If anyone has qf787 photos/videos in sydney could they share them?

Well to be fair, the TV networks, Fairfax NewsCorp, AusBT and a few others were probably paid very handsomely.

QF are getting the money's worth that's for sure.

I somewhat agree that it is "hype" when they are celebrating an aircraft that's been flying for 6 years already, and with Qantas Group for 4, but I think some are missing the forest for the trees.

The source of excitement is not the 787 per se, but more what it represents in terms of a fairly radical new direction for Qantas. After years of bad press, record losses, grounding etc Qantas is back and bigger than ever.

We are seeing a shift away from the orthodoxy of the Geoff Dixon era, which carried over to the early Joyce years probably more out of neccessary than anything else, where the A380 was the vehicle to fly multiple times per day to LHR and LAX, and virtually all other peripheral long haul routes were canned.

Perth-Europe non-stop, ORD and SEA, YVR daily, maybe another hub to SFO, and in time SYD to LHR and JFK, are the sort of routes that the Qantas of 2017 can make a reality, when the Qantas of 2007-2014 really couldn't.

While this plan has arguably been in the works for a decade or more, which is why Qantas ordered the type so early, they weren't in a position to follow through. Now they are, and the 787 is the vehicle to carry the message that this is a new Qantas.

Summed up perfectly, RyanairGuru!
I too see this as somewhat symbolic of the new Qantas and not just about a new type of plane.
Congrats to everyone at QF and Boeing involved, enjoy your omens in the well-publicised (but gloomy in Sydney today) Sun!
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Some pictures from this morning's hangar arrival

No word on the new USA route yet?

Milesdependent wrote:

No word on the new USA route yet?

Heard AJ say a few days ago on TV, will be announced closer to the end of 2017. I assure you I heard it

RyanairGuru wrote:

While this plan has arguably been in the works for a decade or more, which is why Qantas ordered the type so early, they weren't in a position to follow through. Now they are, and the 787 is the vehicle to carry the message that this is a new Qantas.

Thank you - well said. At the end of the video with Captain Norman she mentioned about the symbolism and representation of this aircraft and the new era of Qantas; it's growth, promotion and expansion. I admittedly was only half listening at this point as I was still distractedly looking at the aircraft!



I was wondering whether the song Great Southern Land would be played again, and of course it was.

Qantas has just received its first Dreamliner direct from the Boeing factory, by Lauran McMah, news.com.au, October 20, 2017, http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-ad ... 8ef22dc292

Excerpt from the article:

"The Boeing 787-9, registered as VH-ZNA, touched down in Sydney on Friday morning after its maiden flight from United States and was ceremoniously wheeled into its hangar to the sounds of cheers from Qantas staff and a choral rendition of I Still Call Australia Home, the song that can make even the most steel-hearted among us weep.

But the Australiana theme at the welcoming ceremony was really amped up when the doors of the plane opened and Australian rock legends Icehouse emerged performing their classic hit Great Southern Land."





VH-ZNA, which arrived on Friday morning, will service a number of domestic routes before it takes on the Melbourne to Los Angeles service on December 15.

The second of Qantas’ Dreamliners is on the production line at the Boeing facility in Seattle and will be delivered by the end of the year.

Thanks for all the pics everyone. Keep 'em coming

CBRboy wrote:

QF29 wrote:

VH-ZNA is currently on the final stretch to home!

https://www.flightradar24.com/QFA7879/f41f5ca

When you refer to 'home' do you mean Seattle where the aircraft was built or Sydney, where it will not be based/homed? This is one gigantic propaganda exercise, which QF is very good at, and which the pathetic Australian media gobble up and regurgitate.

Our admirable national flag carrier has finally taken delivery of an aircraft which other airlines have had for six years and which its own subsidiary has had for four years. It is not a 'game-changer' by any reasonable definition of those words. But we will hear that repeated over and over again.

Nonetheless, I'm pleased to see Qantas finally taking on the 787.

much prefer our other national carrier virgin over QF anyday

A SYD/SEA direct flight via BNE would be much more preferable to any SYD/LAX/SEA. No changing terminals at BNE, same aircraft the whole way.

RyanairGuru wrote:

While this plan has arguably been in the works for a decade or more, which is why Qantas ordered the type so early, they weren't in a position to follow through. Now they are, and the 787 is the vehicle to carry the message that this is a new Qantas.

A question that I have been asking myself for a while now is - What Next? The 789s are here and their numbers will grow and support new routes (including ULH) and changes to existing ones.

Lets call the A380/A330 fleet one step change in QF, and the 789 another (JQ is probably another one there too btw, but not JQ and the 788). What is the next step change that we think that QF is going to have to deal with?

undertheradar wrote:

Thanks for all the pics everyone. Keep 'em coming

Glad your enjoying them. Here is some more

has anyone heard what the new NONSTOP 787 route will be out of BNE ?

BNE/ORD ?

BNE/SEA ?

BNE/SFO ?

The close ups are GREAT. Cheers qf789

USAOZ wrote:

has anyone heard what the new NONSTOP 787 route will be out of BNE ?

BNE/ORD ?

BNE/SEA ?

BNE/SFO ?

AJ mentioned a few days ago on TV, the new route will be announced closer to the end of 2017

Another day, another article from New Zealand media on QF's new 787 - there has now been an article each day, for the past week.

This, in a country which is not even set to see a QF 787 in the near future!

See: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11935155.

RyanairGuru wrote:

The source of excitement is not the 787 per se, but more what it represents in terms of a fairly radical new direction for Qantas.

bunumuring wrote:

I too see this as somewhat symbolic of the new Qantas and not just about a new type of plane.

If so, then let us actually talk more about this new direction (in terms of destinations and products), rather than just posting photo after photo.

After all, there is already a separate thread on the delivery of QF's new 787 - see: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1376269&start=100.

Cheers,

C.

You're welcome to not read the thread if it doesn't interest you.

RyanairGuru wrote:

You're welcome to not read the thread if it doesn't interest you.

Agreed, plus not to make some meaningless comments in here. That can save us some bandwidth too.

Michael

It may be old news or hype to us, but a brand new QF 787 is certainly news to the general (non-aviation geek) public who don't follow aviation to the degree we do.

Keep in mind that QF gets both the good and the bad from the media. In the aftermath of the QF A380 incident, any QF incident such as an aircraft having to turn back was front page news.

qf789 wrote:

undertheradar wrote:

Thanks for all the pics everyone. Keep 'em coming

Glad your enjoying them. Here is some more

Great images thanks for sharing. I probably bumped into you today

USAOZ wrote:

has anyone heard what the new NONSTOP 787 route will be out of BNE ?

BNE/ORD ?

BNE/SEA ?

BNE/SFO ?

Coming from someone who chooses to fly the “other” national carrier why the curiosity? (Qantas always going to be Australia’s National carrier btw).

AJ did mention SYD/MEL/BNE-JFK direct as potential routes & certainly feasible.

EK413

qf2220 wrote:

Lets call the A380/A330 fleet one step change in QF, and the 789 another (JQ is probably another one there too btw, but not JQ and the 788). What is the next step change that we think that QF is going to have to deal with?

The 737NG replacement, the backbone of the domestic fleet will need replacing at some point.

SYDSpotter wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Lets call the A380/A330 fleet one step change in QF, and the 789 another (JQ is probably another one there too btw, but not JQ and the 788). What is the next step change that we think that QF is going to have to deal with?

The 737NG replacement, the backbone of the domestic fleet will need replacing at some point.

Speak of which would be due for replacement from 2022-2024 with -VXA hitting 20 years of service.

EK413

Given all the talk of press hype around the QF 789, this column from Joe Aston is illuminating reading: http://www.afr.com/opinion/columns/from ... 020-gz4v06

EK413 wrote:

SYDSpotter wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Lets call the A380/A330 fleet one step change in QF, and the 789 another (JQ is probably another one there too btw, but not JQ and the 788). What is the next step change that we think that QF is going to have to deal with?

The 737NG replacement, the backbone of the domestic fleet will need replacing at some point.

Speak of which would be due for replacement from 2022-2024 with -VXA hitting 20 years of service.

EK413

I don't see that as a step change but more of the same...

345tas wrote:

Given all the talk of press hype around the QF 789, this column from Joe Aston is illuminating reading: http://www.afr.com/opinion/columns/from ... 020-gz4v06

Link gives a paywall

undertheradar wrote:

345tas wrote:

Given all the talk of press hype around the QF 789, this column from Joe Aston is illuminating reading: http://www.afr.com/opinion/columns/from ... 020-gz4v06

Link gives a paywall

If you put "Riding the first Qantas Dreamliner" into Google, the article comes up through Google's news service, which allows you to read it without paying.

V/F

VirginFlyer wrote:

undertheradar wrote:

345tas wrote:

Given all the talk of press hype around the QF 789, this column from Joe Aston is illuminating reading: http://www.afr.com/opinion/columns/from ... 020-gz4v06

Link gives a paywall

If you put "Riding the first Qantas Dreamliner" into Google, the article comes up through Google's news service, which allows you to read it without paying.

V/F

Or you can access it through Joe Aston's FB page apparently.

Thanks VirginFlyer & 345tas. Tried google. Still get paywall, and I'm one of those freaks who lives without facebook Ahh well, no biggie. I'll survive Sure there will be plenty from others over the next few days

undertheradar wrote:

Thanks VirginFlyer & 345tas. Tried google. Still get paywall, and I'm one of those freaks who lives without facebook Ahh well, no biggie. I'll survive Sure there will be plenty from others over the next few days

You didn't miss much - a trip report on one long piss-up at QF's expense. And as an aside he flew home on a new QF 787.

He believes the hype over QF's 789s is overblown, yet went on to say things such as "nobody has configured [the 789] so elegantly", "on board, the atmosphere is dramatic", and we are "a nation of road warriors" for whom "these jets will vastly improve the ultra-long-haul travel experience".

getluv wrote:

Well to be fair, the TV networks, Fairfax NewsCorp, AusBT and a few others were probably paid very handsomely.

QF are getting the money's worth that's for sure.

Inaccurate and ill-informed: Qantas definitely didn't pay AusBT a penny for this, not any promise of ad campaigns or anything else. It's strictly an editorial arrangement: we're invited to events like this because there's news value for our readers, and not just on all things QF789 – a few non-789 stories already published and a few more to come, and all of them chosen based on merit of appeal to readers.

Milesdependent wrote:

No word on the new USA route yet?

To be announced end of this year or early 2018.

SYDSpotter wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Lets call the A380/A330 fleet one step change in QF, and the 789 another (JQ is probably another one there too btw, but not JQ and the 788). What is the next step change that we think that QF is going to have to deal with?

The 737NG replacement, the backbone of the domestic fleet will need replacing at some point.

Alan Joyce has spoken of the 737 MAX, and down the track Boeing's mid-market 'MOM' aka 797 jet, for domestic routes (with 797 also picking up international routes to Asia and perhaps NZ).

Re. Next generation narrowbody at QF.

I've been thinking lately what could work well for QF is a fleet of around initially 15-20 preferably A321neo*(otherwise 737-10 MAX) to replace the VX series 73H around the 2020 timeframe. The larger aircraft will come handy adding additional pax and cargo capacity that was lost with the retirement of the 767. Can definitely see it being useful complementing the 73H on the golden triangle and east-west flights freeing up A330s for more Asia flying.Then around 2025 a further 10 frames maybe A320neo or 737-8 MAX to replace the VY series 73H. Then by the time the VZ and XZ series are due both OEMs should have green design narrowbody on the not so distant horizon.

*A321neo vs 737-10 MAX - As much as I like the 737, without looking at the numbers I think the Airbus is better optimised in this size class also being able to take AKH containers is an advantage.

Just my 2c,

vhqpa wrote:

replace the VX series 73H around the 2020 timeframe.

I honestly expect to see the VXx 737s operating until the late 2020s. They easily have 25 years of life in them, and could probably be flown for 30 years with no issues. With Qantas' conservative approach to capital management they are unlikely to buy shiny new jets just for the sake of it, and I can easily see Qantas sitting out a generating and going straight to the MOM.

RyanairGuru wrote:

I honestly expect to see the VXx 737s operating until the late 2020s.

Yep, it would make very little sense to start retiring them until 2024-25 at the earliest.

QF has already stated that they will start looking at ordering a 737 replacement "within the next few years" so I don't expect to see an order until 2020 let alone deliveries that soon.

Between the MOM and the C-Series QF has plenty of options without needing to lock themselves into operating 737s right through to 2050.

djsflynn wrote:

getluv wrote:

Well to be fair, the TV networks, Fairfax, NewsCorp, AusBT and a few others were probably paid very handsomely.

QF are getting the money's worth that's for sure.

Inaccurate and ill-informed: Qantas definitely didn't pay AusBT a penny for this, not any promise of ad campaigns or anything else. It's strictly an editorial arrangement: we're invited to events like this because there's news value for our readers, and not just on all things QF789 – a few non-789 stories already published and a few more to come, and all of them chosen based on merit of appeal to readers.

Considering you felt the need to jump on and defend the site says a lot.

I know how this works. QF may have not paid as much as some of its industry peers for column inches, however [I'm making a calculated guess] QF/Boeing probably offered its "guests" 5-star accommodation, J class flights to Seattle, photo/social media ops, exclusive access to Alan and possible other future arrangements and/or news that is embargoed, otherwise why would you have gone? Your time costs money, content costs money and so does publicity and keeping content owners happy. Its business.

qf789 wrote:

Glad your enjoying them. Here is some more

Airplane porn at its finest!

getluv wrote:

Considering you felt the need to jump on and defend the site says a lot.

Only says that I care about setting the record straight against mis-information.

getluv wrote:

QF may have not paid as much as some of its industry peers for column inches

And I'll say it again – nobody pays anything to me or AusBT for 'column-inches'. Can't say it any more clearly.

getluv wrote:

however [I'm making a calculated guess] QF/Boeing probably offered its "guests" 5-star accommodation, J class flights to Seattle, photo/social media ops, exclusive access to Alan and possible other future arrangements and/or news that is embargoed, otherwise why would you have gone?

Okay, I'm going to ask you to think through and work through your statement with an eye towards logic and commonsense,

* five-star accommodation: yes, because that's standard. You think an airline is going to put media up at the YMCA? I've stayed at four-star places on similar trips due to over-booking in the city, doesn't worry me much, in the end we're getting a single room (in the case of Seattle, with a wonderful view of the car park next door) where we can work and sleep, and that's that. There's no fanciness attached to this 'five star hotel' stuff: typical day is you wake up, go downstairs for a very average US hotel breakfast (paid for by Qantas, I guess that means my stomach is 'sponsored'?), catch a bus to Everett for briefings and factory tours and interviews, grab a boxed lunch at Boeing in between and type up and file and publish any newsy stories (eg QF 789 for BNE-LAX-JFK, QF looking at 737 MAX and 797), then hop back on the bus to the hotel, try to transcribe and write some more, then off to dinner, back to the hotel late, sleep and repeat. There's no 'luxe lifestyle' about this, so I think we can discount 'five star accommodation' as a thing.
* J class flights to Seattle: yep, and again, that's the standard, especially when this is a business trip. And again, just think this through: you'd expect an airline yo say to media: come along but sorry, you'll be in economy? Of course an airline wants to ensure media are comfortable and show off its business class.
* photo/social media ops: it's the reveal of an all-new aircraft type for Qantas, of course there will be photo opportunities.
* exclusive access to Alan: and again, of course there will be interviews with the CEO and other relevant execs. Why would you think otherwise?
* and possible other future arrangements and/or news that is embargoed: not sure what you mean by 'possible other future arrangements' but there was no news under embargo on this trip, it was all up for grabs.

getluv wrote:

otherwise why would you have gone?

I think your punchline here has missed the spot, because as I've indicated above, what we had was the norm for a launch like this.

Let's flip this around: if Qantas said "Hey David, come along to the 787-9 event in Seattle: we'll fly economy, put you up in a dodgy two-star fleapit and won't allow any photos or any interviews" - clearly that's an outlandish and self-defeating scenario in the first place, and do you think a journalist would have gone? I wouldn't have. But still unsure of your point here, so maybe you can restate and reframe?

getluv wrote:

Your time costs money, content costs money and so does publicity and keeping content owners happy. Its business.

And again, I'm sure you have a point but I can't quite see it, unless you're saying "Qantas offered you a standard media trip and you accepted"..?

I'm happy to offer insights into this 'junket' stuff as relevant and appropriate.

So much 'argy bargy'. Gotta love '(un)social media' lol. You'd think this was a 'human rights postal marriage survey' hehehe. Of course ANY 'reporter' on ANY topic will have an element of 'personal opinion'/fluff in it, which is perfectly fine by me. Its part of the human thought process. Personally, I enjoy reading reports/articles/news/looking at pics etc to gain a bit more knowledge about the objective things (facts) I am interested in and disregard the bits I'm not interested in (usually the subjective bits). I then form my own opinion/make my own decisions based on my own requirements. I don't care how the media were 'treated' by the company involved. Good luck to 'em, I say
Sorry to the mods for a not entirely aviation focused post. I wont to it again

Let's flip this around: if Qantas said "Hey David, come along to the 787-9 event in Seattle: we'll fly economy, put you up in a dodgy two-star fleapit and won't allow any photos or any interviews" - clearly that's an outlandish and self-defeating scenario in the first place, and do you think a journalist would have gone? I wouldn't have. But still unsure of your point here, so maybe you can restate and reframe?

but would you have gone if Qantas had said "We have an event in Seattle for the launch of the 787; you are invited to attend but must make your own travel and accommodation arrangements" This is not an unusual arrangement as it is the way most businesses work when they send staff overseas. to conferences etc.

I don't begrudge you your trip. Who wouldn't take it? but let's face it, Qantas pays for everything and expects only positive media coverage as a result. Had you written an article pointing out that the 789 will have what is probably the equal worst Y class across the Pacific and far behind VA/DL's 777 and QF's own A380s, I'm sure they wouldn't have been impressed and you would've heard about it.

djsflynn wrote:

getluv wrote:

Well to be fair, the TV networks, Fairfax NewsCorp, AusBT and a few others were probably paid very handsomely.

QF are getting the money's worth that's for sure.

Inaccurate and ill-informed: Qantas definitely didn't pay AusBT a penny for this, not any promise of ad campaigns or anything else. It's strictly an editorial arrangement: we're invited to events like this because there's news value for our readers, and not just on all things QF789 – a few non-789 stories already published and a few more to come, and all of them chosen based on merit of appeal to readers.

Hmmm..... I was Head of Business Development at what I'll call a "travel provider" for 7 years until I moved on 4 years ago. So I'm really well informed!

Talking in generic terms and not any specific outlet, but buying an ad package, sponsoring events, a few drinks evenings, buying tickets to this and that event, a few upgrades or tickets here and there, all went a very very long way to positive column inches up until 4 years ago.

I'd get a phone call from an editor or similar saying, "hi, we're thinking about running a story about country x in four weeks and service y in four weeks after that. Thought it might be good for you to have a big ad in both to re-inforce your message, perhaps I'll get my reporter to come and have a chat before flying out, maybe it would be a good chance for them to try out your new [insert lounge/bed/food/whatever]". Next thing you've bought ads and given away a free or very discounted ticket.

You'd need to do a fair amount of searching to find 5 AusBT articles in the last 12 months which stray far from the press release.

tullamarine wrote:

but would you have gone if Qantas had said "We have an event in Seattle for the launch of the 787; you are invited to attend but must make your own travel and accommodation arrangements"

We'd not have gone because we have no budget for that, and I'd wager that few if any other media would have done so either (apart from perhaps TV channels with a reporter & crew based in LA, and still maybe not because while the packages would be good they'd effectively be promoting Qantas rather than reporting 'real' news, eg bushfires around LA).

tullamarine wrote:

This is not an unusual arrangement as it is the way most businesses work when they send staff overseas. to conferences etc.

Quite so, but press trips, launches etc are an entirely different matter to those examples.

tullamarine wrote:

but let's face it, Qantas pays for everything and expects only positive media coverage as a result."

Qantas' expectations are not my concern – writing stories for my readers is – but Qantas is sufficiently grown-up to realise that they can't have everything their way and if a journo pens a reasoned objective and fair-minded piece which happens to be negative on some aspect of the 787 for example, that is the journo's right.

tullamarine wrote:

Had you written an article pointing out that the 789 will have what is probably the equal worst Y class across the Pacific and far behind VA/DL's 777 and QF's own A380s, I'm sure they wouldn't have been impressed and you would've heard about it.

If I did write such a piece for Australian Business Traveller – a comparo of best economy between Australia and the USA - and rated the QF 789 in such a way, Qantas' feelings on the matter wouldn't be of any concern... and I doubt they'd call or email if it was a reasoned article based entirely on 'measurables' such seat width, pitch and recline while also taking into account availability of AC/USB ports, IFE screen size and content, maybe baggage allowance, and several other factors.

But either way, I'd want to double-check the facts on QF A380 Y vs QF789 Y – and regardless, that's not an article you'll see on AusBT because we as a rule don't cover economy class.

And anyway, what if QF PR didn't agree with a story and even called me to give their side? Big whoop. I've had worse, and this comes with the territory of being a journo. I'm not beholden to Qantas or any airline.

Ryanair01 wrote:

You'd need to do a fair amount of searching to find 5 AusBT articles in the last 12 months which stray far from the press release.

I'm calling bullsh*t on this. We strenuously avoid the PR copy-paste routine because it adds little value to readers and indeed impacts SEO... you'll far more likely find news-breaking articles not based on any press release and in some cases raising issues which airlines did not publicise for whatever reason. But "hater's gonna hate" etc, and you'll see whatever you choose to see.

Ryanair01 wrote:

I was Head of Business Development at what I'll call a "travel provider" for 7 years until I moved on 4 years ago. So I'm really well informed!

Without doubt you're well informed about the travel trade market or whichever publishing channel you dealt with, but that example and your experiences have zero application not to AusBT. Speak to anybody who knows me, who knows my history and who knows the site, and you'll come back with a different tune.

Anyway, some here have voiced their opinion and I'd had my reply to try and set the record straight, so maybe posts can get back to the subject at hand...

I'm sure this probably happens more than I am aware of but VA992 (BNE-SYD) on Friday night returned to Brisbane as it missed curfew. Flightradar records show it reaching 0ft at 11:06pm over the threshold of 34L, not sure if it actually touched the runway but either way it got very close before realising the fine wasn't worth it and returned to BNE...

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flig ... 92#f450cbd

Without restarting the argument on whether the curfew should exist at all (it shouldn't...), surely there should be some more relaxed rules for flights that miss it by such a small amount of time. Now 180 passengers (+ crew) are spending the night in another city and they still created a lot of noise by conducting a missed approach anyway. The rules should be relaxed and allow each airline "x" number of flights that are allowed to land/take off after curfew (say within 30mins) each week/month/year without requiring special permission.. this could be based on the number of flights they operate into SYD and would be low (say QF/VA could get 1 or 2 per week each, other airlines a lot less).

The real joy of that is that by nearly completing the approach and then performing the go-around they made more noise (and over a larger area) than just actually landing.

I would have expected also that ATC would have been pointing out the tightness of the timing before the flight actually got anywhere near the threshold.

Qantas16 wrote:

I'm sure this probably happens more than I am aware of but VA992 (BNE-SYD) on Friday night returned to Brisbane as it missed curfew. Flightradar records show it reaching 0ft at 11:06pm over the threshold of 34L, not sure if it actually touched the runway but either way it got very close before realising the fine wasn't worth it and returned to BNE...

They were cutting it very fine the moment they left BNE. Looks like they left BNE at 9pm local time (10pm SYD time) and were madly trying to beat the curfew. At what stage is dispensation granted? Surely you'd get it prior to taking off?

SYDSpotter wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

I'm sure this probably happens more than I am aware of but VA992 (BNE-SYD) on Friday night returned to Brisbane as it missed curfew. Flightradar records show it reaching 0ft at 11:06pm over the threshold of 34L, not sure if it actually touched the runway but either way it got very close before realising the fine wasn't worth it and returned to BNE...

They were cutting it very fine the moment they left BNE. Looks like they left BNE at 9pm local time (10pm SYD time) and were madly trying to beat the curfew. At what stage is dispensation granted? Surely you'd get it prior to taking off?

Indeed but evidently thought it was still possible...

IIRC the ATR and Q400 can both operate to SYD at any time, would be an interesting idea for QF/VA to trial later flights (particularly on Friday night) that operate into and out of SYD after (or close to 11pm). Similarly, operate early morning departures out of SYD?

This is also particularly relevant for BNE during daylight savings, where last QF flight at the moment leaves BNE at only 7:35pm to arrive in SYD at 10:10pm. Operating Q400s could allow the operation of one or two more flights, such as:

QF561 BNE 2005 - 2300 SYD
QF563 BNE 2105 - 2359 SYD

Naturally the demand isn't there for the opposite from SYD as flights can depart until 11pm so that is probably late enough.

Similarly, SYD-MEL flights run every 15minutes from 0600... could it be a potential advantage for QF to run a 0500 and 0530 departure to capture the business traffic that needs to be in MEL before 8am? It would also mean passengers could avoid the crowds at 6am!

One issue would be with aircraft scheduling as you are essentially operating one-way routes and would not want to be flying MEL-SYD-BNE with Q400s during the day to get the aircraft back home... but if they could schedule it around their existing route network and only offered it on peak demand days (e.g. Monday AM, Friday PM), it could be an interesting way to gain an advantage in the business sector. Not that QF really needs it but maybe VA could trial it.

Qantas16 wrote:

Similarly, SYD-MEL flights run every 15minutes from 0600... could it be a potential advantage for QF to run a 0500 and 0530 departure to capture the business traffic that needs to be in MEL before 8am? It would also mean passengers could avoid the crowds at 6am!
.

No business class on the Q400's, the business types wouldn't accept that

6am is an ungodly hour to be at the airport, a 5am or 5.30am departure would not be fun. Even with a 5am departure on a Q400/ATR, you're probably only saving 30-40mins compared with a 6am departure given their slower cruising speed. Generally though, if you need to be in Melbourne in the early AM, most companies will just put their employees up in Melbourne overnight which means the employee is not getting up at 3-4am to get on a 5am flight.

6am is an ungodly hour to be at the airport, a 5am or 5.30am departure would not be fun. .

I'm pretty sure QF run a 5:00am departure BNE-MEL during DST. Yuck!

I've done the transcons leaving PER between 5-6am, it's terrible having to set an alarm for 3:45am. I'd still take them over a redeye anyday though.