wandering_fred

Apologies but I suspect both of them work ONLY if you are flying something better than economy

WF

ozstamps

Widebodies still have economy seats in them? I must go check one day.

I think what I was posting was that the plane must be capable of the NYC direct flight.

QF have traffic rights for NYC and that would be an obvious direct route to plan.

cpShawnie

This could also open up some SthAmerican markets to QF, like perhaps GRU or GIG (whether from SYD or AKL), and would be a good size to allow QF to make a profitable return to EZE.

Also, with Mr Anderson negotiating EU rights, this could be used to open up secondary European cities, e.g. PRG, WAW or Former Yugoslav cities (as Oz has quite a high population from those areas) - also these routes would be shorter than a nonstop to LHR, and might open up more interesting stopover opportunities for LHR-bound pax, rather than SIN/BKK/HKG.

d00t

new aircraft... good time for qf to start with premium economy!

Kiwi Flyer

NZ's introduction of premium economy in a few months may hurry QF along!?

eamus

The (alleged) capabilities of the aircraft open up some pretty interesting questions. I like the *ONE3 option from Australia. I doubt QF will return to EZE or enter GRU/GIG/SCL any time soon, or at least not before South American currencies shake off some of their volatility to US$. Right now, pax originating in South America would contribute a relativley highly volatile amount of revenue which implies QF would have to put in place some pretty advanced hedging strategies in order to plan their business, and given their customary conservative approach I would guess the risks there outweigh rewards (in their view). YVR is an interesting option, but begs the question where do you go from there? QF has no partner in Canada so unless the inherent population can sustain the otherwise largely dead-end route (calling Bombay, calling Bombay, come in Bombay), that flight is likely to be iffy at best. And don't expect AC to cozy up any time soon if they see the Red Roo as direct competition.

Assuming the plane can do it operationally, I would guess that flying into DFW would be the most obvious route other than LHR. DFW is AA's fortress and absolutely massive; ORD is too but with de-peaking it is becoming a less convenient connection point. In a lot of ways DFW makes more sense (from an AA-connection standpoint especially) than LAX. I gather that QF looked very hard at DFW some time ago, and I would bet that they could easily dust off all that work and implement a strategy pretty quickly. Offering flights into LAX and DFW would be a huge marketing boon to QF I would think. NYC would be off-the-chart great, but I gather that the EWR-HKG by CO using a 773 is weight-restricted and that probably makes it less attractive to QF than running the comparatively efficient 744s into JFK.

I like the 777s' size and capabilities and have often wondered why QF hasn't made the leap. I know they are very expensive, even by aircraft standards, and that never helps. But with the A$ riding well versus US$ now might not be a bad time to cut a deal with Boeing and try to fix the exchange rate for 06/07/08 deliveries. Perhaps they are waiting to offload their 767s on AO to run mid-Asia routes, and trade to a more balanced mix of aircraft sizes (767-747 is a big leap, but 767-777-747-A380 is much more progressive) and frequencies, with less heritage bound up in cabin layout. Interesting times ahead.

virtualtroy

I can hardly wait Esp. in view of earlier post talking about ALL premium Y planes...

og

So a LHR-SYD fright (sic) would have to leave LHR at 2 or 3 in the morning to get into SYD after curfew. Not too attractive at this stage. Suppose the other option is the evening arrival in SYD much like QF32's timing - that may be more attractive for LHR departures. I'm sure others have done these time calculations better than I.

Personally, the prospect of such a long stage is frightening. Let me off in SIN, BKK or HKG please.

As for the WHY+ seating, I'm sure there's a marketing edge there. I'm not holding my breath.

turtlemichael

Are't there going to be major crew (and cost) issues with a 19 or so hour flight?

NM

Capable yes. JFK-SYD might be pushing against the winds. But could they sell enough seats non-stop to JFK to make it work, even 3 times a week? One reason SYD-LAX-JFK works is that they can collect a significant amount of freight in LAX for carriage to JFK, and the aircraft would otherwise be idle on the ground in LAX due to curfew imposed flight schedules. Remove those from the economics equation and it may not be so attractive to operate non-stop.

However, DFW and ORD remain major hubs for QF's partner, AA. So offering entry points of LAX, DFW and ORD would permit one-stop flights to almost anywhere on the AA map, including Noo York. While Noo York remains an important final destination for many people, it is not as much of a hub for other US connections - especially JFK.

NM

Perhaos Skybeds up front, a few rows of Melleniums (in similar density to domestic A332's), followed by slimlines down the back. I can see this happening on A333 and whatever is selected next. Perhaps even in the 2-class 744.

I would not be surprised if the A380's are the only hulls in the QF fleet with F cabins in 5 years time. But remember that Skybeds are better than the F seats used prior to the current F beds.

NM

All Boeing aircraft purchases and leases are handling in US$. So no opportunity to fix an exchange rate. QF pay in US$ no matter how it is structured. This may be different for Scarebus aircraft, which I assume are purchased in Euros. Either way, QF is always going to be exposed to A$ variations unless they find an Australian-based leasing company that is willing to lease in A$ currency.

You make some other very valid and good points in the rest of your post. I agree with your take on DFW being an option once again.

NM

Probably less than operating in two sectors of 8 hours plus 12 hours. For a 12 hour flight, QF still uses 4 tech crew (Captain, FO and 2 SO's). That same crewing would still work for a 19 hour flight as it does for a 14-15 hour LAX-MEL flight.

Perhaps they will need an additoinal couple of FA's, but not the two full crews used now for the Kangaroo route. In fact, that would be a major part of the savings.

Note that the 777's come standard with a crew rest area in the rear.

turtlemichael

Good point! But thinking about it they still need two full crews on Syd-LHR because of the stop plus I would think that there are likely to be significant penalties at least in the minds of the unions for such a work "shift". It would be interesting to see the cost analysis, not that I will!.

ozstamps

Ummmmm.

Air Canada right NOW has a daily non-stop SYD-YVR and that is not setting the world on fire so QF wouold be nuts to add another. Why would you pick a city ALREADY served non stop if you owned such a plane?

YVR is not a very large population city by American standards.

NYC or ORD, or yes, even DFW due to AA feeder traffic make a ton more sense.