QF announce non-stop Perth-London B787 Services

[MEL_Traveller]

Oh I know it's the airline's fault, but with the exception of JAL, all the Boeings that aren't 747s or 767s have narrow seating because the airlines have squished in more seats into the modern models. (I admit I've never been in a 757 so can't say about that) Nobody with an Airbus has done that yet.

There are several operators out there with a 2-4-2 configuration on the 767 - fairly tight. And also low cost operators with 3-3-3 on the airbus A330 - Air Asia being on of the major carriers to offer this configuration. Cebu Pacific is another. Again, fairly tight.

747s are actually a victim of seat squishing - their original configuration was a 2-4-3, or 9 abreast. Ten was later introduced and became standard.

Narrow bodies today there just isn't much of a scope - you can't really fit an extra seat in. It's all down to cabin width - and the ERJs have very narrow seats in a 2-2. But in the past narrow bodies were also victim of squishing - the 727 had an option for 2-3 seating, later increased to 3-3. BAe 146s were introduced with 2-3 seating which many operators converted to 3-3.

 

[levelnine]

Let us be reminded and appreciate that we are not travelling on the roof of an overcrowded train through a 3rd world country.

That is not a relevant comparator. If 3rd world train travel is a relevant comparator, why not luxury first class ocean liner travel?

The relevant comparison is other Y seats on other airlines and aircraft that are available for a comparable cost.

On this relevant comparison, the 9-abreast 787 is a terrible product, especially for ultra long haul flight.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

On this relevant comparison, the 9-abreast 787 is a terrible product, especially for ultra long haul flight.

And there's the issue - the numbers speak for themselves. The 787 is tight on seating. 17.2 vs 18 on an airbus may not seem like much, but add two seats together (side-by-side) and that's an extra 1.6 inches of shoulder room, and hip room. Some may find the 787 comfortable, but an airbus may be even more comfortable.

 

[JessicaTam]

And there's the issue - the numbers speak for themselves. The 787 is tight on seating. 17.2 vs 18 on an airbus may not seem like much, but add two seats together (side-by-side) and that's an extra 1.6 inches of shoulder room, and hip room. Some may find the 787 comfortable, but an airbus may be even more comfortable.

Yep. After doing the two back to back you won't get me back on a QF 787 in Y.

 

[suze2000]

That is not a relevant comparator. If 3rd world train travel is a relevant comparator, why not luxury first class ocean liner travel?

Thank you for making this post, I was just about to do the same.

A couple of years ago I was on an A380 out of LAX that was delayed a couple of hours and then taxied for (no joke) an hour before takeoff. I know that trip would have been awful if it had been a plane with 17" wide seats. The big reason for that is that my cough is more than 17" wide. That extra inch means a lot to me, and in the shoulders as well as my coughs take up a bit of space too and force my arms out sideways onto the armrests... and, well you see where I'm going with this.

ETA: why can I write about my coughs but not my *rse?

 

[JohnK]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but I’ve read a lot of negative opinions on AFF from members who haven’t been on the flight yet.

Let us be reminded and appreciate that we are not travelling on the roof of an overcrowded train through a 3rd world country.

If I remember correctly I have flown TG 787 in business KUL-BKK, RJ 787 in business BKK-HKG and economy HKG-BKK and JQ 787 in economy SYD-BNE and SYD-OOL.

I wasn't too impressed with RJ business class on this aircraft. Too narrow for me. I also mentioned RJ economy was OK for a 2 hour flight but I was in bulkhead and only 1 other person in economy in first 5 rows.

JQ economy was OK for the 1 hour flights but again I was in bulkhead both times with no one next to me.

I would not want to sit in economy in a 787 for 15-16 hours with a person either side. It will be torture.

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but I’ve read a lot of negative opinions on AFF from members who haven’t been on the flight yet.

Let us be reminded and appreciate that we are not travelling on the roof of an overcrowded train through a 3rd world country.

I tend to agree with you, plenty of view points being shared, some are very qualified responses with real life experience, some pure speculation. The consensus here on AFF certainly does not look favourable for QF's B787 Y configuration, but those early BITRE figures are very good for a brand new route and with April being a historically a tough month for AUS > Europe flights, the intial pax figures appear favourable.

I really believe much of the issue with the comfort factor in long haul Y seats on new aircraft is the choice of seat itself.

The AY Y seat on the A350 would be the worst long haul Y seat that i have experienced in recent years.
The slimline construction, with almost no padding feels not to dissimilar to sitting on a park bench for an extended period of time.
Many airlines are demanding the weight of the seats in new aircraft be reduced, which in turn results in the overall seat comfort deteriorating due to the light weight materials used in the seat construction.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I tend to agree with you,plenty of view points being shared, some are very qualified responses with real life experience, some pure speculation. The consensus here on AFF certainly does not long favourable for QF's B787 Y configuration, but those early BITRE figures are very good for a brand new route and f considering April is historically a tough month for AUS > Europe flights, the pax figures are strong.

I really believe much of the issue with the comfort factor in long haul Y seats on new aircraft is the choice of seat itself.
The AY Y on the A350 would be the worst long haul Y seat that i have experienced in recent years. The slimline construction, with almost no padding feels not to dissimilar to sitting on a park bench for a park bench for extended time.
Many airlines are demanding the weight of the seats in new aircraft be reduced which in turn, reduces the comfort factor due to the light weight materials used in the seats construction.

But how realistic are the figures with respect to loadings? The recent qantas ‘sale’ was advertising premium economy from Melbourne and Sydney to london for $6099. Ex PER premium was $3800. The choice is pretty easy there, and it’s not a reflection on the popularity of the service per se, just the chance to pocket $2000 (allows for the purchase of domestic connections to PER).

Loadings are often fare dependent, for any airline. And in themselves i don’t believe loadings are an endorsement of a product.

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

But how realistic are the figures with respect to loadings? The recent qantas ‘sale’ was advertising premium economy from Melbourne and Sydney to london for $6099. Ex PER premium was $3800. The choice is pretty easy there, and it’s not a reflection on the popularity of the service per se, just the chance to pocket $2000 (allows for the purchase of domestic connections to PER).

Loadings are often fare dependent, for any airline. And in themselves i don’t believe loadings are an endorsement of a product.

Not going to disagree with you - QF did have some good sales fares to start the route off and some Good Award availability which is more generous than what you can now find on the route. It is still early days for the route, and a little too early to prophesise the future.

 

[TheInsider]

Loadings are often fare dependent, for any airline. And in themselves i don’t believe loadings are an endorsement of a product.

Loadings may not be an indicator of customer endorsement, but NPS is. The NPS for the QF9/10 is consistently high in all cabins. Usually higher than any domestic or other international flight.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Loadings may not be an indicator of customer endorsement, but NPS is. The NPS for the QF9/10 is consistently high in all cabins. Usually higher than any domestic or other international flight.

Net promoter scores? There’d be a lot of analysis there. The excitement of a new route could be a major factor.

 

[TheInsider]

Net promoter scores? There’d be a lot of analysis there. The excitement of a new route could be a major factor.

Yep, Net Promoter Score. Some info about it here: QANTAS - NET PROMOTER SCORE - Infografia

Excitement of a new route may be a factor, but a lot of people don't really care too much about it. It's just another flight , even if it's in Y.

Also to add to that, the NPS on a 787 US flight is higher than an A380 or B747 flight too, this is for Y.

 

[BD1959]

I'm not that convinced everyone see this as a new route: it's still QF9/QF10, it still runs MEL-LHR-MEL with a stop on the way.
There may be lots of gushing sounds from the QF PR machine (and it's lap-dog commercial media) when first introduced but at the end of the day the most significant factor for me is that there is a reduction in premium seats (and award) available between MEL and LHR.

Regards,

BD

 

[Pleb Status]

I tend to agree with you, plenty of view points being shared, some are very qualified responses with real life experience, some pure speculation. The consensus here on AFF certainly does not look favourable for QF's B787 Y configuration, but those early BITRE figures are very good for a brand new route and with April being a historically a tough month for AUS > Europe flights, the intial pax figures appear favourable.

QF9/10 MEL-XYZ-LHR v.v is not a 'new' route. The only thing that has changed for the majority of pax (East Coast originators) is the stopover point and the aircraft type/product.

QF have reduced the number of pax carried in a day to Europe on their own metal (isolating the QF9/10 changes) by 248 ow from 484 ow to 236 ow. With that reduction in seats, if I was in QF management I would asking some very serious questions if the LF was not close to 100% even in the quietest times of the year...

 

[levelnine]

With that reduction in seats, if I was in QF management I would asking some very serious questions if the LF was not close to 100% even in the quietest times of the year...

An excellent point. Another reason why load factors cannot be the sole determinant of success on this route, especially in the early days where there has been lots of free press, extensive discounting and first time 787 flyers (who subsequently vow never to fly it in Y again).

 

[TheInsider]

An excellent point. Another reason why load factors cannot be the sole determinant of success on this route, especially in the early days.

You know what, when it comes down to it, if it's profitable, it's a success.

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

You know what, when it comes down to it, if it's profitable, it's a success.

The armchair experts who despise Qantas would disagree.

 

[levelnine]

You know what, when it comes down to it, if it's profitable, it's a success.

A success for Qantas, yes. That doesn't, however, mean it is a success for consumers. If Ryanair becomes the dominant model of airline travel in the twenty-first century, few would hail that a success for consumers.

 

[kevrosmith]

Yep, Net Promoter Score. Some info about it here: QANTAS - NET PROMOTER SCORE - Infografia

Wow.. according to that video, only white people with blond or brunette hair travel with or work with Qantas... not a very diversity-friendly promotion that one... how did that get through the diversity-policy police...?

 

[coyote25]

I'm just interested in how many J award seats are getting opened up on PER-LHR. As a WP I'm being looking on and off for a while now but hadn't really seen anything for the last 3-4 months. Is this getting so well booked they aren't releasing J awards?