Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Mileage Run Deals > Premium Fare Deals
Reload this Page >

QR First (?!) DOH-LAX 3563 USD

QR First (?!) DOH-LAX 3563 USD

Old Feb 27, 17, 11:58 pm
  #1  
Formerly known as rwk32882
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SFO, FL350
Programs: IHTFP, AS 75k, AA EXP, ex-UA 1K, Ex-BD *G (RIP), SPG Gold
Posts: 480
QR First (?!) DOH-LAX 3563 USD

Probably just a mistake, but it looks like QR is advertising a rather attractive DOH-LAX first class fare. Unless I am mistaken, they only have two cabin service on that route. Perhaps this is their very subtle way to announce they are deploying an A380 on that route? Or perhaps QR revenue management is just heckling the EK revenue management team?

DOH-LAX 12975 QAR (3563 USD)
Purchase by: 28 Feb 2017
Valid: 18 Feb 2017 - 21 Jun 2017

Roaming Ryan is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 12:01 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Programs: SQ AA TK
Posts: 1,368
Definitely a typo. The business promo fare is exactly 12,975.
dfs24 is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 1:19 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Programs: AA PLT, ex-UA 1K, Sixt Plat.
Posts: 601
Having quite literally flown this exact route a week ago, it's definitely a mistake. DOH-LAX is a 16.5-hour flight, and both QR and EY fly the same metal on their ex-LAX routes: the 77L, which still holds the record for the longest-distance commercial flights in the world. The A380 can fly quite far, but I suspect it's just short of the necessary fuel capacity to make it to the Middle East -- or, rather, from it, given that it has to fly all the way up to the Arctic Circle to avoid jet-stream headlines.

Also, as many (if not most) of the airlines that have tried it have discovered, there's actually not all that big a market for ultra-long-haul flights. It's too far to haul in coach unless you're a masochist, and having flown r/t on EY's LAX-AUH service and QR's LAX-DOH, it's subpar even in F or J (and I flew the former on EY and the latter on QR). My return flight to LAX last week was half-full even in J, which is a rarity these days.

OTOH two additional factors could have affected it: QR flies to most of the countries subject to the recent ME travel ban, plus its J product is subpar (particularly compared to EY), with a 2-2-2 configuration throughout. Fortunately I ended up with an empty seat next to me in both directions, but otherwise I wouldn't have been pleased with the comparative lack of privacy. Finally, note that QR's newest metal -- the A350 (which I got to fly on my connecting flight to SIN), A380 and 788 -- all offer complimentary wi-fi service, but I don't know if they have a timeline for retrofitting their entire fleet with it.

Okay, I've rambled long enough: again, there's no A service on the DOH-LAX route.

Edit: QR's 2-2-2 J layout is of the traditional style, with two identical seats next to one another throughout, all facing directly forward.

Last edited by kirker; Feb 28, 17 at 1:22 am Reason: clarification on configuration
kirker is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 1:22 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, A3*G, Mucci de l'expertise des Apps
Posts: 2,740
Originally Posted by kirker View Post
The A380 can fly quite far, but I suspect it's just short of the necessary fuel capacity to make it to the Middle East -- or, rather, from it, given that it has to fly all the way up to the Arctic Circle to avoid jet-stream headlines.
You should probably share your expertise with Emirates
Airprox is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 1:51 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Metal tube with wings
Programs: KF Gold|VA Gold|HH Diamond|Kimpton IC|Hyatt Gold
Posts: 413
kirker, in your thoughts, the QR fight was subpar because of the 777 2-2-2 seating? Was that the only factor?
oh_lol is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 1:55 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Programs: AA PLT, ex-UA 1K, Sixt Plat.
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by Airprox View Post
You should probably share your expertise with Emirates
Ouch. It slipped my mind entirely that EK flies out of LAX, but you are correct. Also, I looked up the distance capacity of the A380, and it's only slightly less than the 77R. That said, QR in particular is far behind EK in terms of its F product (both on the A380 and the rest of its long-haul routes), and while EY's is better -- I flew it last year from AUH-SYD -- its unavailability at LAX may simply reflect the fact that EK offers considerably more (and better) connections out of DXB. (Or it could simply mean that EY hasn't yet taken delivery of enough A380s to add LAX service on it.)
kirker is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 2:01 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: YVR | SEA
Programs: BAEC Silver, DL GM, AA Plat, NEXUS
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by kirker View Post
Having quite literally flown this exact route a week ago, it's definitely a mistake. DOH-LAX is a 16.5-hour flight, and both QR and EY fly the same metal on their ex-LAX routes: the 77L, which still holds the record for the longest-distance commercial flights in the world. The A380 can fly quite far, but I suspect it's just short of the necessary fuel capacity to make it to the Middle East -- or, rather, from it, given that it has to fly all the way up to the Arctic Circle to avoid jet-stream headlines.

[/I]


I can't count how many times I've flown on EK's A380 (LAX-DXB) which is longer than LAX-DOH.

Even better, EK uses the A380 on DXB-AKL, which is 500mi longer than DXB-LAX.
redadeco is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 2:04 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Programs: AA PLT, ex-UA 1K, Sixt Plat.
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by oh_lol View Post
kirker, in your thoughts, the QR fight was subpar because of the 777 2-2-2 seating? Was that the only factor?
Actually, no. Its IFE system is dated: the monitors in J are too far away from the seat (and not movable) to watch much properly, plus the sound on the QR-provided headphones is terrible! (though at least they're noise-cancelling) Service is pretty good, but nowhere near that on EK/EY. Even with no one next to me, the seats aren't great for sleeping.

The brand-new A350 I flew to from DOH to SIN, however, was superior in every way, most of all its J seats (1-2-1 reverse-herringbone layout). Also, the scuttlebutt I heard on the topic is that QR is gearing up to retrofit its entire long-haul metal with J seats identical to the A350 ones.
kirker is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 2:08 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Programs: AA PLT, ex-UA 1K, Sixt Plat.
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by redadeco View Post
I can't count how many times I've flown on EK's A380 (LAX-DXB) which is longer than LAX-DOH.

Even better, EK uses the A380 on DXB-AKL, which is 500mi longer than DXB-LAX.
Again, I stand corrected! I simply falsely assumed that the reason EY and QR fly comparatively older (as well as identical) metal on their LAX routes was because it's the only jet that can fly the entire distance nonstop.
kirker is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 3:46 am
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Programs: Hilton IHG LH BA TK
Posts: 12,390
Originally Posted by kirker View Post
Having quite literally flown this exact route a week ago, it's definitely a mistake. DOH-LAX is a 16.5-hour flight, and both QR and EY fly the same metal on their ex-LAX routes: the 77L, which still holds the record for the longest-distance commercial flights in the world. The A380 can fly quite far, but I suspect it's just short of the necessary fuel capacity to make it to the Middle East -- or, rather, from it, given that it has to fly all the way up to the Arctic Circle to avoid jet-stream headlines.
I see others have dealt with this nonsense

Originally Posted by kirker View Post
It's too far to haul in coach unless you're a masochist, and having flown r/t on EY's LAX-AUH service and QR's LAX-DOH, it's subpar even in F or J (and I flew the former on EY and the latter on QR). My return flight to LAX last week was half-full even in J, which is a rarity these days.
Economy-class travellers have a tough choice: a single-leg of 16 hours or a two-leg journey of 20, hours or longer. Some may value time spent at an intermediary airport, though that probably comes with additional security theatre and/or immigration; others will prefer to get the journey over with as quickly as possible.

As I say, a tough choice. But for many, the shorter non-stop journey time will be a God-send

Originally Posted by kirker View Post
.. I wouldn't have been pleased with the comparative lack of privacy.
Not sure what you do in your seat that requires privacy: but be warned, the 1-2-1 seating isn't all that private!


Originally Posted by kirker View Post
Actually, no. Its IFE system is dated

This I really don't get at all: QR offers a big screen, enormous choice of films and a fine map service for me to help the pilot find his way

Originally Posted by kirker View Post
monitors in J are too far away from the seat (and not movable) to watch much properly
a function of the splendid seat pitch. But the screen is very big and the distance isn't THAT far. You might need glasses.


Originally Posted by kirker View Post
plus the sound on the QR-provided headphones is terrible!


Originally Posted by kirker View Post
service is pretty good, but nowhere near that on EK/EY.
unless you got a particular bad crew, this is something else I just don't get. True, my experience on Etihad and Emirates is limited: so could you expand on the service elements of those two carriers that are so much better than QR's??

Originally Posted by kirker View Post
even with no one next to me, the seats aren't great for sleeping.
I can continue matching subjective twaddle with subjective twaddle. Some of us really do like the long, wide, unconstricted bed offered by QR's B777. Hand on heart, I am way more comfortable in that arrangement than in the tight "tubes" of the herring-bone arrangement. The downside of the 2-2-2 is of course having a neighbour, but with a small privacy screen and sufficient gap to walk by him/her it's (usually) no great concern.

Travelling with an empty seat next to you is bliss on the QR B777. It means a seat turning into a real, wide, long, forward facing, unconstricted bed plus a spare seat alongside you to store all your in-flight junk. I can't get my head round how any passenger wouldn't find this a near perfect public-transport sleeping arrangement. But, there you are, as I said, just more subjective twaddle... and this is FLYERTALK
IAN-UK is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 4:04 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: Gold: A3, KL Silver: AZ, BA
Posts: 24,338
Originally Posted by IAN-UK View Post
I can't get my head round how any passenger wouldn't find this a near perfect public-transport sleeping arrangement. But, there you are, as I said, just more subjective twaddle... and this is FLYERTALK


irishguy28 is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 4:10 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: MEL
Programs: QF GA NZ WN. Accor+ Bonvoy IHC
Posts: 232
ian-uk you win the prize for best rebuttal I've ever seen in here.
BSBtraveller is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 4:17 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Metal tube with wings
Programs: KF Gold|VA Gold|HH Diamond|Kimpton IC|Hyatt Gold
Posts: 413
I have to agree with IAN.
The 777 by QR for me, has preferable seating than the newer ones such as on the A380, because it is closer to a true bed without the cubbyholes for your feet.
Yes the 2-2-2 is not preferred, but it's fine. I'll just dine on demand and drink the great wines and completely forget or make friends with my seatmate.
I'm also sure that QR just recently won an award for best IFE, correct me if I'm wrong.
I've also found the service on QR has been tops.
oh_lol is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 5:13 am
  #14  
dll
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: AA EX PLT; Marriott Plt; *wood Plt
Posts: 2,235
Originally Posted by kirker View Post
Ouch. It slipped my mind entirely that EK flies out of LAX, but you are correct. Also, I looked up the distance capacity of the A380, and it's only slightly less than the 77R. That said, QR in particular is far behind EK in terms of its F product (both on the A380 and the rest of its long-haul routes), and while EY's is better -- I flew it last year from AUH-SYD -- its unavailability at LAX may simply reflect the fact that EK offers considerably more (and better) connections out of DXB. (Or it could simply mean that EY hasn't yet taken delivery of enough A380s to add LAX service on it.)
Not sure if you are referencing unavailability of the EY A380 at LAX (true), or of their First product. They do operate with a First/Business/Economy product, albeit the 77L. Have since route launched.
dll is offline  
Old Feb 28, 17, 5:52 am
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist & Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: London
Posts: 16,763
Originally Posted by kirker View Post
Also, I looked up the distance capacity of the A380, and it's only slightly less than the 77R.
Don't forget that this is usually the distance at maximum take off weight.

If you are willing to take a weight restriction, by carrying fewer pax or less cargo, then you can go further.

LAX-HNL is further than the "maximum" A321 range (with the headwind) but AA fly it with a weight restriction.
Calchas is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: