QF10 - Avoiding Iranian Airspace
Jun 21, 2019, 11:31 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basingstoke, UK
Programs: BA, EK, Hilton H, Starwood, A-Club
Posts: 75
QF10 - Avoiding Iranian Airspace
I just noticed that QF10 (LHR-PER) is flying further south today to avoid Iranian Airspace - does that add much time to the flight? Will be flying this route later in the year BTW.
Jun 21, 2019, 7:02 pm
#2
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,645
FAA closed the airspace to US aircraft, so guess QF being prudent.
I would guess the FAA will say airspace will stay closed until tensions diminish for US aircraft. Other airlines will generally follow advice like this. I haven't seen ICAO close anything yet. ICAO I'm pretty sure pushed an advisory after MH17 for an example
I would guess the FAA will say airspace will stay closed until tensions diminish for US aircraft. Other airlines will generally follow advice like this. I haven't seen ICAO close anything yet. ICAO I'm pretty sure pushed an advisory after MH17 for an example
Jun 21, 2019, 7:38 pm
#3
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,160
I’m not sure what the block time is but looking back over s few weeks of flights (pre Iran airspace restrictions), flying time has been 15:53-16:37 (hours and minutes), departure delayed <60 minutes 5 times and >60 minutes 1 time in the last month.
QF10 is currently in a FR24 dead zone but when I tracked it earlier (when first saw your post) was past Iran and on track for arrival after 16:07 of flight time
obviously N=1 and I haven’t checked winds etc but early indications are not overly negative
QF10 is currently in a FR24 dead zone but when I tracked it earlier (when first saw your post) was past Iran and on track for arrival after 16:07 of flight time
obviously N=1 and I haven’t checked winds etc but early indications are not overly negative
Jun 22, 2019, 10:07 am
#4
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SYD
Programs: QF Plat, BA GGL, VA Silver, SQ Gold, IHG Gold, HH Diamond, Accor Plat, Hertz Pres Circle
Posts: 406
Instead of Iran, they're flying over Iraq instead... not a whole lot of improvement!
Jan 7, 2020, 2:47 am
#5
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spitalfields, London
Programs: BA Gold, KFC 'The Colonel's Club' Palladium tier, Mucci des Visions Célestes du Nord-Pas-de-Calais
Posts: 2,327
Any ideas if Qantas' avoidance of Iranian airspace will resume? Other airlines such as BA and SQ already are...
Jan 8, 2020, 12:11 am
#6
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,160
Story today is QF9 will carry 90 fewer passengers in order to support rerouting away from Iranian airspace, potential to add a refueling stop in SIN instead depending on economics. QF10 will continue fully laden as headwinds help even considering avoidance of Iran
https://www.afr.com/companies/transp...0200108-p53pu1
https://www.afr.com/companies/transp...0200108-p53pu1
Jan 8, 2020, 2:52 am
#7
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 19,589
QF is routing over Afghanistan to avoid Iran/Iraq, so fuel stop in SIN makes a lot of sense as they would be overflying SIN in any case. Rerouting 90 pax from PER to LHR is not that easy on Oneworld, making a fuel stop more attractive and not so disruptive given the timings.
Jan 8, 2020, 3:07 am
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,530
QF is routing over Afghanistan to avoid Iran/Iraq, so fuel stop in SIN makes a lot of sense as they would be overflying SIN in any case. Rerouting 90 pax from PER to LHR is not that easy on Oneworld, making a fuel stop more attractive and not so disruptive given the timings.
Jan 8, 2020, 11:59 am
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: MEL CHC
Posts: 21,022
QF is routing over Afghanistan to avoid Iran/Iraq, so fuel stop in SIN makes a lot of sense as they would be overflying SIN in any case. Rerouting 90 pax from PER to LHR is not that easy on Oneworld, making a fuel stop more attractive and not so disruptive given the timings.
Some of the PER pax will be from MEL as QF9 fly MEL-PER-LHR.
However this time of year flights from Au (all airlines) have high loads
Jan 10, 2020, 3:43 am
#12
Join Date: May 2003
Programs: QF WP; VA Gold
Posts: 1,007
QF is routing over Afghanistan to avoid Iran/Iraq, so fuel stop in SIN makes a lot of sense as they would be overflying SIN in any case. Rerouting 90 pax from PER to LHR is not that easy on Oneworld, making a fuel stop more attractive and not so disruptive given the timings.
Jan 10, 2020, 3:45 am
#13
Join Date: May 2003
Programs: QF WP; VA Gold
Posts: 1,007
Likewise I would expect them to reinstate non-stop when the risk returns to a tolerable level.
Jan 10, 2020, 2:03 pm
#14
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Adelaide
Programs: VA Platinum, QR Platinum, QF Gold, ITA Executive, HH Diamond, Accor Plus Diamond
Posts: 71
And why shouldn’t they. I imagine the costs of operating the route with the tech stop would actually be higher than going non stop with the config, though they may uplift more cargo given the shorter ranges.’
Likewise I would expect them to reinstate non-stop when the risk returns to a tolerable level.
Likewise I would expect them to reinstate non-stop when the risk returns to a tolerable level.
With their inflated price and average product it’s still a no for me though
Jan 10, 2020, 2:49 pm
#15
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 19,589
Not sure what you mean by inflated price, I looked at booking MEL-LHR in December and price was identical (within $100) for QF via SIN or PER and for EK and even EY (which is usually cheaper). Glad now that I didn't book EK, EY or QR (they are continuing to fly through Iraqi airspace though not through Iran airspace). Going via HKG or SIN is pretty good alternative.