QF International via Darwin

[Seat0B]

Why fly direct when you can connect

Wow!! We might almost be back to 2019 with crazeeeeeee ideas like that @Ade.

 

[Ade]

Wow!! We might almost be back to 2019 with crazeeeeeee ideas like that @Ade.

I reallllyyyyy wish we get back to 2019 travel levels fingers & toes crossed we get there pretty soon!

 

[Jack_OC]

The elephant in the room is travel insurance.
Australia has reciprocal medicare with the UK. In terms of not getting hit with a massive, medical bill if you get Covid while travelling, UK is the only viable option.

This is an important point, but as far as I can tell, there is no problem getting travel insurance that will cover medical bills if you get sick due to COVID while travelling, unless you travel against the advice of the Australian government. At least that is my reading of the Allianz policy. I realise that right now almost any overseas travel would be against the advice of the Australian government, but I assume that will change once the borders reopen? (BTW, just to clarify that there are exclusions related to COVID wrt to other coverage - e.g. having to cancel your trip before you depart).

Additionally, when it comes to reciprocal healthcare arrangements, the UK isn't the only option:

Reciprocal Health Care Agreements - About reciprocal health care agreements - Services Australia

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This is an important point, but as far as I can tell, there is no problem getting travel insurance that will cover medical bills if you get sick due to COVID while travelling, unless you travel against the advice of the Australian government.

Will be interesting to see if insurance companies distinguish between 'do not travel' on safety grounds as opposed to covid grounds... so for example Vietnam might be perfectly ok safety wise, but not covid wise. Will you be covered if you're hit by a bus in Vietnam despite not being covered for covid?

 

[Jack_OC]

Will be interesting to see if insurance companies distinguish between 'do not travel' on safety grounds as opposed to covid grounds... so for example Vietnam might be perfectly ok safety wise, but not covid wise. Will you be covered if you're hit by a bus in Vietnam despite not being covered for covid?

Interesting question, although I'm not sure it makes much difference in reality (at least to me). I would always want to make sure insurance covers the risks that are most likely to arise, so if medical cover for COVID isn't covered, that would be a deal breaker really.

FWIW though, I think it's fair to assume that any insurer can exclude claims related to any travel to a destination where there is a "do not travel" warning in place. I think that was the case even pre-COVID. Perhaps you could argue that your claim should be honoured if it is unrelated to the reason for the "do not travel" warning, but I wouldn't like to find myself in that situation with perhaps 10s of thousands of $ at stake.

 

[SJF211]

In regards to connections in Darwin both the Brisbane and Adelaide flights have been retimed. From the 18th of December QF826 will depart Brisbane at 1845 for a 2220 arrival. QF827 will depart Darwin 0130 (35 mins earlier then the current 0205 departure). From the 18th QF870 will run on the 18th and 19th departing Adelaide at 2155 arriving 0045. From the 20th the current QF858 will be retimed to depart Adelaide at 2000 to arrive into Darwin at 2250. Given the arrival times I’d imagine arriving passengers would have to connect to QF9 as the Brisbane flight arrives just 5 minutes before QF1 departs.

 

[Mr H]

A lot of the comments on this thread take the premise that the way things are now is how they will always be. I get the feeling that the world's attitude to Covid is changing rapidly - probably as a result of vaccination. When we are no longer chasing zero, Covid will transmit and people will get sick. But hopefully vax will keep the levels lower and the effects less severe. So people will not keep doing tests, will not have to quarantine, will not be barred from travel if they are infectious. Covid will be treated just like other infections.

And if facilities at Darwo are rudimentary at the moment, that won't stop someone building a lounge pretty sharpish if there's a prospect it'll get used.

I am crossing my fingers and booking a "why fly direct if you can connect" booking for the second half of 2022 in the expectation that the current restrictions will be a distant memory by then. I think people are just not willing to go along with restrictions for much longer. But I may be wrong...

 

[jrfsp]

As far as i can interpret it, the issue with a SIN will be the requirement for dedicated VTL (vaccinated travel lane) flights.

When SIN allows travel from AU as part of a VTL, people will have to travel on dedicated flights so anyone transiting to London say cannot travel on the same flight as someone going to SIN?

I cant see how QF is going to generate enough demand (competing against SQ) for dedicated VTL flights alongside transit QF1/2 to route the flight via SIN, especially if the lounges wont be open or access is difficult.

 

[justinbrett]

A lot of the comments on this thread take the premise that the way things are now is how they will always be. I get the feeling that the world's attitude to Covid is changing rapidly - probably as a result of vaccination. When we are no longer chasing zero, Covid will transmit and people will get sick. But hopefully vax will keep the levels lower and the effects less severe. So people will not keep doing tests, will not have to quarantine, will not be barred from travel if they are infectious. Covid will be treated just like other infections.

And if facilities at Darwo are rudimentary at the moment, that won't stop someone building a lounge pretty sharpish if there's a prospect it'll get used.

I am crossing my fingers and booking a "why fly direct if you can connect" booking for the second half of 2022 in the expectation that the current restrictions will be a distant memory by then. I think people are just not willing to go along with restrictions for much longer. But I may be wrong...

I think that's contradictory.

It's only because of covid that Darwin is being used. In a covid-free world, Qantas would be flying out of Perth where it makes commercial sense.

There just isn't the long haul market from DRW, and whilst it has had QFI flights previously, they were patchy and ultimately the city is served by Jetstar and foreign carriers.

I say this as a former Darwin resident who was working in the aviation industry up there, including the period where QFI transitioned into Australian Airlines and ultimately Jetstar. The airport (including the Qantas Club) is much better these days, but I can't see any further investment in the short/medium term - the airport is very well equipped for the number of flights it handles.

 

[Mr H]

I think that's contradictory.

I don't think I am being contradictory - only pointing out the difficulty in others' thinking. My own hunch is that neither DRW nor PER are going to be long term international hubs for Europe. There is not enough direct traffic from those cities to justify the routing as a single hop, and if you;re going to have to break the journey, people would rather have a more even split in one of the super-airports in Asia. But I don't think quarantine or the lack of a business lounge in DRW are going to be a factor in where we are at in six to ten months' time.

 

[justinbrett]

I don't think I am being contradictory - only pointing out the difficulty in others' thinking. My own hunch is that neither DRW nor PER are going to be long term international hubs for Europe. There is not enough direct traffic from those cities to justify the routing as a single hop, and if you;re going to have to break the journey, people would rather have a more even split in one of the super-airports in Asia. But I don't think quarantine or the lack of a business lounge in DRW are going to be a factor in where we are at in six to ten months' time.

We're in agreement (about DRW at least), I thought you were saying that DRW will persist long term and somebody will build a lounge.

I think QF will return to domestic only out of Darwin - JQ will do the international routes.

Disagree about PER, stats were showing a big majority were either outbound from PER (for locals) or inbound to PER (British tourists), and it's a lot easier to fill a B787. Maybe it won't stay daily, maybe 3-4x weekly. But I think there will always be a market for it. But yes that's because there's a market for PER-LHR direct, not that PER could be a hub.

 

[Mr H]

We're in agreement (about DRW at least), I thought you were saying that DRW will persist long term and somebody will build a lounge.

If DRW is given a green light for a route with some degree of long term certainty (which neither of us think will happen) then a lounge would be built quickly.

If PER-LHR has enough local pax then it may be sustainable, and good luck to them. I think WA's hold-out against Covid is very time limited and I'd bet on it being gone by Christmas. The public mood has changed - the thinking in NSW and Vic flipped so quickly on this. When the sandgropers see the rest of Australia getting back to normality they will demand that for themselves.

 

[OATEK]

We're in agreement (about DRW at least), I thought you were saying that DRW will persist long term and somebody will build a lounge.

I think QF will return to domestic only out of Darwin - JQ will do the international routes.

Disagree about PER, stats were showing a big majority were either outbound from PER (for locals) or inbound to PER (British tourists), and it's a lot easier to fill a B787. Maybe it won't stay daily, maybe 3-4x weekly. But I think there will always be a market for it. But yes that's because there's a market for PER-LHR direct, not that PER could be a hub.

Before Covid QF9 began in MEL, and while I am not sure what % pax to LHR came across the Nullabor as opposed to joining in PER, I suspect the MEL pax made it pay. So think PER-LHR is somewhat problematic once direct MEL-LHR begin. Doubt they could maintain daily, and QF9 will move to MEL-LHR if project sunrise gets off the ground.

 

[justinbrett]

Before Covid QF9 began in MEL, and while I am not sure what % pax to LHR came across the Nullabor as opposed to joining in PER, I suspect the MEL pax made it pay. So think PER-LHR is somewhat problematic once direct MEL-LHR begin. Doubt they could maintain daily, and QF9 will move to MEL-LHR if project sunrise gets off the ground.

Melbourne only made up 25%. Adelaide 4%.

71% of inbound visitors got out at Perth.

AJ has made many statements saying it was the WA market that made the route a success.

Don't think it's problematic at all, it's been one of their most successful and profitable routes.

 

[OATEK]

71% of inbound visitors got out at Perth.

AJ has made many statements saying it was the WA market that made the route a success.

Don't think it's problematic at all, it's been one of their most successful and profitable routes.

I just think that without MEL leg, 70% will not sustain daily flights PER-LHR. Maybe as you say 3 or 4 days a week.

 

[jrfsp]

Before Covid QF9 began in MEL, and while I am not sure what % pax to LHR came across the Nullabor as opposed to joining in PER, I suspect the MEL pax made it pay. So think PER-LHR is somewhat problematic once direct MEL-LHR begin. Doubt they could maintain daily, and QF9 will move to MEL-LHR if project sunrise gets off the ground.

If anything i think it will be MEL that will struggle with direct LHR. It has less expat brits than Perth and Sydney and less inbound tourism from the UK. PER will work because the 787 is fairly small.

The A350 will have more seats to fill and will be more expensive to run (than a shorter PER route)

 

[dajop]

As far as i can interpret it, the issue with a SIN will be the requirement for dedicated VTL (vaccinated travel lane) flights.

When SIN allows travel from AU as part of a VTL, people will have to travel on dedicated flights so anyone transiting to London say cannot travel on the same flight as someone going to SIN?

I cant see how QF is going to generate enough demand (competing against SQ) for dedicated VTL flights alongside transit QF1/2 to route the flight via SIN, especially if the lounges wont be open or access is difficult.

With VTL flights, it's all about inbound to SIN, and transits to both non-VTL and VTL flights are allowed.

So if QF routed QF1/2 via SIN (and assuming a VTL opened up between Singapore and Australia) with appropriate permissions from the Singapore government:
- QF 1 SYD-SIN and QF 2 LHR-SIN could operate as VTL flights and carry fully vaccinated pax into SIN and beyond.
- QF 1 SIN-LHR would not need to be a VTL flight and as such could carry passengers connecting from anywhere/any airlines the Singapore government allowed and UK allow entry to, for example from QF35 from MEL irrespective of whether QF35 operated as a VTL flight or not.
- QF2 SIN-SYD would depend on whether Australia government institutes similar VTL approach or not for inbound flights. If not, it could, subject to permission from Singapore goverment, allow transits from other flights as well (eg 3K flights).

 

[jrfsp]

With VTL flights, transits to both non-VTL and VTL flights are allowed. Transit from a non-VTL flight to VTL flight is not permitted.

So if QF routed QF1/2 via SIN (and assuming a VTL opened up between Singapore and Australia) with appropriate permissions from the Singapore government:
- QF 1 SYD-SIN and QF 2 LHR-SIN could operate as VTL flights and carry fully vaccinated pax into SIN.
- QF2 LHR-SIN could also carry pax connecting from Italy, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, France and Spain (provided they'd only been in those countries in previous 14 days)
- QF1 SIN-LHR QF 2 SIN-SYD could carry passengers connecting from anywhere/any airlines the Singapore government allowed, for example from QF35 from MEL.

Confusing much, so actually its not too bad - maybe not such a big issue as i thought

 

[dajop]

Confusing much, so actually its not too bad - maybe not such a big issue as i thought

Yeh, confusing, but easiest to remember it's all about inbound to SIN, outbound doesn't matter so much (with the proviso that airlines still need to obtain permission from Singapore government to allow passengers to connect to other flights).

 

[Mr H]

If anything i think it will be MEL that will struggle with direct LHR. It has less expat brits than Perth and Sydney...

Maybe we could get direct flights to Athens.