QF to Europe returns to the Kangaroo Route (via SIN)

[mviy]

Wonder if that's because you're a P1? Will be interesting to see if seats open up closer to departure with the loads of capacity to SIN.

 

[Chalkie]

This gives QF quite a nice backup plan if PER-LHR is unsuccessful (e.g. if MEL passengers shun the route, or oil prices rise significantly and make it too expensive). QF could shift MEL-PER-LHR 787 to MEL-SIN-LHR A380 pretty easily if they need to.

That's an interesting point. There's not much difference in the (awful - I detest early morning arrivals into LHR; mid-late afternoon arrivals are preferable for me) arrival times between the new QF9 and QF1. For me, I don't see any point at all in taking QF9 MEL-LHR, unless one is really keen to reduce flying time. For the Kangaroo route, which is so long anyway, a couple of hours extra in a lounge at SIN just means a couple of hours extra work time.

 

[kermatu]

Haven't had a chance or need to examine this closely but my initial reaction is this is great. I'm happy there's more scope to fly via SIN on QF metal through to LHR (HKG would have been good too, if only for the Pier F lounge in HKG rather than the QF lounge in SIN). And that the EK alliance remains (hopefully) intact to give greater choice into Europe, and Trans-Tasman.

Should also mean the F lounge in MEL is secure; although hard to see it remaining open and with full services available for the same times as present.

I do fear that lounges and access in SIN will be a problem though. And this must take away some custom from BA which they can't be thrilled with.

 

[mviy]

BA has two flights to SIN a day (one of which is an A380. The smaller plane then flies on to SYD). So there'll now be quite a lot of capacity for SYD-SIN-LHR.

Will be interesting if with this change when looking for award seats there's the option of e.g. MEL-SIN in QF J then SIN-LHR in BA J.

 

[RichardMEL]

Totally agree on the LHR arrival times. Terrible.

Current QF9 is perfect - evening out of MEL.. go sleepies most of the way to DXB, land at LHR lunchtime, get to hotel/accom(whatever) at decent time to get a room and freshen up, and a few hours to the evening, a dinner and bed in the local timezone. O-dark-thirty morning arrivals into europe are shocking from this point of view (unless one stupidly wants to go to work right away?!)

It's unfortunate they couldn't time this out better, but it probably also has to do with slots at LHR. I wonder what happens to the mid day slots for QF9/10. EK maybe gets them?

My other thought on QF35 MEL-SIN r/t to 380 is less about connecting to LHR (QF37 do that) but the capacity on the day flight to Asia (and QF have been harping on about this for the past year or so). Can also connect to a 3K evening bank ex-SIN.

 

[justinbrett]

So are QF selling SIN-LHR? They haven't said they are and it's not bookable at the moment. I assume they will, BA sell SYD-SIN and assume we still have the agreement with Singapore as SQ are still flying Aus-NZ.

Surely there has to be a deal with QF and BA pending (understand why they wouldn't announce it on day one - message would be Qantas is shifting partners) - but it seems unlikely BA and QF will be flying the same route at the same time without a JV deal - or at least codesharing. Perhaps BA will go back to BKK-SYD. Or even SIN-AKL and leave Aus to QF. Eitherway I can't see them competing on this route without some sort of deal.

 

[mviy]

My other thought on QF35 MEL-SIN r/t to 380 is less about connecting to LHR (QF37 do that) but the capacity on the day flight to Asia (and QF have been harping on about this for the past year or so)

They may say that, but my desire to fly on the A380 service MEL-SIN would solely be to connect onto a flight to LHR.

 

[RichardMEL]

They may say that, but my desire to fly on the A380 service MEL-SIN would solely be to connect onto a flight to LHR.

... because it's all about YOU!

 

[mviy]

So are QF selling SIN-LHR? They haven't said they are and it's not bookable at the moment. I assume they will, BA sell SYD-SIN and assume we still have the agreement with Singapore as SQ are still flying Aus-NZ.

QF's guide for travel agents (see post #41) mentions that the SYD-SIN-LHR flights will progressively go on sale starting tomorrow. We'll know more once that happens.

Surely there has to be a deal with QF and BA pending (understand why they wouldn't announce it on day one - message would be Qantas is shifting partners) - but it seems unlikely BA and QF will be flying the same route at the same time without a JV deal - or at least codesharing. Perhaps BA will go back to BKK-SYD. Or even SIN-AKL and leave Aus to QF. Eitherway I can't see them competing on this route without some sort of deal.

QF has renewed their agreement with EK. If they can do a deal with BA that benefits the shareholders for both QF and BA and doesn't conflict with QF's deal with EK I'm sure they will. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[dk4]

...but it seems unlikely BA and QF will be flying the same route at the same time without a JV deal ...

If EK inked a new 5 year deal that didn't explicitly exclude QF working more closely with BA on flights to EU, then I would be surprised! Plus, the way BA unilaterally expelled QP members from their lounges without prior consultation with QF (the final push that presumably sent QF into EK's arms), is likely to still leave a bitter taste in many mouths.

 

[tm.smile]

Surely there has to be a deal with QF and BA pending (understand why they wouldn't announce it on day one - message would be Qantas is shifting partners) - but it seems unlikely BA and QF will be flying the same route at the same time without a JV deal - or at least codesharing. Perhaps BA will go back to BKK-SYD. Or even SIN-AKL and leave Aus to QF. Eitherway I can't see them competing on this route without some sort of deal.

BA isn't some necessary deal. They already have codeshares on routes that are beneficial to QF. There is no need for a JV or codeshare between AU and the UK

 

[Quickstatus]

What can BA offer in a JV that would be beneficial to QF?

 

[mviy]

Plus, the way BA unilaterally expelled QP members from their lounges without prior consultation with QF (the final push that presumably sent QF into EK's arms), is likely to still leave a bitter taste in many mouths.

Maybe BA got wind that QF wanted to fly to LHR via SIN again and yet at the same time continue a deal with EK. I'm sure that would be upsetting to BA. BA would have much preferred it if QF dumped the EK deal and did a deal with BA.

 

[justinbrett]

BA isn't some necessary deal. They already have codeshares on routes that are beneficial to QF. There is no need for a JV or codeshare between AU and the UK

I think you're missing the point. JV deals allow capacity to be managed and ensure two otherwise allied companies are not competing with each other.

The AA deal has become significantly worse for both airlines - as many AA destinations are now only bookable via Qantas if you route through DFW or SFO/YVR. Otherwise you have to go on AA metal and use the aa website. It's not good for either airline and that's why they are going to try again for a JV deal.

I think you'll find it will be the same with BA. Well, my thoughts anyway.

 

[SYD]

While they're on a roll, would be asking too much to reinstate a daytime flight SIN-SYD?...

 

[TheBOSman]

The QF2/QF36 LHR-SIN-MEL timing is really nice.

Also re MEL-SIN-LHR.. if EK keeps their MEL-SIN-DXB routing, the timing for that slots nicely to connect to QF1 to LHR as it arrives ~2200ish in SIN, and has an F cabin and a QF code... for those concerned about the longer layover, that could be one option if QF37 is not to one's liking.

So, one would fly Emirates on a route (MEL-SIN) not involving DXB, to connect to Qantas flying on a route not (at least in the specific terms of it being a SIN-LHR leg) actually serving Australia. And both airlines would probably be cool with this as they are dividing the profit/loss from your ticket anyway.

Airlines makes no darn sense .

 

[tm.smile]

I think you're missing the point. JV deals allow capacity to be managed and ensure two otherwise allied companies are not competing with each other.

The AA deal has become significantly worse for both airlines - as many AA destinations are now only bookable via Qantas if you route through DFW or SFO/YVR. Otherwise you have to go on AA metal and use the aa website. It's not good for either airline and that's why they are going to try again for a JV deal.

They are two very different scenarios. The point of EK's alliance was to allow one stop connections to much of Europe. BA isn't needed because when QF partnered with them, it involved connecting at LHR onto your final destination. This is now mute for most of the EU when flying EK.

The JV with AA is similar in that its about enabling reach into North America from any port that QF serves from the first port of call in the US. Having a JV with AA just allows QF to share revenue on the flights that AA operate carrying QF pax.

The fact that BA and QF are competing now on SYD-LHR hasn't changed since the original EK agreement. The only change is that QF now also connects in SIN.

 

[RichardMEL]

So, one would fly Emirates on a route (MEL-SIN) not involving DXB, to connect to Qantas flying on a route not (at least in the specific terms of it being a SIN-LHR leg) actually serving Australia. And both airlines would probably be cool with this as they are dividing the profit/loss from your ticket anyway. Airlines makes no darn sense .

I'm not saying this will happen.. fares could well restrict use of codeshare flights in such a case, but if the flight's there I don't see why it couldn't occur. In general though pax would go on the QF metal to connect, but it occured that the connection could potentially work (or perhaps EK will redeploy and code on the QF flight) Just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

 

[docjames]

So with an 0510 arrival (QF9) and an 0650 arrival (QF1) - what happens to the early afternoon arrival slot (currently used by QF9)?

Also goes back to leaving the A380 on the ground from 0650--> 2130 (or therabouts depending on daylight savings) which i thought they'd changed for "better fleet utilisation" of the A380.


The 787 turn is better at 0510 --> 1330.


Must have been some slot trading to achieve these timings.

 

[mviy]

Also goes back to leaving the A380 on the ground from 0650--> 2130 (or therabouts depending on daylight savings) which i thought they'd changed for "better fleet utilisation" of the A380.

MEL-SIN vs MEL-DXB-LHR frees up an A380, I think. MEL-SIN return would only require one A380.