RickyT

Unfortuantely, QF doesn't have a lot of choice. CA is tied up with CX with their cross-shareholding and CZ, with their hub in CAN, would definitely not be interested in establishing a LCC at an airport less than 100miles away.

The other viable option is HU (the Hainan Airlines Group) but they have an existing interest in the HKG market with Hong Kong Airlines and Hong Kong Express already. Although there were rumors that Hong Kong Express was going to be re-launched as JQ HK.

Will be interesting to see where JQ HK will fly to? I am guessing it would be secondary cities in China seeing that major cities such as PEK, PVG/SHA are well served by many carriers.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

I dunno. Could provide a lot of feeder traffic into the HKG flights (maybe we might even see MEL-HKG switch to an A380 if there is enough traffic).

Flights ex HKG to China are expensive (always - with the exception of Spring which allows only hand luggage and is notoriously delayed).

JQ would provide a valid option for me (especially with lounge access and extra leg-room seats)

BD1959

Thanks both - so nothing in the PR to lead one to believe this will boost the Australian Tourist market nor be the saviour for International, it's all about regional growth tapping into a new market ... must have been some side-briefing "Make sure you include ...." or the journalist is putting 2-and-2 together etc.

I'd expect the Chinese middle-class - who appear to be very brand-conscious - would steer-clear of an LCC. I'd also expect that the timing of QF29 into HKG is unlikely to lend itself to same-day connections for onwards flights into Greater China, so wouldn't expect to see a return to a 747 let alone A380 anytime soon.

This sort of thing is also likely to put CX well offside - welcome to oneworld, the quality alliance!

Regards,

BD

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

Yes - I see the timing of the QF 29 into HKG is not so good, but the flight ex SYD is ok. Connections back both work well. (In fact the new timing for the QF29 is hopeless for just about anything to China, even arriving in HKG is too late for anything but going to a late party or your hotel. CX for me if I have to me thinks...)

Lonely Flyer

Something in this story does not ring true

http://au.news.yahoo.com/vic/latest/...airline-snack/

It may have happened but mis-reported.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

qantas has not denied responsibility. the only misreporting here is that the passenger bought the snack, when in fact it would have been complimentary. Probably the reporter not understanding that the snack-on-Q bags are free.

Himeno

o.O How is QF responsible for something which was packaged and sealed before they even got it?

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

could be several reasons... storage (not in a secure bug free environment), length of storage (allowing bugs to eat into the bag), not checking the product before delivery to the passenger. Who knows.

However I agree, generally one would think the manufacturer would be responsible.

Himeno

While QF is responsible for their supply chain, there should be processes in place (such as the standard across the food industry of First In, First Out) on Qantas' end to prevent stock being stored too long. If the problem was on Qantas' end, then there would be more issues then just a handful of packets as the entire stock at the originating port would be compromised.
If this was something like a meal which is fully within the control of Qantas (such as something made by Q Catering), then yes, it is QF's problem. However all QF would have done in this case is take delivery of the stock, open up the boxes, put a packet of the nuts into a Snack on Q bag and send it to the aircraft for delivery to the passenger. It's a premade, prepackaged, sealed item. Qantas has no reason to assume that it does not contain what the manufacturer has told them it does.

Lonely Flyer

I think the manufacturer is at fault since several packets were apparently contaminated.

Unlikely that fly maggots could enter the package even if older stock after delivery to QF. If it was mouse or cockroach droppings then QF could well be at fault.

Robt760

Not quite sure why something like this is burrowed in this thread. How would anybody who is not a regular QF Forum member even know by the thread title!?

Time to rename it!!

N830MH

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...1226332813714Q

They did great job to taking him down and they restrained him. He bothering the passengers during redeye flight from PER-MEL. He would deserve him banned flying the airlines for his life. He could go to jail for that. He will never flying on QF again.

og

So if I read the SMH article right, the person in question was annoying pax down the back and was then brought up front -- where the fuss continued. Hardly a constructive way to get the upgrade.

If it was in some other countries, it wouldn't have been a trip to the police station, more likely the morgue.

angeloedades

Article seems to be a bit vague for me... so in essence he was bother other passengers and then he was brought forward of the cabin?

Does anyone have any more info?

/AE

weero

It indeed reads like that.

What a terrible approach by the crew to deal with an obnoxious individual !

The PER-SYD, PER-MEL redeyes seem to attract this kind of passengers it seems, I cannot remember a peaceful ride on a single one of them...