would be easy enough to extract the aircraft from. Crew hours will be an issue no matter where you go, and any diversion will probably give rise to a second one as it drops into LA or DFW to replace the crew.

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.

Baku is simply an issue, more for geopolitical reasons than anything else. The warning that took them there is sufficiently worrying that you’d ignore any of the company preferences. I once had a related warning, and Lahore was the nearest viable option, and explaining to the boss why his aircraft was there would not have been a consideration.

It’s funny, I remember when Perth London was scheduled for launch and then Perth Rome (plus some even longer overseas routes on other carriers of course) - how many people were absolutely adamant that no one would pay a premium for ULH non connecting flights.

You need to separate the Perth to London bit from the actual start point in Melbourne. P-L (or Europe) makes sense, but should be able to stand on its own. Out of Melbourne, it’s still a one stop, but now with the stop at a rather inconvenient point in the journey. Personally, there’s no way I’d take that route, when the option exists to go via Singapore/Thailand on a 350/380. Be interesting to see how it fares if someone at the other end decides to put on a reverse flight. Sometimes things increase the market, but I‘d expect that to simply chop up the existing cake. Almost perfect for someone like Turkish….

 

[levelnine]

Worse than that. There were two 747s AND two 380s before Alan started the big downsize. I’m sure Sunrise could be nicely done with a couple of big bizjets….

I think this is probably key.

There will always be some rusted on QF loyalists willing to pay $$$$ to fly Y on a QF plane for 19 hours.

But the fact that they've had to keep downsizing and downsizing suggests that it isn't actually that many, especially when you consider that international departures/arrivals have been constantly growing over the last decade (COVID-19 being the exception). Qantas' strategy (whether good or bad) seems to be to acquire a smaller part of a growing pie.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think this is probably key.

There will always be some rusted on QF loyalists willing to pay $$$$ to fly Y on a QF plane for 19 hours.

But the fact that they've had to keep downsizing and downsizing suggests that it isn't actually that many, especially when you consider that international departures/arrivals have been constantly growing over the last decade (COVID-19 being the exception). Qantas' strategy (whether good or bad) seems to be to acquire a smaller part of a growing pie.

We don’t know what the pricing will be ex USA. It could be very attractive. The reasoning being that US citizens aren’t inconvenienced by the transit in LAX like Aussies are, so need more of an incentive to get them on the non-stop.

They could fill a large number of the Y seats with travel originating in the USA for all we know.

 

[jakeseven7]

Peeps probably thought the same when SYD-LAX went nonstop….

Ha probably!

I think it’s pretty clear it will be the classic adoption curve here too, first movers, the masses then the stragglers but all of this is heading in one direction, as your point illustrates

 

[JohnK]

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

I saw someone post on the office Slack off-topic chat they were excited with these ultra long-haul flights from SYD/MEL or even BNE. I queried why anyone would want to sit in economy for 16-18 hours.

One of the ladies mentioned they have family in the UK they visit occasionally. They are 2-3 hours from LHR and live more than 1 hour from BNE airport. By the time they are done with current schedules they say it takes more than 30 hours from leaving family in UK to get home in SE Qld.

I guess that is a good point but let's say a SYD-LHR flight is 18 hours non-stop where as SYD-SIN-LHR is 22 hours with a break in SIN. I'd still take the break as saving 4 hours on a 24+ hour journey is for me not worth it especially if it's going to cost more.

I'll go one step further and take 3 x 8 hour flights rather than 1 x 18 hour flight. I've done SYD-LAX 3 times and at 14-15 hours I'm struggling around 6-7 hours into the flight. It would be great to have a break at that point and start again the 2nd leg.

 

[Quickstatus]

@JohnK the Y seats are 33 in for pitch and 18in wide - more space than the A330 Y and 789 Y

i do wonder if the sunrise flights will help improve the OTP of the current flights via SIN and previously DXB

 

[JohnK]

@JohnK the Y seats are 33 in for pitch and 18in wide - more space than the A330 Y and 789 Y

i do wonder if the sunrise flights will help improve the OTP of the current flights via SIN and previously DXB

For me it's not just the pitch. It's the length of time spent in a metal tube in the sky.

If LHR/JFK were your final destination these ultra long-haul flights may make sense and that is their target market.

 

[kamchatsky]

For me it's not just the pitch. It's the length of time spent in a metal tube in the sky.

If LHR/JFK were your final destination these ultra long-haul flights may make sense and that is their target market.

I did LAX-SIN on SQ Y earlier this year. That turned out to be 18 hours. It was a tough flight for me, but Y was completely full. Most people just want to get from A to B as quickly as possible.

 

[jase05]

Most people just want to get from A to B as quickly as possible.

Absolutely and I know plenty who who will absolutely jump at the chance to fly non stop. It will be a massive success for QF IMO.
It’s not my cup of tea but I’m in the minority I’d think

 

[DC3]

Reading some of these posts, it’s probably good that the posters have no influence over how the general public may view these flights or how QF runs their business

 

[Melburnian1]

Given the typically high fares QFi charges, how many seats on say pre-Sunrise AKL to JFK QF3 or the reverse JFK-AKL would have to typically be vacant before QFi made a loss on that particular flight? IIRC, someone above mentioned one of the few flights thus far had c.90 empty economy seats: a minority perhaps due to weight restrictions, but many must have been unsold.

Filling every economy seat is unlikely to be essential for its business model when Sunrise commences, but at some stage having few in Y must hurt the bottom line even though seats sold in J and W bring in far more revenue per square metre, or per seat.

 

[PineappleSkip]

Peeps probably thought the same when SYD-LAX went nonstop….

This peep was disappointed when 744s arrived and SYD-SIN-DXB-etc became SYD-SIN-etc. Give me a seven hour flight - or several - any time.

 

[Quickstatus]

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

NZ has been doing AKL-JFK for about 9 months now.
QF 7 SYD-DFW is about 14:30hrs
NZ2 AKL -JFK is about 15:30 hrs

Apart from the issues of a twin engine flying over large tracts of open ocean, any other place won't be more of an issue compared with Baku. In fact Bora Bora or Pago Pago (UA 839 Dec 30 2022) would be a nice place to have to divert to

 

[PineappleSkip]

Haven’t seen this mentioned before, uploaded yesterday. Might have been asleep though.

Seems this was supporting a media release that dropped on Friday.

Cheers skip

 

[jb747]

Given the typically high fares QFi charges, how many seats on say pre-Sunrise AKL to JFK QF3 or the reverse JFK-AKL would have to typically be vacant before QFi made a loss on that particular flight?

That's not information that is ever going to be 'out there'.

IIRC, someone above mentioned one of the few flights thus far had c.90 empty economy seats: a minority perhaps due to weight restrictions, but many must have been unsold

As far as can see, there would have been no weight restrictions.

 

[lovestotravel]

I wasn't sure whether to post in this or the 'SYD-AKL-JFK' QF3/4 area, and apologies if this has been raised before as I've not read this whole thread:

The (soon to be previous) QF CEO Mr Joyce is spruiking numerous alleged 'better sleep' features of Project Sunrise.

There's an idea in it that may well prove extremely unpopular with passengers: these flights are going to have the lights switched on for 10 consecutive hours.

This is supposedly to allow passengers to better adjust for their destination, but if one is departing JFK at say 1930 or 2100 hours, my guess is the vast majority of passengers would want to have a meal and then want the lights switched off say three hours into the flight.

I like to open the window shades/blinds (if manual operation is possible) and peer out, but many just want to sleep, and some want to do it the whole way.

Joyce says 'we provide eye shades'.

On what will be from 2025 more super long flights for which QFi will charge horrendously high fares, it ought not be dictating when passengers can even more feel like they're in some (mobile) prison with the lights blaring.

It's hard enough for lots of patrons to sleep in uncomfortable Y (and W!) seats on aircraft without making it close to impossible.

Another reason to avoid QFi!

There are many many reasons to avoid QF but this isn't one of them

Not sure crew will like it - More people awake - More work to do

Then again the faithful NZ crew who are going to work for peanuts will end up doing it

 

[mviy]

If there are less passengers than usual then they can carry more freight cargo.