Qantas Frequent Flyer - Nonstop SYD-JFK and PER-LHR

777-200LRs were designed with these 2 routes in mind -- at QF's request, back when QF was interested in buying 772LRs. Now V.Australia is rumoured to be buying a fleet of 6 and operating SYD-JFK non-stop (not sure about JFK-SYD, that probably requires a stop, maybe in SFO to hub with V.America), and also PER-LHR non-stop in both directions. Would SYD-PER-LHR be attractive over other routings? I suppose xxx-PER-LHR would be attractive over xxx-SYD-LHR from many cities, even with PERs really ridiculous int/domestic transfer process (makes SYD look like a great airport).

Wonder how QF will react, if these routes do start up by 2011, presumably by then premium yields will be up again and V.Australia could really clean up (presumably they will configure their 772LRs to be competitive with A380 J comfort).

Interestin. Presumably QF didnt want an oddball fleet of 6 or so 777's when they also put their plan together. Not to mention they would likely have been an F/J heavy config. VA may think it could work... is their enough PER-LHR traffic (without connections) to justofy a service? Probably given the one stop flights. Presumably they would also be codesharing with VS on the route.

As for SYD-JFK.... not sure on that one yet.... at least with LHR-PER they can fully co-operate with VS and VS is an established UK brand.

What about premium ecocnomy class need to gets lie-flat to have installed sleeper seat. So it will have bring more seat configurations on operated 777-200LR. the entire 777 will have to be refurbished the cabin configured. It should bring more economy class to need more leisure or business traveler from PER-LHR & SYD-JFK nonstop on 77L aircraft. It will be tougher due to headwinds over TPAC flight. It will bring more payload restrictions to revenue more cargo. It will have a simply problems for flying over TPAC flight due to weight restrictions and it need to be installed more fuel tanks.

777-200LRs were designed with these 2 routes in mind

Boeing's website gives the max range of the 777-200LR as 9,380 miles. SYD-JFK is 9,950 miles via the most direct route, so they would have to be getting an extra 10% from somewhere, which I would expect would require a bit of weight shedding if it's even possible at all. If they are going to stop in SFO/LAX then they gain little to nothing over what Qantas, United and Delta are already offering.

PER-LHR is "only" 9000 miles, so it's possible, but I really don't see how they can justify this over doing a stopover somewhere along the path - the number of people wanting to start/finish in PER has got to be relatively small, so most people are going to end up requiring a stopover somewhere anyway as they do SYD-PER-LHR or similar, plus the fuel requirements for SYD-PER-LHR are going to be more than for SYD-HKG-LHR. The only real benefit is that you get to service more cities with only one stop, but I can't see it being worth the 9000 mile hop.

Aircraft ranges are quoted in nautical miles (nm) or kilometres -- not in miles. SYD-JFK great circle route using ETOPS180 is 8646 nm, so well within the 772LR range of 9380 nm. QF was to have been the launch customer for the LR (which is shorter ranged than the larger 300ER, ironically enough) but then QF became enamoured of the A380 and Airbus freebies, and the huge 787 order (largest in the world) replaced their 772LR interest.

... the number of people wanting to start/finish in PER has got to be relatively small, so most people are going to end up requiring a stopover somewhere anyway as they do SYD-PER-LHR or similar ....The only real benefit is that you get to service more cities with only one stop, but I can't see it being worth the 9000 mile hop.

I think your last point is the pertinent one, as there are around 16.5 million Australians who don't live in SYD. I suspect V Australia isn't going to have the ability to offer services from SYD/BNE/MEL/ADL/PER -HKG-LHR, but a PER-LHR direct service would allow them to pick up pax from each of the ports using DJ's domestic network (and FWIW the regional WA ports as well). This could broaden the potential market for VA, as no backtracking through SYD for pax originating outside SYD - or no need to start up services to an Asian hub from several Australian cities to provide additional traffic to support the LHR service.

Given VA cosying up to DL, wonder if JFK will happen or whether it would be more likely be a direct SYD-ATL or SYD-MSP service? I guess DL has a hub at JFK as well.

Interestin. Presumably QF didnt want an oddball fleet of 6 or so 777's when they also put their plan together. Not to mention they would likely have been an F/J heavy config. VA may think it could work... is their enough PER-LHR traffic (without connections) to justify a service? Probably given the one stop flights. Presumably they would also be codesharing with VS on the route.

As for SYD-JFK.... not sure on that one yet.... at least with LHR-PER they can fully co-operate with VS and VS is an established UK brand.

I doubt if V Australia would be looking at this for a long time. It will take some time to start turning a profit on their current services.

..I think your last point is the pertinent one, as there are around 16.5 million Australians who don't live in SYD.But Air Sydney (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/qantas-frequent-flyer/1013399-how-any-mel-peeps-have-fly-out-syd-because-lack-international-flights.html) ( aka Qantas ) don't know that :D :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The longest flight ever scheduled, and still scheduled, is SQ EWR-SIN. 15 345 km by great circle. It is flown by A340-500 non-HGW. It is now all business (no first) with 100 seats. But SQ succeeded in carrying 181 seats on the route (64 Business, 117 Premium Economy).

The longest flight ever scheduled on B777-200LR was DL Bombay-Atlanta. 13 695 km. Ended this 23rd of October. Carried standard 270+seat 2-class interior.

The longest flight still scheduled on B777-200LR is DL Johannesburg-Atlanta. 13 582 km.

The longest flight scheduled on neither A340-500 nor B777-200LR is CX JFK-Hong Kong. B777-300ER, 12 990 km.

The longest flight scheduled on A380-800 is QF LAX-MEL. 12 748 km.

JFK-SYD is 16 013 km. Does B777-200LR have the range for it? If yes, with what payload? All First? Or First and Business? Or also Premium Economy?

A 777-200LR did a Hong Kong to London flight, the long way heading east across the United States back in 2005. This was a non-scheduled flight just to show off; however, it did see two sunrises across 13,422 miles (21,602 km) in the air for 22 hours and 22 minutes. It was stripped down with a light load however. I remember this as I was on the tarmac watching it leave in HKG. I would love to see VA start offering something to either central or east coast USA to get around the mayhem of LAX…

I can't see any of those routes happening. Neither SYD-JFK nor PER-LHR. Ultra long hauls require an absolute premium pricing in order to make even a hint of a profit. And this is at the current low fuel prices. Once we are back at more than $100 barrel this will become problematic. You need a lot of J pax for this and V Australia is not the airlines for this.

In addition, as an economy passenger if I have the choice between a 17h nonstop and 19h with one stop I would go for the 1 stop option.

The 772LR CASM is a lot lower than for 744 (or even 773ER, for that matter); so long thin routes are viable using 772LR that are not viable on other equipment and several such routes have started in the last 2 years. For example DXB-LAX and DXB-SFO was made possible (no prior flight), and ATL-JNB avoids a technical stop (needed by 744, not by 772LR). But those are mostly routes that don't have a convenient intermediate stopping point (so a bit different from the PER and SYD situations). I haven't examined the flight times, but recollect that PER-LHR on the Boeing Subsonic Cruiser was one of the few routes which benefitted, so maybe there is a similar value for a non-stop 772LR having better departure/arrival times than the existing schedule. Also PER is forecast to have a major rise in J travel for the next decade due to the boom in the resource sector. Finally it is the flamboyant publicity-grabbing route that Virgin historically loves and maybe worth a lot in terms of image. Certainly it would give them some one-upmanship on QF; and SYD-LAX-JFK is the highest yield route in the world (rumour has it, again anybody who really knows cannot post on FT due to non-disclosure).

I can't see any of those routes happening. Neither SYD-JFK nor PER-LHR. Ultra long hauls require an absolute premium pricing in order to make even a hint of a profit. And this is at the current low fuel prices. Once we are back at more than $100 barrel this will become problematic. You need a lot of J pax for this and V Australia is not the airlines for this.

In addition, as an economy passenger if I have the choice between a 17h nonstop and 19h with one stop I would go for the 1 stop option.

EWR-SIN works. SQ somehow fills 100 J seats. 64 turned out to be too few.

Singapore has 4,5 millions of inhabitants - mostly Chinese and Malay. Australia has 5x the population, and those are English. So there should be a lot of traffic at all classes. How do the traffic volumes of, say, SYD-LAX compare against SIN-LAX? NYC-SYD would, as mentioned, be only slightly longer than NYC-SIN.

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=18418

V Australia, the international arm of Virgin Blue, is understood to be close to announcing an order for 777-200LRs for new nonstop Sydney-New York JFK and Perth-London Heathrow service beginning in 2011.

CEO Brett Godfrey is in the final stages of negotiations with Boeing for an order of up to 70 aircraft that will include six 300-seat 777-200LRs, 737-800s and 737-900ERs for fleet replacement and expansion

Let's the speculations begin. It is nice to see VA is orders more newest 777-200LR to need more new routes out SYD-JFK & PER-LHR nonstop. It will be more tougher long jetlags out of Australia.

V Australia, the international arm of Virgin Blue, is understood to be close to announcing an order for 777-200LRs for new nonstop Sydney-New York JFK and Perth-London Heathrow service beginning in 2011.

Who wants to start the betting on what the diversion rate on the NYC-SYD flights will be? The combination of it being the slower direction of the two, as well as the last 7500 miles of it being over water, well...

In addition, as an economy passenger if I have the choice between a 17h nonstop and 19h with one stop I would go for the 1 stop option.

I know a number of people who would far prefer a longer non-stop and hate having to deal with connections ( even if it is a 1 stop service ). The main issue for me is that going to Perth is not generally where I would want to get to from London and that LHR-PER-SYD is further than LHR-SIN/HKG-SYD ; if wanting to do LHR-PER , then it would be v appealing

Dave

EWR-SIN works. SQ somehow fills 100 J seats. 64 turned out to be too few.

Singapore has 4,5 millions of inhabitants - mostly Chinese and Malay. Australia has 5x the population, and those are English. So there should be a lot of traffic at all classes. How do the traffic volumes of, say, SYD-LAX compare against SIN-LAX? NYC-SYD would, as mentioned, be only slightly longer than NYC-SIN.

SYD-NYC is more than 400 miles longer than SIN-NYC which makes quite a difference when you need to carry all this extra fuel. And as you said, 64 J seats at the premium SQ pricing were not enough. VA on the other hand can't command premium pricing (quite the opposite) so I can't see how they can make this work.
And SYD also only has 4.5MM people. You can't count much on the rest of Australia because they already have a one stop connection to JFK and going via SYD wouldn't be an advantage for them.

This whole thread has the feel of "Federation Starship vs Colonial Battlestar" about it. All we need now is for Carlo Kopp to weigh in and tell us how the RAAF's F-111 fleet could remain in service until 2250 if only they get upgraded with FTL drives, particle beam weapons and quantam computers.

SQ operates A345 SIN-EWR -- due to lack of slots at JFK. V.A is proposing B772LR SYD-JFK. So 2 big advantages: lower CASM due to the greater efficiency of the 772LR (approx 8% lower operating cost), and higher cruise speed (so less elapsed time). Also greater range, so more cargo potential. Finally JFK instead of EWR has major advantages. V.A seem to have considered some of the factors before jumping into this decision (years later).

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=18418



300-seat.

That is... much. True, Pakistan has 310; but, say, Delta has 276 or so. Air India has 238.

On the longest A340-500 routes, Thai has 215 or so seats, and SQ had 181, decreased to 100.

Plane Talking is now reporting contact from a Virgin Blue spokesperson to quash the rumours.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2009/11/08/delusional-reporting-about-virgin-blue/

SQ operates A345 SIN-EWR -- due to lack of slots at JFK. V.A is proposing B772LR SYD-JFK. So 2 big advantages: lower CASM due to the greater efficiency of the 772LR (approx 8% lower operating cost), and higher cruise speed (so less elapsed time). Also greater range, so more cargo potential. Finally JFK instead of EWR has major advantages. V.A seem to have considered some of the factors before jumping into this decision (years later).

The lower operating cost would be eaten up by the greater distance and the additional fuel carried. And the big disadvantage is that the plane can not go back non-stop. I don't think that VA could pull this off, also the number of seats indicated a high level of economy pax which makes this route impossible.

And if we can believe the press, than all of this discussion is a non event.

This whole thread has the feel of "Federation Starship vs Colonial Battlestar" about it.

There can't be a discussion about that.

There can't be a discussion about that.
Until he specifies what era he is talking about!
Original versus NG.:p

The outcome is clear in reference to the new (only) BSG - you can have your photon torpedoes and phasers and transwarp hyperhpase gobbledigook inducers - a couple of nukes from a Viper will rain on your Prime Directive parade in a massive way.

So say we all.

Beam me up Scottie.............

Seems it's already sorted:

http://www.grudge-match.com/History/galactica_voyager.shtml