Will you use the new ULH PER-LHR?

[NickC]

Forget the aircraft, focus on the price. It should be significantly cheaper as the fees charged by SIN/DBX (pick either) are no longer involved. We're only talking the charges of a national port at this end of the journey. PER (and WA) want the business, so they're not likely to gouge with pax charges. This should mean cheaper overall costs. Of course, it all depends on whether the leprechaun keeps those savings for the company or passes them on to us, the flying public. Which ever way you slice it, it's roughly 24 hours from east cost to LHR. For the average Joe, price will be the decider.

 

[justcallmeryan]

I'd give it a go as a novelty. Being SYD based saving an hour or two is no big deal, but the bragging rights of flying direct from Australia to LHR would be worth it! And if the flight has a decent arrival time (like anytime after noon as opposed to 6am), then that adds to the appeal for me.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Yes I will try it at least once, depending on schedule. I would not do a red eye to the East Coast on the return flight so that's a deal breaker for me.

 

[moa999]

Forget the aircraft, focus on the price. It should be significantly cheaper as the fees charged by SIN/DBX (pick either) are no longer involved..

For PER-LHR yes.. not for MEL-PER-LHR.

And I suspect that our privately owned monopoly airports with subatantial labour costs are charging quite a penny compares to SIN/DXB, particularly with competition from KUL/AUH/DOH

 

[kathy_7050]

Will definitely look at it, if price is reasonable. Have flown Dallas-SYD a few times and the 16 hrs flying is no worse than the 13 hrs from LAX. Would hope to depart from SYD international though

 

[ginger01]

Possibly will use this route, but would break the journey with a stopover in Perth [given that I live in Auckland and would use the ANZ direct service AKL-PER]. It's a long time being airborne with limited opportunity to get up and stretch your legs though.

 

[monoccular]

From MEL I would rather transit at DXB than fly to PER then transit between terminals.

It would also depend on transit times - IF I could be sure of a significantly shorter transit in Per than in DXB, maybe, but "all things being equal" I would prefer a transit later in my journey than early.

 

[moa999]

From MEL I would rather transit at DXB than fly to PER then transit between terminals. .

But you won't.
QF is moving its international flights from PER from T1 to T3/4

 

[93Revisited]

Count me as a no. Im based In Melb and I've got a suspicion that the QF A380 may no longer be a choice once Perth is up and running. Y Lounge access becomes an issue and that's one of the key benefits of WP.
I'm not sure I could do the 17 hours in J let alone Y. Need the hour in Dubai to walk and stretch.

 

[Ansett]

I do not see myself nor Mrs Ansett doing this trip not even in J. With LTG now about to be achieved we are free to go with other less taxing options. Oh and possibly far better product

 

[Zulu0929]

Definitely a no. I am PER based but cannot think of anything worse that being captive for that period of time, even in J. Now that I am a retiree, there is no real reason to have to do the trip in one jump and besides, I like stopovers en-route, particularly DXB and find that a stopover eliminates the jet lag.

 

[warren morris]

Yes if I am in business. No if I am in premium or economy

 

[yohy?!]

Have done ewr-hkg in w on the 777 and it was fine, I did have the front row though which allows you to rest your feet on the mag holder and legs on the leg rest. Highly doubt QF will be able to offer similar.

 

[Pilbaracommuter]

I've done Qantas to/from DFW a few times so flight duration is not a big issue. Most of my flights would start/end in Perth so the time saving and absence of a change of aircraft is attractive IF MY DESTINATION IS SOUTHERN ENGLAND. Otherwise if a change of aircraft is involved I would seriously look at the alternatives and decide on basis of price and schedule. A further negative of using PER-LHR is that any transfer is likely to be domestic-international or vice-versa - and most transfers at LHR will involve a change of terminal. Collecting baggage to go through customs is a pain too.

As Qantas haven't released schedules yet, timing will be a big factor. I would be less likely to do PER-LHR in a single flight with a morning departure. Leaving Perth mid-evening and arriving early morning is more attractive to my body clock (coming back is bad, whatever time you leave!).

And if I was an East Coast resident, I would still be checking out all the alternatives.

My guess is that if Qantas can get enough of the market to LHR, then add FRA and CDG, they would consider ditching the Emirates alliance.

 

[moa999]

My guess is that if Qantas can get enough of the market to LHR, then add FRA and CDG, they would consider ditching the Emirates alliance.

That last part I very much doubt. EK provides 50+ UK/EU connections

 

[Himeno]

My guess is that if Qantas can get enough of the market to LHR, then add FRA and CDG, they would consider ditching the Emirates alliance.

How about ditch EK, form partnership with AY, create Jetstar Scandinavia and start PER-HEL flights.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

How about ditch EK, form partnership with AY, create Jetstar Scandinavia and start PER-HEL flights.

You are a cruel human being.

 

[Zulu0929]

Helsinki...............you gotta be kidding. Have you been there in January? I spent a week there one day (1980) en-route to Moscow.....-25 degrees.

 

[Skyring]

My guess is that if Qantas can get enough of the market to LHR, then add FRA and CDG, they would consider ditching the Emirates alliance.

I think Qantas might be flying a few kites with FRA and CDG.

I was dubious at the time, but I think the EK thing has worked out well. Qantas is always going to fly to London, but they need a stopover point, at least from the east coast where most Australians live. DBX is as good as any from that point of view, with the advantage that fuel is going to be plentiful and cheap.

The real killer is that EK provides direct onwards flights to many destinations in Europe and the Middle East. No need for a transfer in Heathrow and a seat in a BA A320 - both very moderate pleasures, in my book.

AY and HEL are an option, but poorly placed from Australia. From East Asia feeding to Europe, brilliant. I flew KAN-HEL-IST with the missus a few years back and it worked out very well.

And, just quietly, but flying long haul out of LHR, especially in a premium cabin, adds a significant chunk of taxes to the cost.

 

[NoName]

Being based in Brisbane for me it would only be a yes if:
- In J
- They upgrade the lounge offering in PER

Even then I would probably prefer to go via other ports either on QF or other carriers.