qf789 wrote:

BITRE out for Jan 18

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoi ... y_1801.pdf

Even with extra flights, 4 weekly for Jan Air Mauritius pulled a 98% load factor on inbound traffic to PER, wonder if they will go 5 weekly next summer
Batik Air load factor improved 86.6% inbound, 46% outbound
QF's SCL service 98.4% LF inbound, 95.4% outbound, even with a 5th weekly seasonal service added looks like this could be increased in the future
VA's MEL-HKG seems to be doing better 88.7% LF inbound, 66.2% outbound

Qantas16 wrote:

I know we talk about it every month but VA's BNE-POM was 28% inbound, 37% outbound.

PA515 wrote:

All this talk of BNE to ORD, DFW or SEA could be nothing. I mean why would there be a BNE-SEA instead of a SYD-SEA, and ORD-BNE would be at the limits.

Qantas16 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

BITRE out for Jan 18

I know we talk about it every month but VA's BNE-POM was 28% inbound, 37% outbound...

jrfspa320 wrote:

Having returning from ZQN yesterday, it was a very busy Easter weekend over there, with warbirds over wanaka being a big highlight.

The A320 better runway performance than the 738, shouldn't have been an issue. Not sure if the A321 would make it out however....

Sylus wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

BITRE out for Jan 18

I know we talk about it every month but VA's BNE-POM was 28% inbound, 37% outbound...

While this is bad, the J loads on this route are quite high with many flights going out with a full J cabin.

Speaking of high loads, today's JQ 224 ZQN-SYD left with 180 passengers - a full load. I've never seen an international flight leave ZQN with over 170 so that was a cool sight - not much runway to spare!

IndianicWorld wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

The best outcome for VA would be to have SQ take a larger interest, with EY and HNA exiting. HNA have some significant issues they are trying to manage, which also makes it likely they could be seriously considering selling their stake.

Obzerva wrote:

I do recall HBA and LST having a ridiculously great schedule to MEL during the CRJ ops, think it was 10 and 8 flights a day respectively. That was great from a customer perspective.

Obzerva wrote:

Ansett wanted to drop having it’s regional airports having direct employment by AN and wanted contractors - mainly due to the conditions enjoyed by the local airport staff, hence AN doing a complete pullout of locations such as LST and HBA, rather than the better scheduled, one or two AN 737s in and CRJ supplementing the schedule, which would have allowed for business and groups

eta unknown wrote:

Re VA taking over SQ frequencies- part of the issue is SQ has too many planes and not enough places to fly them, hence the multiple frequencies. BNE really doesn't need 4 flights a day + Scoot @ OOL.

Obzerva wrote:

Ansett wanted to drop having it’s regional airports having direct employment by AN and wanted contractors - mainly due to the conditions enjoyed by the local airport staff, hence AN doing a complete pullout of locations such as LST and HBA, rather than the better scheduled, one or two AN 737s in and CRJ supplementing the schedule, which would have allowed for business and groups.

log0008 wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Re VA taking over SQ frequencies- part of the issue is SQ has too many planes and not enough places to fly them, hence the multiple frequencies. BNE really doesn't need 4 flights a day + Scoot @ OOL.

SQ fly multiple frequencies because it can fill them, it has one of the highest load factors year round, almost always 90%+

In a letter sent to Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia, Canberra Airport has committed to paying AUD100,000 per month for the next six months to the airline that successfully operates the Canberra-Sydney route with a monthly cancellation rate at or below the national average for that month. If both Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia beat the national average, then the carrier with the lowest number of cancelled flights will get the monthly incentive. The offer will be in place for a full for six months, giving airlines the chance at AUD600,000.

qf789 wrote:

Canberra Airport is offering a cash incentive to both QF & VA for reducing cancellations on SYD-CBR route

In a letter sent to Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia, Canberra Airport has committed to paying AUD100,000 per month for the next six months to the airline that successfully operates the Canberra-Sydney route with a monthly cancellation rate at or below the national average for that month. If both Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia beat the national average, then the carrier with the lowest number of cancelled flights will get the monthly incentive. The offer will be in place for a full for six months, giving airlines the chance at AUD600,000.

https://blueswandaily.com/exclusive-int ... nd-sydney/

sq256 wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

Ansett wanted to drop having it’s regional airports having direct employment by AN and wanted contractors - mainly due to the conditions enjoyed by the local airport staff, hence AN doing a complete pullout of locations such as LST and HBA, rather than the better scheduled, one or two AN 737s in and CRJ supplementing the schedule, which would have allowed for business and groups.

KD's CRJs were also a common sight at most Queensland regional airports in AN's final years. BNE-ROK, BNE-MKY and SYD-MCY saw regular CRJ service (at a high frequency) during the weekday with mainline AN serving those ports on the weekends at a lesser frequency. Which was kind of screwed up from a scheduling perspective as you'd see J offering from AN mainline on a weekend, whilst the CRJ has no J seats.

a36001 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Canberra Airport is offering a cash incentive to both QF & VA for reducing cancellations on SYD-CBR route

In a letter sent to Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia, Canberra Airport has committed to paying AUD100,000 per month for the next six months to the airline that successfully operates the Canberra-Sydney route with a monthly cancellation rate at or below the national average for that month. If both Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia beat the national average, then the carrier with the lowest number of cancelled flights will get the monthly incentive. The offer will be in place for a full for six months, giving airlines the chance at AUD600,000.

https://blueswandaily.com/exclusive-int ... nd-sydney/

That is by far the strangest thing I have read all day! As for QantasLink I'm sure the airline would love to keep to schedule, if only the 717's felt the same way!

qf789 wrote:

Conflicting reports on EY's stake in VA, EY says VA remains important partner

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/eti ... t-partner/

eta unknown wrote:

Re VA taking over SQ frequencies- part of the issue is SQ has too many planes and not enough places to fly them, hence the multiple frequencies. BNE really doesn't need 4 flights a day + Scoot @ OOL.

sq256 wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

Ansett wanted to drop having it’s regional airports having direct employment by AN and wanted contractors - mainly due to the conditions enjoyed by the local airport staff, hence AN doing a complete pullout of locations such as LST and HBA, rather than the better scheduled, one or two AN 737s in and CRJ supplementing the schedule, which would have allowed for business and groups.

KD's CRJs were also a common sight at most Queensland regional airports in AN's final years. BNE-ROK, BNE-MKY and SYD-MCY saw regular CRJ service (at a high frequency) during the weekday with mainline AN serving those ports on the weekends at a lesser frequency. Which was kind of screwed up from a scheduling perspective as you'd see J offering from AN mainline on a weekend, whilst the CRJ has no J seats.

Qantas16 wrote:

log0008 wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Re VA taking over SQ frequencies- part of the issue is SQ has too many planes and not enough places to fly them, hence the multiple frequencies. BNE really doesn't need 4 flights a day + Scoot @ OOL.

SQ fly multiple frequencies because it can fill them, it has one of the highest load factors year round, almost always 90%+

For some reason Eta Unknown takes particular issue with SQ operating 4x daily flights ex-BNE and continues to peddle the lie that they can't fill them - they are consistently full year round. Yes, the weakest performer is the new afternoon 265/266, but it has decent loads already and within the next year will be close to their other 3x daily flights. SQ would prefer to leave a plane sitting on the ground in SIN than fly it on a loss-making service consistently, so not sure why you continue to go on about this.

csturdiv wrote:

How much life is left in the Rex SF34s? And what would their replacement be? During my short 23 minute flight from KGC to ADL yesterday I wondered about that. Also, that was probably the smallest airport I have been into. Check in to gate, about 30 seconds, and that's being generous.

eta unknown wrote:

Presumably we'll see NZ BNE-WLG flights reinstated and more VA WLG-AU flights beyond their current BNE services.

Sydscott wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Presumably we'll see NZ BNE-WLG flights reinstated and more VA WLG-AU flights beyond their current BNE services.

Not necessarily. VA will be by far the smallest operator on the Tasman so I'd expect them to concentrate on business services while allowing Tiger to grow into the market to cover off leisure travel. For NZ, I'd expect them to continue to be present on the maximum number of city pairs and have the highest frequency in the market. Certainly its a natural evoluation of the VA / NZ relationship because, realistically, NZ probably doesn't need the partnership to continue to attract the amount of traffic it does to their long haul network. A codeshare would do just as well.

smi0006 wrote:

Makes senses considering NZ ex-AU as a key long haul growth market where they compete with VA/DL to the US. With QF moving to 330s, places VA at a weak spot across the Tasman from a product and frequency perspective.

Sydscott wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Presumably we'll see NZ BNE-WLG flights reinstated and more VA WLG-AU flights beyond their current BNE services.

Not necessarily. VA will be by far the smallest operator on the Tasman so I'd expect them to concentrate on business services while allowing Tiger to grow into the market to cover off leisure travel. For NZ, I'd expect them to continue to be present on the maximum number of city pairs and have the highest frequency in the market. Certainly its a natural evoluation of the VA / NZ relationship because, realistically, NZ probably doesn't need the partnership to continue to attract the amount of traffic it does to their long haul network. A codeshare would do just as well.

zkncj wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Makes senses considering NZ ex-AU as a key long haul growth market where they compete with VA/DL to the US. With QF moving to 330s, places VA at a weak spot across the Tasman from a product and frequency perspective.

Starting to think VA will just leave the Tasman, and move all its Tasman flights to TT. Now without Lounge access on the Tasman, and pretty bad Intentional J product there business market is now gone.

a7ala wrote:

Would be the prime time for QF to set EK lose on BNE-WLG as the NZ/VA alliance disintegrates. Would have been hard for QF or EK to fly against 2xdaily VA but much easier if the alliance splits into dailies each.

ben175 wrote:

I’m flying the PER-MEL sector of QF10 on Saturday and it’s looking veeeery empty at this stage. My friend who is crew checked to see the status of my commercial upgrade request to Y+ and I’m the only one waiting with 20 seats to spare!

I have a feeling the ridiculous domestic fares on QF9/10 will start to wither away... I did get this flight for only $2 more than the other closest PER-MEL flight.

Qantas16 wrote:

log0008 wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Re VA taking over SQ frequencies- part of the issue is SQ has too many planes and not enough places to fly them, hence the multiple frequencies. BNE really doesn't need 4 flights a day + Scoot @ OOL.

SQ fly multiple frequencies because it can fill them, it has one of the highest load factors year round, almost always 90%+

For some reason Eta Unknown takes particular issue with SQ operating 4x daily flights ex-BNE and continues to peddle the lie that they can't fill them - they are consistently full year round. Yes, the weakest performer is the new afternoon 265/266, but it has decent loads already and within the next year will be close to their other 3x daily flights. SQ would prefer to leave a plane sitting on the ground in SIN than fly it on a loss-making service consistently, so not sure why you continue to go on about this.

zkncj wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Makes senses considering NZ ex-AU as a key long haul growth market where they compete with VA/DL to the US. With QF moving to 330s, places VA at a weak spot across the Tasman from a product and frequency perspective.

Starting to think VA will just leave the Tasman, and move all its Tasman flights to TT. Now without Lounge access on the Tasman, and pretty bad Intentional J product there business market is now gone.

travelhound wrote:

Ending the alliance would allow ANZ more control of their destiny. If, as some have suggested ANZ increase flying to more Australian ports, the VA alliance would probably become a hindrance to their future plans.

It will be interesting to see how VA respond to this. They will be the smallest and without an alliance the weakest carrier in the trans-Tasman market.

From a strategy perspective, if QF increase their presence in the New Zealand market the best thing ANZ could do is scuttle their relationship with VA. This would allow ANZ to still grow whilst QF are going for a market share grab.

I think we will see a corresponding competitive response from QF in the next six months.

sq256 wrote:

VA's interline and/or codeshare partners from SkyTeam will still want NZ feed. Possibly more likely that BNE/SYD/MEL-AKL/CHC and BNE/SYD-WLG will remain and possibly re-timed to feed into the SkyTeam bank in SYD/MEL/BNE with leisure timings (e.g Red-Eyes) to the 3 main NZ ports handed to TT.

VA's NZ leisure routes/destinations would either likely be handed to TT or dropped entirely.

zkncj wrote:

As of today NZ started there daily AKL-CHC-AKL 789 service, so they are defiantly up-to something. Maybe evening testing out how cost effective it is to run an 789 on an short-haul sector? Thinking they may try to enter the golden tri-angle with SYD-MEL and SYD-BNE services in the near future?

zkncj wrote:

travelhound wrote:

Ending the alliance would allow ANZ more control of their destiny. If, as some have suggested ANZ increase flying to more Australian ports, the VA alliance would probably become a hindrance to their future plans.

It will be interesting to see how VA respond to this. They will be the smallest and without an alliance the weakest carrier in the trans-Tasman market.

From a strategy perspective, if QF increase their presence in the New Zealand market the best thing ANZ could do is scuttle their relationship with VA. This would allow ANZ to still grow whilst QF are going for a market share grab.

I think we will see a corresponding competitive response from QF in the next six months.

As of today NZ started there daily AKL-CHC-AKL 789 service, so they are defiantly up-to something. Maybe evening testing out how cost effective it is to run an 789 on an short-haul sector? Thinking they may try to enter the golden tri-angle with SYD-MEL and SYD-BNE services in the near future?

getluv wrote:

NZ will also lose access to domestic AU lounges and VA's frequent flyer base so everyone has something to lose. VA and NZ will have to use more aircraft to maintain frequencies and P2P traffic so the big winner here is QF (obviously). I don't expect any new routes in the short term. Everyone will be figuring each other's plans.

SYDSpotter wrote:

zkncj wrote:

As of today NZ started there daily AKL-CHC-AKL 789 service, so they are defiantly up-to something. Maybe evening testing out how cost effective it is to run an 789 on an short-haul sector? Thinking they may try to enter the golden tri-angle with SYD-MEL and SYD-BNE services in the near future?

I wouldn't have thought so...

Perhaps it's to utilise an aircraft with downtime that would otherwise be sitting at AKL

To be competitive on SYD-MEL-BNE, you need multiple frequencies as well as being able to deploy widebodies at peak times. To capture the FF market in Australia, you also need a domestic network outside of SYD-MEL-BNE. Are you suggesting that Air NZ is about to commit to some significant investment in new widebodies and narrowbodies and enter a period of sustained losses with no return on capital?

History has shown that the Australian domestic market can only support 2 major players at most. At the moment there are effectively 2 players (JQ and TT are largely complimentary to QF and VA rather than being competitors). Why would NZ want to enter a market where QF and VA will fiercely defend their market share (as evidenced by the domestic capacity war a few years ago)?

Oh and please tell us where Air NZ is going to get those non-existent morning peak hour landing and take-off slots at SYD?

zkncj wrote:

getluv wrote:

NZ will also lose access to domestic AU lounges and VA's frequent flyer base so everyone has something to lose. VA and NZ will have to use more aircraft to maintain frequencies and P2P traffic so the big winner here is QF (obviously). I don't expect any new routes in the short term. Everyone will be figuring each other's plans.

There had been talk that NZ was looking at obtaining some additional secondhand 777s in the recent months - if they can source some they could have them refitted and in service by November. They have already said they will increase the use of the 787/777 on the Tasman. Therefore it will free up some A320s ex-AKL to help cover the lost of VA.

Along with NZ is planning to have 220-230 Y seats on there A321NEOs so effectively an A320/738 flight now becomes one!

Obzerva wrote:

So predictions?

NZ to open up one or two regional Australian locations with a direct flight to AKL to feel in to their eastbound bank. Possibly CBR, HBA, NTL or pick your Qld airport. They’ll use displaced A320s from when the A321s come online.