FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   British Airways | Executive Club (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club-446/)
-   -   BA and Qatar joint venture application to Australia (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/2005787-ba-qatar-joint-venture-application-australia.html)

DYKWIA Jan 24, 20 4:50 am


Originally Posted by LGWClosedAgain (Post 31988968)
I think you're in a very small minority of people who would rather connect at DOH than SIN. DOH is a chore between flights, SIN is a nice pleasant break between flights.

Not in my experience. In the 4 times I've passed through, there has not been any security for transit passengers (I know this depends on which flight), so I've been in the lounge less than 10 minutes after leaving the plane.

Also, no messing about with the security check at the gate.

navylad Jan 24, 20 5:11 am


Originally Posted by DYKWIA (Post 31988976)
Not in my experience. In the 4 times I've passed through, there has not been any security for transit passengers (I know this depends on which flight), so I've been in the lounge less than 10 minutes after leaving the plane.

Also, no messing about with the security check at the gate.

This has never been my experience, always had security in transit (although often has bottles of water and the like in my bag which I’ve found after, which they seam to always miss).

DOH is an ok airport to transit, but I much prefer SIN, the former gives an initial good impression, but after a long layover or indeed multiple trips, you starts to feel rather ‘fake’ in my opinion, whereas I’ve generally had a very welcoming experience in SIN although my only complaint is the ugly carpet in the terminal (I concede this is a very minor point).

Meanwhile moving back on topic, this would seams commercially beneficial for both airlines and I disagree with the early threads that two airlines working together reduces completion; it can in fact increase competition if the combined effect causes an effect on the other major players. To suggest otherwise would appear to me to be rather naive.

DYKWIA Jan 24, 20 5:21 am


Originally Posted by navylad (Post 31989010)
This has never been my experience, always had security in transit (although often has bottles of water and the like in my bag which I’ve found after, which they seam to always miss).
.

Not all airports require you to remove liquids. Recently at DXB, all that needed to be taken out was laptops.

itsmeitisss Jan 24, 20 5:27 am


Originally Posted by DFB_london (Post 31986495)
yes totally correct- all QR long haul fleet, including some A320 are fully horizontally flat.
The last sloppy went when the A330 were refurbished. (The A340-600 that went to Manila have long gone.)

At worst, on the few A330 that still run you get a flat seat similar to the AA or UA Atlantic 757 seat. Which is fine

The 350, 380 and 787 either have a 1-2-1 herringbone on Q suite. The 777LR is q suite. The 77W is either q suite or a 2-2-2 - but flat and roomy.

The issue with the 2-2-2 77W is that the point at which you need to step over your neighbour is higher up their body than in CW. Also while Dine on demand is great if you are the aisle passenger and the window seat passenger is partaking you'd better be a heavy sleeper.

As far as crew are concerned they are variable, just the same as BA. From ICN to DOH i found the crew exceptional. They noted I was ill and offered to help with any medication I might need. And kept checking on me. I ate nothing and drank no alcohol, but they kept me going with plenty of hot water.I haven't been to China, lol turns out it's a chest infection with a cold on top...

IntVic Jan 24, 20 7:31 am

I mainly fly in the premium economy cabin so I will not see any benefit with Qatar.

HighwayToHEL Jan 24, 20 7:56 am


Originally Posted by wemyss (Post 31985704)
Does QR not fly to EDI? (soon to be Qsuites)

Yes. I leave BLR in about 7 hours from now (777) to DOH, then the A350 to EDI. Small matter of dinner and a few Kingfisher beers to consume first.

EDI to DOH is my favourite sector on all my journeys.

HighwayToHEL Jan 24, 20 8:02 am


Originally Posted by DYKWIA (Post 31989033)
Not all airports require you to remove liquids. Recently at DXB, all that needed to be taken out was laptops.

coming out here to BLR I went through the trial scanner at EDI. Keep EVERYTHING in bags, including liquids and laptops.

The theory is good. The reality was that my laptop bag went down the inspection channel and was sat behind a dozen others. So my normal fast track 2 minutes became 14.....

OT, I know.

JAXBA Jan 24, 20 8:25 am


Originally Posted by allturnleft (Post 31984728)
Are there definitely no new BA routes as a result of this? Does SIN-SYD get dumped?

Notice that SYD isn't included in the JV application: BA will still be flying there.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/n...ralian-flights


The agreement would encompass all of Qatar's Australian destinations

except for Sydney, which the proposal notes is already served by both BA and Qatar Airways, with the Sydney-London route "highly contested... any attempt by the Parties to co-ordinate on the routes would be quickly defeated by the other airlines who offer services on the route…

sxc Jan 24, 20 10:43 pm

I don’t understand why including SYD would be seen as a less chance of approval. Of all the routes they are applying for, SYD is the one that already has the most alternatives for getting to Europe. Whereas the other cities have fewer options. So wouldn’t it be less likely that the other cities would be approved vs SYD?

Passmethesickbag Jan 25, 20 5:01 am


Originally Posted by sxc (Post 31992144)
I don’t understand why including SYD would be seen as a less chance of approval. Of all the routes they are applying for, SYD is the one that already has the most alternatives for getting to Europe. Whereas the other cities have fewer options. So wouldn’t it be less likely that the other cities would be approved vs SYD?

I imagine that BA might not want to undermine the viability of their own route.

Reds2011 Jan 25, 20 6:20 am


Originally Posted by Dave Noble (Post 31987197)
I can't think of many better airports for connecting at than Doha. (the only one that I prefer is Muscat). Singapore is decent, but not as good as Doha imo

I'm the complete opposite - I dislike Doha intensely for connecting and much prefer Singapore. Only been through Muscat once since the new terminal opened, and it was decent enough. Doha is a very poorly signed airport in my (and others I have spoken with) opinion although I have not transited there for ~4 years now. It may have improved.

Depending on the time, the transit security check area is a disorganised sh*t show of the highest order. Probably a lot better with reduced traffic since the disagreement with the other GCC nations.

ukgooner Jan 25, 20 6:45 am

I doubt either airline is worrying too much about a constituency largely based on flying Qatar on ultra cheap ex-Helsinki deals to harvest TPs.

Qatar might look cheap through our eyes, but in each local market it is often one of a number. SQ is currently the cheapest J class offer to Aus from most Scandi gateways right now, and they are hardly perceived as a 'Base Airline'. The fact is it is a very competitive market, and BA does very well in it despite some of the perceptions here about the offer.

This is about leveraging each airline's strengths to provide greater awareness of the choices available to each other's customer base. From BA's perspective it would be quite an investment to restart Melbourne, despite its SYD success and improving viability of new AUS routes with an A350. I image this new arrangement should kill off speculation for a while (Which is probably helpful for Qatar).

Talking of cheapness - one of the issues if you want to fly on BA codes to AUS is the availability of I class, particularly on QF, on the codeshares from SE Asia, so if this improves things we should all be grateful (Particularly with the Avios uplift you get from flying on a BA code)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:48 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.