QF announce non-stop Perth-London B787 Services

[straitman]

I would not want to be on this flight in any cabin. I still don't understand the reasoning other than a gimmick that other airlines may replicate soon after.

Many don't subscribe to your negativity on this as there are a bunch of reasons why it is more than a gimmick.

My concern is A330 economy but I guess the same can be said for business class. Skybed mark I and II both fine by me for the rare times I'm at the front.

Why specifically A330 economy?

 

[Melburnian1]

Of course QF would decline given the number of new entries into the market.. that's a given. How about you look over the last

I assume you meant the 'last three years?'

 

[Quickstatus]

I would not want to be on this flight in any cabin. I still don't understand the reasoning other than a gimmick that other airlines may replicate soon after.


My concern is A330 economy but I guess the same can be said for business class. Skybed mark I and II both fine by me for the rare times I'm at the front.

I do applaud QF for constantly renewing itself and introducing new ideas. Staying the same is a recipe for disaster in this industry.
I can see some upside but also downside in this new product. When travelling in Y I can only see downside and no upside. There are upsides only if in J and W.

Certainly some upside of originating/terminating in PER.

Im definitely not going to do Y on this product. I would rather go 2-3 sector instead.

 

[Franky]

That's what jb747 said.

My reading of JB747s comments was that the PER-EU options may be considered when further deliveries of 787s occur, not rather than..

 

[straitman]

My reading of JB747s comments was that the PER-EU options may be considered when further deliveries of 787s occur, not rather than..

Maybe I misunderstood you then because I agree that's what he said.

 

[hutch]

Sure - easy when oil price is $50USD barrelIts not so much that ULR non stop are good. I see it as dynamic manoeuvres within the industry in response to competition which tends to commoditise air travel. If you can create a unique product then there may be a premium until other jump onboard......No doubt but there will be a point where a 2 sector is more cost / yield effective. Even if 10% less costly on any basis, it's not a great buffer when oil prices have been shown to at least double in the past in a short period. Sure it affects every airline similarly but there's a limit to what passengers will pay - hence the rise and rise of the LCC

Yep - so fuel prices are low and airlines respond accordingly... they go up and they re-assess things. That's what a business should be doing.

 

[hutch]

I do applaud QF for constantly renewing itself and introducing new ideas. Staying the same is a recipe for disaster in this industry. I can see some upside but also downside in this new product. When travelling in Y I can only see downside and no upside. There are upsides only if in J and W. Certainly some upside of originating/terminating in PER. Im definitely not going to do Y on this product. I would rather go 2-3 sector instead.

If I was flying QF, I'd happily fly this sector eastbound from London as it connects well onto CBR bound flights and I don't think 15hrs is that bad. Towards London I'd probably prefer going via DXB as 17hrs followed by a 5am arrival doesn't appeal to me. But if the CBR-PER flight was re-timed and the Y prices was cheaper, I'd probably consider it.

 

[Quickstatus]

How would you compare with the timing of Singair services LHR-SIN-CBR

 

[Daver6]

But Is PER enough of a hub to support several end ports at the other end?

Perhaps longer term that is the plan. Sydney the hub for flights heading to the Americas and Perth the hub for flights to the EU. Potentially as newer aircraft become available (and assuming demand), F could be added. Maybe in the 787-10 and whatever the proposed super duper long range 777 will be.

Obviously this will upset the Melbourne folk, but at least they can stop over in Perth on the way to the EU to watch the AFL GF when its played here one day

 

[nlagalle]

Perhaps longer term that is the plan. Sydney the hub for flights heading to the Americas and Perth the hub for flights to the EU. Potentially as newer aircraft become available (and assuming demand), F could be added. Maybe in the 787-10 and whatever the proposed super duper long range 777 will be.Obviously this will upset the Melbourne folk, but at least they can stop over in Perth on the way to the EU to watch the AFL GF when its played here one day

I can't see Sydney taking on too many more flights given the slot constraints so there is ample space for BNE and MEL to remain hubs and possibly have more traffic. ADL i suspect won't go anywhere given its location

 

[Choosethedrew]

Very tempted by this...

 

[Quickstatus]

How would EK ATH-DXB-BNE // BNE-DXB-ATH compare

 

[hutch]

How would you compare with the timing of Singair services LHR-SIN-CBR

QF is 90 minutes shorter overall trip. PER stopover around 2 hours. SIN stop-over is 4hours (which is still fine). Main selling points for QF are daily flights and late night arrival into Canberra which I like for jet-lag. SQ of course has A380 for some LHR-SIN leg flights and it has better schedule for CBR-SIN-LHR flights.

 

[whatmeworry]

And it applies to most airlines around the world. Can you really see it as sustainable that QF can operate internationally from multiple destinations within Australia? That is pie in the Sky dreaming on your behalf. Look at the US. They don't fly from every city to worldwide desitinations. QF could not survive running multiple hubs all over the country.

So your advocating for another hub from PER?

 

[nlagalle]

So your advocating for another hub from PER?

It makes sense if they are going to push direct flights into EU... i never said they could only have 1. but some people here seem to think QF should be running multiple flights from every city everyday.

 

[mviy]

Perhaps longer term that is the plan. Sydney the hub for flights heading to the Americas and Perth the hub for flights to the EU.

In the longer term a stopover won't be needed in PER so flights from MEL/SYD will go direct non-stop to the EU. The use of PER as a hub is a stopgap till suitable aircraft are available for nonstop from the East Coast to LHR (they'll also want these planes to have the range to fly nonstop to JFK).

If people think PER will remain a major international hub for QF once they don't need to stop somewhere anymore on the way to the EU they're dreaming. The only reason why nonstop flights from the East Coast would be majorly delayed (even if there are suitable aircraft available) would be if oil prices are too high.

When they can fly direct from MEL/SYD presumably passengers from BNE would be directed to SYD and passengers from HBA and ADL to MEL and perhaps PER to MEL as well (though they may be unwilling to fly to the East Coast as that's the wrong direction for flying to LHR).

 

[Melburnian1]

....some people here seem to think QF should be running multiple flights from every city everyday.

Historically more than 50 per cent of the origin of passengers on say Oz - SIN and Oz - HKG plus quite a few other destinations including the USA has been Oz not foreign ports, because Australia used to have more of us going overseas than foreigners coming here. We still exceed overseas visitors, but obviously not on every route - mainland China is one set of routes where there are now more foreigners coming here than us going there.

As a small example, at least twice as many Australians still visit Canada annually than Canadians visit here.

So from this, if CX and SQ can run multiple departures from their home ports into Oz each day, but QF has far fewer seats (and typically - crucially - fewer flight frequencies) - than its major foreign competitors (including TZ v JQ and other similar comparisons), why?

High, unionised unrealistic Australian wage and salary rates might be one reason, our high costs as a nation might be another, but overall, sadly for QF, it's been unsuccessful compared with its foreign peers. It doesn't even fly to KUL, and its list of abandoned destinations could fill a small book (although admittedly markets and demand change over the years.)

60 per cent plus of the total market of international travellers into and out of Oz flies with an airline other than QF, JQ or EK, and including EK is generous because QF does not get every cent in revenue from the total passengers on EK.

 

[Daver6]

In the longer term a stopover won't be needed in PER so flights from MEL/SYD will go direct non-stop to the EU. The use of PER as a hub is a stopgap till suitable aircraft are available for nonstop from the East Coast to LHR (they'll also want these planes to have the range to fly nonstop to JFK).

Are there any current or slated aircraft that can do that sort of flight?

 

[oz_mark]

Are there any current or slated aircraft that can do that sort of flight?

Airbus has an A350 variant (A350-900ULR) and Boeing a 777 (777-8X) variant that may be able to do the routes.

 

[mviy]

Are there any current or slated aircraft that can do that sort of flight?

Well we are talking about the longterm. There are articles such as this one that mention it: https://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-considering-ultra-long-range-airbus-a350-900ulr

and this one: http://www.afr.com/business/transpo...hink-for-qantas-international-20170126-gtz0gv

MEL is slightly closer to LHR than SYD.

So 2022-2023 may be overly optimistic but still 2022-2023 might be a bit soon to be considered long term anyway.