Why did KLM cease flights to Australia ?

Old Jan 27, 2016, 12:20 pm
  #16  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 540
@johan rebel:

European carriers were indeed heavily government controlled and built up. Without that, they were much smaller or did not even exist anymore. That fate got SN, UT (now part of AF), OA.
But currently all airlines are still strongly subsidized, but that is another discussion. Air tickets do not have sales tax and fuel is not taxed by excise as well, like car gasoline.

@cityflyer369: You are talking about AMS-PER or DRW, but those are the least interesting Oz destinations. Probably you mean SYD and MEL.

Indeed, very long flights of > 14 hours cost even more fuel as the aircraft has to carry lots of fuel, so a stop would be more feasible, even to passenger's comfort. An extra stop costs 2 hours more, but saves on crew (a very long flight requires also two sets of crew, i.e. 2x2 pilots, 2x10 FA/ pursers), more toilet and food waste storage.
I think such flights are more done for prestige reasons, like SQ21 SIN-EWR which was discontinued in 2013, but SQ considers restarting it with an A350, F/C only.
I think the QR nonstop DOH-AKL of 18 hours won't get profitable, but more a kind of "We have the longest nonstop flight".
For the same reason a nonstop LHR-SYD will never be there, despite there are aircraft (777LR, 787-9, 350-10) capable doing this.
airsurfer is offline  
Old Jan 27, 2016, 3:42 pm
  #17  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,444
Originally Posted by airsurfer
@cityflyer369: You are talking about AMS-PER or DRW, but those are the least interesting Oz destinations. Probably you mean SYD and MEL.


For the same reason a nonstop LHR-SYD will never be there, despite there are aircraft (777LR, 787-9, 350-10) capable doing this.
No, I believe that PER or DRW were intended.

LHR-PER is just about technically feasible with a fully loaded current aircraft - so AMS-PER would also be feasible.

SYD or MEL are, however, too far for any current aircraft, unless it was severely payload restricted (Qantas did once fly a 747 from LHR to SYD, non-stop, but with no paying pax, and only a handful of staff and pax on board - http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/Qantas%...top%201989.htm). Therefore, a non-stop service from Northern Europe to the East Coast of Australia just isn't possible for the time being - the plane would have to be half-empty or less, and carrying little or no cargo, and would still be operating at the very limit of what was possible. This just is not commercially feasible.

It's not even possible from IST at the moment.

Last edited by irishguy28; Jan 27, 2016 at 3:56 pm
irishguy28 is offline  
Old Jan 27, 2016, 5:20 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
I believe that kind of routing - desirable to get pax to but a lot of problems standing in the way of an efficient operation - is exactly what alliances are meant to deliver.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Jan 27, 2016, 5:40 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: GLA
Programs: AF/KL FB Plat 4L, VA Vel Silver, BA EC, LH M&M
Posts: 1,825
Originally Posted by irishguy28
Quote:





Originally Posted by airsurfer


@cityflyer369: You are talking about AMS-PER or DRW, but those are the least interesting Oz destinations. Probably you mean SYD and MEL.


For the same reason a nonstop LHR-SYD will never be there, despite there are aircraft (777LR, 787-9, 350-10) capable doing this.




No, I believe that PER or DRW were intended.

LHR-PER is just about technically feasible with a fully loaded current aircraft - so AMS-PER would also be feasible.

SYD or MEL are, however, too far for any current aircraft, unless it was severely payload restricted (Qantas did once fly a 747 from LHR to SYD, non-stop, but with no paying pax, and only a handful of staff and pax on board - http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/Qantas%...top%201989.htm). Therefore, a non-stop service from Northern Europe to the East Coast of Australia just isn't possible for the time being - the plane would have to be half-empty or less, and carrying little or no cargo, and would still be operating at the very limit of what was possible. This just is not commercially feasible.

It's not even possible from IST at the moment.
Exactly. :-)
I was replying to a poster who mentioned that QF was considering LON-PER and discussed whether it would be reasonable for KLAF to offer non-stop flights to Oz, and for this PER and DRW in conjunction with intra-Oz codeshares are currently the only reasonable options.

One-stop flights AMS-Oz are a different topic, and of course for such an approach the problems are:
- crew costs
- still 3-segments flights except for the final destination (SYD or MEL)
- additional flight times for everybody not going to SYD or MEL
- the additional inconvenience of having a stop (in SE Asia, for example).
cityflyer369 is offline  
Old Jan 28, 2016, 11:53 am
  #20  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by cityflyer369
Exactly. :-)

One-stop flights AMS-Oz are a different topic, and of course for such an approach the problems are:
- crew costs
- still 3-segments flights except for the final destination (SYD or MEL)
- additional flight times for everybody not going to SYD or MEL
- the additional inconvenience of having a stop (in SE Asia, for example).
A nonstop flight costs extra crew as there should be 2 sets of crew onboard while a flight AMS-SIN-(PER|SYD|MEL) requires 1 set of crew each leg and can stay in a hotel overnight in SIN and fly back on duty or further onward to Oz.
airsurfer is offline  
Old Jan 28, 2016, 12:30 pm
  #21  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,444
Originally Posted by airsurfer
A nonstop flight costs extra crew as there should be 2 sets of crew onboard while a flight AMS-SIN-(PER|SYD|MEL) requires 1 set of crew each leg and can stay in a hotel overnight in SIN and fly back on duty or further onward to Oz.
But a non-stop flight completely avoids the costs of having an extra crew base in the stopover city; better to have that second crew onboard and working, rather than sleeping in expensive hotels in Singapore (or wherever). Maintaining a crew base in both Singapore and Sydney would be far more expensive.

That a sector is so long that it needs reserve crew is *not* the dealbreaker. No matter how KLM decided to set up a new Australian route, it is difficult to see how they could make it a more compelling (and profitable) proposition than their current partnerships with multiple airlines, who bring passengers from a range of Australian cities to several of KLM's Asian destinations.
irishguy28 is offline  
Old Jan 28, 2016, 12:46 pm
  #22  
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Between AMS and BRU
Posts: 8,852
Who would want to be on an AF/KL flight that long....
RTW1 is offline  
Old Jan 28, 2016, 5:44 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by RTW1
Who would want to be on an AF/KL flight that long....
... 9 abreast in a 787
t0t1t2 is offline  
Old Apr 7, 2020, 4:34 am
  #24  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,444
Just to put it on the record here: KLM flew to Sydney for the first time in 20 years, as the first of two repatriation flights landed on Saturday.

https://www.upinthesky.nl/2020/04/05...aar-amsterdam/
FlyingCow likes this.
irishguy28 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.