QF to Haneda

[under the radar]

There have been rumours that HND and HKG will change to 330 to facilitate the retirement of more 747 and allow new destinations such as YVR.

My only issue with this rumour - these routes are premium routes with decent J demand. The 333 and 744 have the same Y capacity, but will see the loss of W and J capacity more than halve from 58 to 28 seats. What will QF then do to offset the significant loss of J class seats?

less QF J/C seats will see fully booked J/C cabins for QF on a more consistant basis and at a premium price...that is not an 'issue' for QF...it's a bonus!!!

 

[Claudius]

Would hate to lose the 747s that go to NRT or HND next year, it's alread hard enough to book J tickets.

 

[Himeno]

less QF J/C seats will see fully booked J/C cabins for QF on a more consistant basis and at a premium price...that is not an 'issue' for QF...it's a bonus!!!

The new A330 configs don't have W. I will not buy Y for long flights. For single short return trips, I don't get J.
Without W on the 330s, I simply won't book QF.
What could have resulted in more tickets to QF will now result in less.

 

[Himeno]

Most likely. QF have applied & had approval for 3 x weekly flights to Vancouver using B744. They need to use this capacity by March 15.
1 x B744 will also be used on the new MEL LAX 3 x weekly service.

They don't need 744s for the YVR flight. Australia has 5th freedom rights to Canada via HNL. Either QF or JQ could use the YVR route permission and run 330/787 flights SYD-HNL-YVR.

 

[wandering_fred]

They don't need 744s for the YVR flight. Australia has 5th freedom rights to Canada via HNL. Either QF or JQ could use the YVR route permission and run 330/787 flights SYD-HNL-YVR.

Alas one of the main benefits of SYD-VYR direct is the missing requirement for a USA visa. Not a major issue for most Australians/Kiwis but nevertheless a deterrent.

Happy wandering

Fred

 

[hutch]

No point flying to YVR unless it's direct.

 

[Himeno]

Alas one of the main benefits of SYD-VYR direct is the missing requirement for a USA visa. Not a major issue for most Australians/Kiwis but nevertheless a deterrent.

If done right, they can do something such as the NZ AKL-LAX-LHR flights had for a time, or most I-I connections at IAH. Limited to no CBP processing and herded directly to TSA and reboarding. The CX HKG-YVR-JFK flights don't get processed through either US or Canada borders at YVR.

No point flying to YVR unless it's direct.

SYD-HNL-YVR is direct. Would be the same flight number ;P
Would allow for HNL-YVR to be sold, just as SFO-YVR used to be.

 

[hutch]

Yes sorry I meant non- stop.

I don't see the attraction of a 1 stop to YVR... I may as well fly through LAX or DFW or SFO or HKG. If QF fly to YVR via HNL, they may as well just stop at HNL and codeshare to YVR.

Anyway, if we put YVR to the side, it'll be hard to keep HND a 747 unless it's retired to use close to 1 frame.

 

[Himeno]

Yes sorry I meant non- stop.

I don't see the attraction of a 1 stop to YVR... I may as well fly through LAX or DFW or SFO or HKG. If QF fly to YVR via HNL, they may as well just stop at HNL and codeshare to YVR.

Anyway, if we put YVR to the side, it'll be hard to keep HND a 747 unless it's retired to use close to 1 frame.

I'm saying that they don't require a 747 for YVR when they have the via HNL option with 330/JQ787. (I'd hope that if/when QF gets some 787s, they won't have the range limits that the JQ birds do)
But, yes, they should also retime the SYD-TYO 747 to only need one aircraft. ~10 flight each way + 2 hours in TYO = 2 hours in SYD before next flight.

 

[Platinum A332]

The problem to me (at least anecdotally), is that J class seats are quite difficult to get to HKG and HND (and I mean paid fares, not points). Would QF really want to lose over half of their J class market per day from SYD-HKG/HND? Also I think the configuration mix on the 330's whilst making sense for Domestic Routes and Asian routes such as SYD-BKK, BNE-HKG does not necessarily make sense for more premium heavy routes like SYD-HKG/HND.

CX post reconfiguration will have 39J/21W/191Y on their 333. 15.5% J Class/8.4% W Class/76.1% Y Class.

QF B744 configuration is 58J/36W/270Y. 15.9% J Class/9.9% W Class/74.8% Y Class.

Perhaps QF need a 333 configuration similar to CX for more premium routes into Asia?

 

[hutch]

I think QF would be better off doing 2 well timed A330 services SYD- HKG daily as opposed to daily a 747.

If HND retimed, couldn't it stay a 747?

 

[Himeno]

The problem to me (at least anecdotally), is that J class seats are quite difficult to get to HKG and HND (and I mean paid fares, not points). Would QF really want to lose over half of their J class market per day from SYD-HKG/HND? Also I think the configuration mix on the 330's whilst making sense for Domestic Routes and Asian routes such as SYD-BKK, BNE-HKG does not necessarily make sense for more premium heavy routes like SYD-HKG/HND.

CX post reconfiguration will have 39J/21W/191Y on their 333. 15.5% J Class/8.4% W Class/76.1% Y Class.

QF B744 configuration is 58J/36W/270Y. 15.9% J Class/9.9% W Class/74.8% Y Class.

Perhaps QF need a 333 configuration similar to CX for more premium routes into Asia?

The current JL config for SYD-NRT is 8F 49J 40W 135Y (SS7), the previous was 56J 40W 149Y (W51).
The 787 configs are 42J 144Y (E01) and 38J 35W 88Y (E11/SS8)

 

[Mr_Orange]

CX post reconfiguration will have 39J/21W/191Y on their 333. 15.5% J Class/8.4% W Class/76.1% Y Class.

Thank goodness CX are keeping Y+. Looks like they have reduced the number of Y+ seats to add more Y though. Is that the only change in the reconfiguration?

 

[wandering_fred]

Thank goodness CX are keeping Y+. Looks like they have reduced the number of Y+ seats to add more Y though. Is that the only change in the reconfiguration?

Cathay is removing PEY from the South Asia and Middle East A330s...
And I wondered why the PEY section on the A330s to Australia was the same size as on their larger planes...

If the AUD falls far enough maybe the penalty for buying tickets in Australia will disappear and PEY exAustralia will have a better comparative value. Pity it does nothing for the absolute cost and value when you actually live in Australia

Happy wandering

Fred

 

[Flyerqf]

They are flying to vancouver 3 times in January. I'm not sure how that extends to permanent flights.

See here: http://www.iasc.gov.au/determinations_decisions/files/2014/2014iasc113.pdf

They are required to fully utilise the capacity,and have indicated this will be using a 747. They have requested and been granted weekly capacity on this route.

 

[hutch]

I think you're reading too much into it. Even in the document it states QF intends to provide a seasonal service.

If they intend to launch year round 2/3 wkly services they are cutting it fine for March cut off - considering marketing /sakes purposes.

Compare this with BNE/NRT which has a 8/9month lead in.

The capacity allocated to QF and not fully utilised generally will only become an issue when another carrier wants to fly the route and use that capacity. Which is unlikely on Aus - Canada.

I'd expect QF to apply for a amendment if their Jan services work out.

 

[Himeno]

I think you're reading too much into it. Even in the document it states QF intends to provide a seasonal service.

If they intend to launch year round 2/3 wkly services they are cutting it fine for March cut off - considering marketing /sakes purposes.

Compare this with BNE/NRT which has a 8/9month lead in.

The capacity allocated to QF and not fully utilised generally will only become an issue when another carrier wants to fly the route and use that capacity. Which is unlikely on Aus - Canada.

I'd expect QF to apply for a amendment if their Jan services work out.

They didn't give 8 months notice about dropping SFO and starting DFW (then moved it up by 2 weeks with almost no notice). Nor do they give a lot of notice about the extra holiday period flights to NRT or transpac.
The last time QF gave 8+ months notice about a route change was the dropping of HKG/BKK-LHR.

 

[hutch]

Dallas got around 4 months notice as did the change to SFO. Slight difference from moving from a non partner hub (SFO) to partners massive hub (DFW)... there are natural synergies there which facilitate sales. Plus some forward SFO bookings which could be moved to other services (lax/dfw).

I assume you could argue QF could move some YVR via LAX services onto direct flights. But I don't think moving cities in the states is the same as launching a new permanent route.

The holiday flights arent particularly relevant as QF puts them on to meet predicted or actual demand - they already fly there.

I'd love QF to fly to YVR, but I don't think it's a certainty.

 

[Himeno]

I assume you could argue QF could move some YVR via LAX services onto direct flights. But I don't think moving cities in the states is the same as launching a new permanent route.

They can't do that via LAX. The Canada air services treaty only allows AU carriers 5th freedom via HNL, SFO, NAN and PPT. If they routed via LAX, it would have the same limits as the LAX-JFK flight.

Unless QF gets a large amount of 787s, the current announced fleet plan for 12 A380, 9 747 and the A330 reconfig until at least 2018 means YVR has as much chance of normal regular QF service as them restarting flights to KUL or KIX.
Right now, I'd be expecting to see YVR flights for a 3-6 weeks a year with IASC pulling the route from QF for non use and QF reapplying for it every 6 months.

 

[hutch]

I wasn't suggesting they fly to YVR via LAX (my poor writing). I was suggesting they could move YVR bound passengers from LAX services to YVR direct services.

Flying to YVR via any port is pointless if you are trying to compete with non stop AC.