Qantas to Launch SYD-AKL-JFK (June 2023)

[snabbu]

He was not on it from SYD AFAIK

Celebrations started last night in AKL and continue today

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/flying-kangaroo-bounces-back-to-the-big-apple/

The launch of QF3 also marks a new route for the national carrier with flights to New York operating via Auckland instead of Los Angeles. Flights will initially operate three days per week with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft, increasing to four from October, offering more than 1,800 seats on the route each week.

Travelling on the inaugural flight, Qantas Group CEO Alan Joyce said the airline was thrilled to be carrying Australians to New York once again.

Lets wait and see some reviews of the days events in SYD, surely there were some interesting special events associated with the inagural.

 

[Princess Fiona]

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/flying-kangaroo-bounces-back-to-the-big-apple/

Lets wait and see some reviews of the days events in SYD, surely there were some interesting special events associated with the inagural.

I know personally two pax on that flight to AKL both of whom were in the Flounge and neither have posted anything from there except the usual corn fritter pics.
There may well have been some things at check-in, not sure.

Some nice flags and printed coasters etc onboard QF3.

 

[Mwenenzi]

With AJ on board and a SYD-JFK without LAX starting up I would have expected the FL to heaving this morning, huge celebrations at the gate etc. Big wigs joining in AKL sounds kind of boring imho.

AJ was on NZ radio at 08:00 Tuesday. In the studio was my understanding.
Monday was a public holiday in AU but not in NZ.

He was not on it from SYD AFAIK

Celebrations started last night in AKL and continue today

I my view Qantas management & board should do these flights in a middle economy seat way down the back.

 

[CaptJCool]

Yes, this is going to be an issue. I actually don't see much benefit in doing JFK-AKL. AKL-JFK makes sense due to the ability to skip LAX immigration, but with JFK-AKL, the risk of delays etc. plus the lounges in JFK compared to the QF F lounge in LAX. I'd rather do JFK-LAX on AA and then connect onto LAX-SYD flight.

By Joyce

I’m sure the headline writer had fun dreaming up that “slogan” LMAO

 

[jpp42]

Amazing clickbait. But that article also mentions something I haven't seen brought up here - the "dual destination tourists" - mostly Americans who want to visit NZ and AU in one trip. I know a number of people that chose AirNZ (or United+AirNZ) for such an itinerary because it was easy to book that without backtracking. Qantas will now be more competitive in that market (again - I realise they used to fly AKL-LAX in the past).

I'm not sure that skipping immigration in LAX is any benefit for passengers, JFK is no better, particularly because they have so many terminals each with their own smaller immigration unit, compared to LAX's TBIT which can handle large crowds. . But this setup is a benefit to Qantas because they don't have to worry about immigration delays affecting the OTP of the next leg.

 

[Princess Fiona]

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/flying-kangaroo-bounces-back-to-the-big-apple/

Let’s wait and see some reviews of the days events in SYD, surely there were some interesting special events associated with the inagural.

And here is the QF story on QF3 on Insta from today’s inaugural
QANTAS

Pics in the link if anyone wants to see the rest

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I'm not sure that skipping immigration in LAX is any benefit for passengers, JFK is no better, particularly because they have so many terminals each with their own smaller immigration unit, compared to LAX's TBIT which can handle large crowds. . But this setup is a benefit to Qantas because they don't have to worry about immigration delays affecting the OTP of the next leg.

I second your thoughts here - LAX is easily one of the best airports in the US for making connections. I think the most I've ever waited at LAX was 5 minutes at the Global Entry queue whereas in Chicago or New York, 5 minutes is the minimum wait time you'll expect to find. Combine that with the better lounges, the concept that everything is under one roof (i.e. one only needs to walk to the next gate to make a connection instead of having to re-clear security) and the favourable weather (when was the last time LA had a snow storm) and is it any wonder why LAX remains a key international destination and hub for many airlines?

-RooFlyer88

 

[VHOEJ]

JFK is not a great airport, especially if you have another connection. Not exactly a selling point.

LAX has actually improved over the years, particularly the arrival. And LAX doesn't have the fun weather of JFK, particularly in winter.

All the people there for the party should travel home in Y and see how it really is

 

[kangarooflyer88]

AJ was on NZ radio at 08:00 Tuesday. In the studio was my understanding.

For those interested in hearing the interview with Alan Joyce here it is:

Alan Joyce: Qantas CEO says there is big demand for the Auckland to New York route, will compete with Air NZ - The Mike Hosking Breakfast | iHeart

<p>Qantas is gearing up to go from the city of sails to the Big Apple in a 16 hour flight.</p> <p>The Australian airline begins its Auckland to New York flight tomorrow, after years of planning and nine months after Air New Zealand launched its service for the route.</p> <p>Chief Executive, Alan...

www.iheart.com

 

[arrow]

I second your thoughts here - LAX is easily one of the best airports in the US for making connections. I think the most I've ever waited at LAX was 5 minutes at the Global Entry queue

-RooFlyer88

That's because you have Global Entry. Those with only Australian passports can't get Global Entry and the queues at LAX are horrendous which makes tight connections difficult.

The other point is if you are transiting to an east coast city, most companies allow J for long haul Int, but Y for domestic US flights, so it's a long trek from LA to the east coast in Y. Whereas you can SYD - JFK in J and short Y hop to DCA or MIA

 

[Princess Fiona]

I second your thoughts here - LAX is easily one of the best airports in the US for making connections. I think the most I've ever waited at LAX was 5 minutes at the Global Entry queue whereas in Chicago or New York, 5 minutes is the minimum wait time you'll expect to find. Combine that with the better lounges, the concept that everything is under one roof (i.e. one only needs to walk to the next gate to make a connection instead of having to re-clear security) and the favourable weather (when was the last time LA had a snow storm) and is it any wonder why LAX remains a key international destination and hub for many airlines?

-RooFlyer88

I have never waited more than 2 minutes at any of LAX/ORD/DFW or JFK with GE.

But I don’t think that experience is particularly useful for the majority audience here who don’t have GE.

The new BA/AA lounges at T8 are actually a fair bit better IMHO than TBIT.
QF has always done quite well to and from JFK and I think this flight is a good addition, particularly for those with NY as their destination.

 

[jpp42]

LAX has actually improved over the years, particularly the arrival. And LAX doesn't have the fun weather of JFK, particularly in winter.

Yes, also JFK has a lot of crossing runways which contribute to the long taxis and complicated ATC environment (not to mention other nearby airports limiting the airspace). LAX has four parallel runways and way simpler airspace, which greatly improves air traffic flow.

 

[Lynda2475]

I'm not sure that skipping immigration in LAX is any benefit for passengers, JFK is no better,

Disagree will take entry via JFK over LAX any day. LAX is always slammed at the times the QF flights arrive and us Aussie cant get GE.

Last entry via JFK was through immigration in less than 10 mins vs last entry through LAX which took over an hour and had me running to get a connection to JFK anyone because well LA isnt a city Id want to spend time in.

I look forward to Sunrise when one can fly SYD-JFK direct (and omit AKL). In the mean time Id always choose SYD-DFW, SYD-SFO or SYD-AKL-JFK if buying a ticket.

And I found the Flagship Lounge at JFK to be very nice, I enjoyed my steak and free pour Rose a lot.

 

[dajop]

Why are people comparing LAX and JFK? The correct comparison is LAX and AKL. This service - unlike QF’s other NA services is I assume primarily meant for origin/destination traffic - bound for/ originating in that small village known as New York (i guess there will be some connecting to/from somewhere else on or close to the East Coast, but probably not that many).

I know weather is much more of an issue at JFK than LAX, but here’s the thing, if you’re starting at JFK, weather can also affect the transcon flight you would need to connect at LAX. This almost certainly means that it is better to depart on QF4 than an AA connection via LAX. If you miss the connection in LAX, basically you’re stuck there for just under 24hrs. If late into AKL, either you’re continuing on the same plane (subject to crewing) or have alternatives that depart a few hours - rather than 24 hours - later.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I know weather is much more of an issue at JFK than LAX, but here’s the thing, if you’re starting at JFK, weather can also affect the transcon flight you would need to connect at LAX. This almost certainly means that it is better to depart on QF4 than an AA connection via LAX. If you miss the connection in LAX, basically you’re stuck there for just under 24hrs. If late into AKL, either you’re continuing on the same plane (subject to crewing) or have alternatives that depart a few hours - rather than 24 hours - later.

You raise a very good point indeed. If you are starting out from a region notorious for bad weather (like Chicago or New York) what'll get you is that once-daily connection out of LAX. One thing to keep in mind however is that AKL does have a curfew, meaning that if you get particularly bad weather and are severely delayed you could be sitting state-side for some time (unless of course QF is authorized to fly to CHC instead).

At the same time, there are multiple flights per day out of DFW/LAX and I believe for things inside the airlines control like weather they are obligated to put you on any flight that will get you back be it American, Delta or United. What I do find annoying (and maybe someone knows the answer here) is why flights to Oceania from North America seem to always arrive in the morning (and no Hawaii is not part of North America for this argument). Is there any rhyme or reason for this?

 

[kpro]

Why are people comparing LAX and JFK? The correct comparison is LAX and AKL.

Depends on what comparisons you're making. If the final destination is New York, then you'd be comparing the connection experience in AKL. However if traveling onto Miami as an example, there's also comparison on the domestic US connection in JFK vs LAX.
Either way, there is a comparison to be made between LAX and JFK customs and border experiences.

My last trip through JFK probably took about 45 mins to pass through at an off peak time, not sure that it's much better then LAX.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Depends on what comparisons you're making. If the final destination is New York, then you'd be comparing the connection experience in AKL. However if traveling onto Miami as an example, there's also comparison on the domestic US connection in JFK vs LAX.
Either way, there is a comparison to be made between LAX and JFK customs and border experiences.

We could take this one step further too with passengers connecting at Vancouver, Canada which Qantas already serves. The benefit there as a connection point is there is no need to collect luggage with it being forwarded on and the ability to pre-clear US immigration and customs in Vancouver instead of JFK, which I can assure you has way smaller queues than JFK. And for the opposite direction (New York to Sydney) it gets even better since the connection process at Vancouver is simply scan boarding pass and be dumped into the international departures hall thanks to OSS (whereas in AKL you would need to clear security despite you already cleared security at your origin).

 

[sqrt()]

Sure am glad I have GE now so I can enjoy the back and forth

 

[kpro]

pre-clear US immigration and customs in Vancouver instead of JFK, which I can assure you has way smaller queues than JFK

Definitely agree on that, the last time I flew from YVR to the States, the preclearance facility at YVR airport took all of 10 mins.

I've never gone the other way around though, only via LAX or HKG. Prefer the HKG connection, but that's no longer QF so I'd be drifting quite off topic.

Sure am glad I have GE now so I can enjoy the back and forth

Once Global Entry eligibility extends to Australian passports I'll be very glad.

 

[Melburnian1]

It's possible flights are booked out given the relatively small seating capacity of the QFi B789, especially as configured on this long route, but try as I might for a 'ghost' booking on ITA Matrix, for a day in September 2023 when QFi operates QF3 and in October 2023 back on QF4, I couldn't get ITA Matrix to bring up this routing.

The cheapest J return fare it offered was an outrageous A$19529 on QFi, taking 25 hours 39 minutes (gotta love the accuracy!) outbound and 25'25" inbound from JFK. This used AA flight numbers AA4111, AA274 and AA185 and then old stalwart QF12. Travel was via LAX.

I assume fares on QF3/QF4 will be higher than via LAX.

OZ had a J class fare via ICN of A$7872 return respectively taking 27'30" and 28'35". NH via HND cost A$8449 and was scheduled to occupy 28' and 27'15". PR at A$8086 was 26'30" oubound but slower at 41'10" returning, allowing about 15 hours in MNL, which may suit some as it breaks a long journey. I had to tweak ITA Matrix for the latter by allowing plus or minus two days as PR may not operate MNL-JFK and return on the same days as QFi.

There were other options including KE via ICN that were substantially less expensive than overpriced QFi.

Many who have QFF points and redeem (if one can ever obtain seats), those who want to accumulate more points or have travel paid for by their company or government department/agency will travel on QFi, but if paying out of one's own pocket, why would you use this route given excellent alternatives that either only take a few hours longer in each direction, or offer the opportunity for a day's (or longer) stopover?

It's an enormous premium for not many hours' saving and arguably poorer service than on competitor airlines given how so many suggest QFi has declined. (Read the scathing letter in 'AFR' today from a gent who lives in BrisVegas: he recently travelled on A330s, admittedly a different aircraft to newer B789s).