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

[NSun]

Looking ahead to the Points Plane tomorrow, it looks like ZND (Emily) will be doing that flight as it appears QF3 will be the inbound QF76 which will be operated by ZND.

I'm flying SYD-AKL tonight and having brunch with a relative tomorrow before joining the Points Plane in AKL.

A potential long wait US customs has been something I've been worried about (as I have no Global Entry). But at least if New York is your final destination, you're there already (which isn't true if you're entering the US at DFW). And if your final destination is somewhere nearby such as Boston or Washington, it would be a quick flight as opposed to another 3 hours which it would be from DFW.

 

[kpro]

Well QF doesn’t codeshare with B6 so we can discount those.

Already mentioned "discounting the B6 codeshares" in the post you quoted. Even if AA coded they wouldn't earn SC's.

DFW-MIA is 80 SCs.

Was just going by the QF status credits calc, which yes can be often wrong. Says 60 for the AA code and 85 for the QF code. Either way still less.

 

[dajop]

I’m guessing though that those chasing status credits are more of a niche market for this service not the backbone …:

 

[justinbrett]

Already mentioned "discounting the B6 codeshares" in the post you quoted. Even if AA coded they wouldn't earn SC's.

Yes, so let’s go ahead and discount JFK as a domestic hub for AA as per my original point.

 

[kpro]

Yes, so let’s go ahead and discount JFK as a domestic hub for AA as per my original point.

Except that my reasoning in post 353 still stands, destinations posted there are not B6 codeshares. It might not be the best domestic AA hub and DFW might be better depending on the circumstance, but I wouldn't be discounting it entirely.

In any case, I think it's another case of we've both made our points so not worth continuing around in circles.

 

[justinbrett]

Except that my reasoning in post 353 still stands, destinations posted there are not B6 codeshares. It might not be the best domestic AA hub and DFW might be better depending on the circumstance, but I wouldn't be discounting it entirely.

In any case, I think it's another case of we've both made our points so not worth continuing around in circles.

LAS is a more viable domestic hub and it’s not even designated as a hub.

I think we disagree what a hub is.

 

[jpp42]

It might not be the best domestic AA hub and DFW might be better depending on the circumstance, but I wouldn't be discounting it entirely.

My primary US destination is one of those cities (RDU), and a number of years ago I used AA to connect with QF108 (I think?) i.e. RDU-JFK-LAX-SYD. It was nice being on the half-empty B747 on the JFK-LAX leg (this was before they replaced it with an A330). But these days, multiple carriers including AA have nonstop RDU-LAX flights (which would have been unheard of, 10 years ago), and of course many options to DFW. Given there's a one-stop option to either SYD or MEL via either DFW or LAX, with shorter total travel time, lower likelihood of delays (outside peak summer thunderstorm season re: DFW) I remain unconvinced on JFK transits and agree that it's more attractive for O&D customers, of which there is of course strong demand in the NYC area. Sure, there will be a few people here and there making connections, but it will be ancillary, not enough to drive the business one way or another, which I think is justinbrett's point.

 

[kpro]

LAS is a more viable domestic hub and it’s not even designated as a hub.

I think we disagree what a hub is.

AA serves only 10 domestic destinations from LAS (vs 21) and lacks a significant OneWorld presence.

So I agree to disagree on that one.

there will be a few people here and there making connections, but it will be ancillary, not enough to drive the business one way or another, which I think is justinbrett's point.

If that's the point, yes I agree.

 

[justinbrett]

AA serves only 10 domestic destinations from LAS (vs 21) and lacks a significant OneWorld presence.

So I agree to disagree on that one.

If that's the point, yes I agree.

It’s not about the number of destinations, it’s the ability to connect.

Most JFK non-transcon routes are served once or twice a day, if that. Most LAS routes have 4+ flights a day.

I’m not saying LAS is a hub, but it’s more of a domestic hub than JFK is.

 

[Katie]

Sorry, I think I meant WLG there.

I was on a flight to CHC on Fri night/Sat morning 9/6 and we were diverted to WLG due to fog at CHC and being unable to land in those conditions.

The pilot commented that ATC were considering two diversion options - AKL or WLG. WLG was chosen - and we landed around 2am Sat - because AKL has a curfew on Saturday and Monday mornings.

I don't know if he was right, just relaying that experience.

 

[Katie]

I think a more direct flight would be favoured by some families on holidays, and for school groups. Speaking to the mum of one of Teen's friends, she was horrified at the connections we were doing on a trip to the US (gee, and they weren't even really tricky! ), and said she tries to have as few connections as possible. She's also travelling with three kids - 16, 14, and 11.

I definitely try to have fewer connections/get to my destination quicker when travelling with my Teen. This flight to NYC might well be a contender for our Schoolies jaunt to Disneyworld next year, as a few days in NYC going to broadways shows would be right up the Teen's alley. And help console for the lack of NY trip for this year's grade 11 Arts students.

 

[Mwenenzi]

I was on a flight to CHC on Fri night/Sat morning 9/6 and we were diverted to WLG due to fog at CHC and being unable to land in those conditions.

The pilot commented that ATC were considering two diversion options - AKL or WLG. WLG was chosen - and we landed around 2am Sat - because AKL has a curfew on Saturday and Monday mornings.

I don't know if he was right, just relaying that experience.

From a NZ Herald story of 18 Nov, 2019 05:01 PM

An Auckland Airport spokesman said the airport routinely closes the runway on Monday (1.30am-4am) for runway maintenance, to ensure it maintains safe operations for passengers and airlines as well meet Civil Aviation Authority standards.

 

[docjames]

Probably a perception that high yielding passengers want to arrive in SYD or MEL at the start not the end of a business day, plus airline convenience.

Reducing the likelihood of being upset by the SYD curfew might be a third reason.

Logically I'd have thought many travellers (business and lesiure) would welcome the opportunity to collapse into an hotel (or their own) bed at night rather than the annoyance of being unable to use a hotel room until 1400 or 1500 hours if you've not booked it for 'the night before', but the airlines disagree.

It was also potentially historical due to range (and pacific stops - hot airports and better takeoff performance at night) and also to allow for US east coast connections ie:

From Aus, Arrive LAX early AM, get to JFK or East coast destination early evening.

To Aus, allows for departure by mid afternoon / early evening from JFK/east coast, connect into LAX and overnight into Aus. If the LAX - Australia went AM departure from LAX, hard to connect from east coast.

They also use the aircraft downtime in LAX for maintenance.

VA had a daytime flight which was popular but was largely west coast / California traffic, and.or required and overnight in LAX on the way home from elsewhere in the US.

 

[dajop]

If the LAX - Australia went AM departure from LAX, hard to connect from east coast.

If by Australia, you mean Sydney, yes agreed, although WSI might work in a few years? . But if you mean MEL, could easily connect from east coast same day for a 9-10pm arrival in to MEL during the Australian winter, or for an 11pm arrival into MEL during our summer, with any where from ORD west OK, but even a JFK-LAX connection would be possible (if taking a departure around 6:30/7am).

 

[docjames]

If by Australia, you mean Sydney, yes agreed, although WSI might work in a few years? . But if you mean MEL, could easily connect from east coast same day for a 9-10pm arrival in to MEL during the Australian winter, or for an 11pm arrival into MEL during our summer, with any where from ORD west OK, but even a JFK-LAX connection would be possible (if taking a departure around 6:30/7am).

It’s also more efficient for Qantas LAX ground ops to run an arrival bank and a departure bank of flights (and carry no staffing during the middle of the day) so whilst MEL could in theory have late arriving flights, it makes more sense for Qantas (especially in the era of JFK-LAX own metal operation) to have the flight departures for SYD/MEL/BNE (and arrivals) all banked to line up.

There’s been quite the discussion re: connections in JFK but IMO the whole point is a smaller sized aircraft means JFK is the target, not onwards connections from JFK (Acknowledging there will be some, but they forgoe revenue to the via LAX options for an increased fuel cost of the ULH flight, in which case they will be better routing those going to other destinations (popular would be BOS, MCO etc) via LAX or DFW rather than JFK.

Pricing of options eg. MEL-LAX-BOS vs MEL-AKL-JFK-BOS will be interesting to see how it pans out. Noting it’s an extra stop but an “easier” one in many regards (as has been fleshed out earlier up thread) that loses the “easier” when you have to connect in JFK.

Qantas will have the end destination data long term (ie. what are the top 10 end destinations for their pax), and also previosu experience splitting LHR via SIN for ULH via PER to know the cross cannibalisation and will therefore have a well educated guesstimate of demand for AKL v LAX options.

 

[jrfsp]

Be interesting to see what happens when the other connections from BNE/MEL are delayed, will they hold the JFK flight, as unlike at LAX there will be no other back up options for connections

 

[Lynda2475]

Agree NYC will be the destination (either starting or ending) for most of those on QF3/4 and it is a favourite of mine. As someone who loathes Los Angeles the more options to avoid it the better.

Be interesting to see what happens when the other connections from BNE/MEL are delayed, will they hold the JFK flight, as unlike at LAX there will be no other back up options for connections

I doubt it, If not departing directly form SYD or AKL; one would be wise to ensure a healthy buffer for leg one (6 hours min would be my preference).

 

[Quickstatus]

Daily fail but hey ......

...

Be interesting to see what happens when the other connections from BNE/MEL are delayed, will they hold the JFK flight

Would be the same for the QF7 to DFW. They wont hold the flight.
One reason would be that there is not a lot of reserve in terms of crew hours when on such a route.

 

[serfty]

J is pretty fullView attachment 333743

Looks like 40 D/E were no shows or moved. Those three J seats remained empty. 90+ unallocated in economy.

 

[dajop]

I doubt it, If not departing directly form SYD or AKL; one would be wise to ensure a healthy buffer for leg one (6 hours min would be my preference).

In which case, might as well travel via DFW or LAX. MEL has 1:40 and BNE has 2:15 connection. If not on these you need to overnight in AKL, arriving about 17 hrs before QF3 departs (or take the redeye from MEL-AKL and have a 11:35 transit.