Welcome to the Australian Aviation Thread - April 2018 edition. Link to previous thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1387743

Link to QF Fleet Thread 2018

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1382753

Latest on QF 787-9's

VH-ZNA (Great Southern Land) delivered
VH-ZNB (Waltzing Matilda) delivered
VH-ZNC (Quokka) Delivered
VH-ZND (Yam Dreaming) Delivered
VH-ZNE - Final assembly will begin sometime in May
Planned Delivery dates - #5 - 12 July 18, #6 - 24 August 18, #7 - 13 November, #8 - 26 November
Current routes - MEL-LAX, MEL-PER-LHR
MEL-SFO to start 1 September 2018. 4 weekly
BNE will be base for frames 5-8
First BNE based 789 will be named Great Barrier Reef
BNE-LAX-JFK to 789 service from 1 September
BNE-LAX to go to 11 weekly 789 service from 1 December, from 1 September BNE-LAX will be served by a daily 789 and 3 weekly 744
ORD/SEA/DFW tipped for 8th frame
PER-CDG possibly could be announced for 2019 start by end of the year at the earliest

With Virgin opening a hotel in Las Vegas would Virgin Australia start LAS?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

ibthebigd wrote:

With Virgin opening a hotel in Las Vegas would Virgin Australia start LAS?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Extremely unlikely, VA barely have enough aircraft to cover LAX let alone anywhere else

LAS is also a low-yielding destination ex-AU. Extremely unlikely from either of the majors on the US or Australian ends, let alone VA.

How's the PER-LHR nonstop flight doing since it's launch last week?

SQ789 wrote:

How's the PER-LHR nonstop flight doing since it's launch last week?

By all accounts it seems to be going well, it went out with 235 passengers on Thursday ex PER

Alan Joyce interview with Bloomberg a few days ago

https://youtu.be/WqXuODpgIYQ

Some key points

Strong forward loads across business, leisure and VFR traffic
QF happy with initial performance of PER-LHR
From day 1 QF is confident PER-LHR will make money
Seeing immense media coverage, top second or third story in most countries in Europe
QF thinks they have got 100’s of millions of dollars of free publicity
Massive public interest helps the economics of the service moving forward
Super long haul aircraft allow for more direct services to more locations, examples such as New York, Chicago and Washington DC
QF wants to be absolutely sure PER-LHR is making money before more 787’s are converted and also before developing the western hub adding services to Paris and Germany
789’s good option for replacing 744ers at some point in the future
Looking at possibility of exercising 787 options as they expire beginning later this year

SQ789 wrote:

How's the PER-LHR nonstop flight doing since it's launch last week?

I've heard multiple times around the BBQ in Perth that "we're going to use the non stop flight for our trip to europe next year". The locals are embracing it.

qf789 wrote:

From day 1 QF is confident PER-LHR will make money

I doubt they made any money on day 1 given most of the seats were given to the media as freebies

qf002 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

From day 1 QF is confident PER-LHR will make money

I doubt they made any money on day 1 given most of the seats were given to the media as freebies

Cargo? And economy werent all media

waoz1 wrote:

qf002 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

From day 1 QF is confident PER-LHR will make money

I doubt they made any money on day 1 given most of the seats were given to the media as freebies

Cargo? And economy werent all media

I don’t think there was enough if any freight on the 1st PER-LHR. Regardless can’t complain FREE publicity.

EK413

eta unknown wrote:

Cargo is gravy and I doubt anyone is making money on economy AU-Europe fares.

I know freight is gravy. PER-LHR has been weight restricted the 1st week. The 1st flight with unblocked seats departed only 2-3 days ago.

EK413

Looks like EK have downgraded one of the DXB-SYD and SYD-DXB services from A380 to B77W during August/September.

Looks like its EK416 DXB-SYD the 1720pm arrival and EK417 the 1605pm departure from SYD.

How will this work when the arrival is 1720pm and the departure is 1605pm in Sydney?

Is this a schedule error?

vhebb wrote:

Looks like EK have downgraded one of the DXB-SYD and SYD-DXB services from A380 to B77W during August/September.

Looks like its EK416 DXB-SYD the 1720pm arrival and EK417 the 1605pm departure from SYD.

How will this work when the arrival is 1720pm and the departure is 1605pm in Sydney?

Is this a schedule error?

Looks like a schedule error unless the B777 is sitting at SYD for 23 hours?

Probably means EK 413 or EK419 reverts to a B777 and EK417 uses an A380 from an earlier arrival.

SYDSpotter wrote:

vhebb wrote:

Looks like EK have downgraded one of the DXB-SYD and SYD-DXB services from A380 to B77W during August/September.

Looks like its EK416 DXB-SYD the 1720pm arrival and EK417 the 1605pm departure from SYD.

How will this work when the arrival is 1720pm and the departure is 1605pm in Sydney?

Is this a schedule error?

Looks like a schedule error unless the B777 is sitting at SYD for 23 hours?

Probably means EK 413 or EK419 reverts to a B777 and EK417 uses an A380 from an earlier arrival.

Excellent to see the EK 77W in SYD again! The ME3 A380’s are becoming somewhat boring with exception of recent QR 2nd daily B77W DOH-SYD-CBR-SYD-DOH service

EK413

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.

Given the amount of capacity that is going into SYD by the ME3, something had to give.

Will be interesting to see how each of the carriers go, especially EY. EK appear to be the one that will make adjustments where required, but EY would appear to be playing with the weakest hand overall.

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.

It’s been a question that no one seems to be able to answer, even someone I know that has been working at Rex.

There really are not the options available at that size these days, making it have to look at larger options like the ATR 42, or an even bigger step up to the ATR 72 or Dash8-400.

IndianicWorld wrote:

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.

It’s been a question that no one seems to be able to answer, even someone I know that has been working at Rex.

There really are not the options available at that size these days, making it have to look at larger options like the ATR 42, or an even bigger step up to the ATR 72 or Dash8-400.

Well given Rex's preference for planes with less than 50 seats into airports with no security screening, I think a 40 odd seater ATR 42 would be the best option for them. It is not too much bigger than the SF34s (no more than 10 seats) and they are actually currently in production, which helps.

JBusworth wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

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.

It’s been a question that no one seems to be able to answer, even someone I know that has been working at Rex.

There really are not the options available at that size these days, making it have to look at larger options like the ATR 42, or an even bigger step up to the ATR 72 or Dash8-400.

Well given Rex's preference for planes with less than 50 seats into airports with no security screening, I think a 40 odd seater ATR 42 would be the best option for them. It is not too much bigger than the SF34s (no more than 10 seats) and they are actually currently in production, which helps.

I thought that security screening also took into account the weight of the aircraft? Apparently JETGO ran into trouble at Essendon because their planes were just a tad too heavy and had to wait for clearance to get security at Essendon before beginning operations.

I flew a QantasLink 717 from ADL to PER today, and it got me thinking how the route has seen regional jets become more and more common - VA fly in a F100 and the all economy 320. What’s the reason for this? Have passenger numbers declined?

qf789 wrote:

SQ789 wrote:

How's the PER-LHR nonstop flight doing since it's launch last week?

By all accounts it seems to be going well, it went out with 235 passengers on Thursday ex PER

I flew out of MEL to DXB on Thursday night and it seemed just about everything was full. Display in Lounge showed pax numbers and it seemed that everything leaving after 10PM was full including EK and QR A380s heading to Middle East and QF 789 heading to LAX. It was the start of Easter and School Hols which obviously helped.

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.

NZ has 23x Q300s that are 2005-2008 builds (Last Q300s built) - they are currently configured as 50 seaters.

With the oldest one getting to around 13 years old this year, its likely within the next few years this fleet will be 'up for sale' - which could be an good option for REX (with very little shipping costs involved).

The ATR 72-500s are being replaced at around 10-15 years old, ironically with ATR 72-600s. Its likely that NZ will just replace the Q300s with ATR's, now that the ATR fleet is just under 30 aircraft.

ben175 wrote:

I flew a QantasLink 717 from ADL to PER today, and it got me thinking how the route has seen regional jets become more and more common - VA fly in a F100 and the all economy 320. What’s the reason for this? Have passenger numbers declined?

I think VA use the F100 through the centre, ie ADL-ASP-DRW so they would need to position it to ADL somehow, and given the F100 is based in WA seems the most logical way to do it. VA I don’t think have ever been strong ADL-PER, so it could be right sizing their market there.

A bit of a historical one for the long weekend...

Can anyone give a brief rundown on the last few years of Kendall, particularly with their whole move into the CRJs? I remember Aust Aviation articles on it at the time touting the move but it seemed to backfire on the carrier, or at least from my teenagememory it seemed that way.

Was it the CRJs themselves or just the general Ansett shemozzle that caught Kendall up?

If there's a decent website that'd be great too (am somewhere remote and for some reason Google just hangs withat damn blue doughnut... ANet to the rescue!).

aerokiwi wrote:

A bit of a historical one for the long weekend...

Can anyone give a brief rundown on the last few years of Kendall, particularly with their whole move into the CRJs? I remember Aust Aviation articles on it at the time touting the move but it seemed to backfire on the carrier, or at least from my teenagememory it seemed that way.

Was it the CRJs themselves or just the general Ansett shemozzle that caught Kendall up?

If there's a decent website that'd be great too (am somewhere remote and for some reason Google just hangs withat damn blue doughnut... ANet to the rescue!).

I also remember those times where the CRJ’s were introduced as a ‘game changer’, yet things certainly soured.

It was a combination of factors from memory, including AN’s struggles through to not really being a great fit fo their needs.

Sorry I don’t have more specific info, but those were my memories about that time.

zkncj wrote:

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.

NZ has 23x Q300s that are 2005-2008 builds (Last Q300s built) - they are currently configured as 50 seaters.

With the oldest one getting to around 13 years old this year, its likely within the next few years this fleet will be 'up for sale' - which could be an good option for REX (with very little shipping costs involved).

The ATR 72-500s are being replaced at around 10-15 years old, ironically with ATR 72-600s. Its likely that NZ will just replace the Q300s with ATR's, now that the ATR fleet is just under 30 aircraft.

That might be a good option, but what about spares. How "full" are the Rex planes usually? The few I've been on have been at the most 1/2 full down to just a few pax. Would even a Q300 or ATR42 be too much?

^^Kendell and the CRJ's. Kendall were acqired by TNT-News Jun 1990, the name was retained. The CRJ's were leased and brought into service between Sep 99 and Jun 01, and were on the inventory when AN went belly up. All ac were repossessed by the lessor early 2003. There is a photo of some of the CRJ's in a AN hanger at MEL Dec 2002 in Stewart Wilson's book page 176 Ansett. The story of the rise and fall of Ansett 1936-2002.
I remember reading that the introduction of the CRJ was introduced for thin routes, but the intro into service was botched . One of the factors was the training of pilots (from prop to jet op) was a lot more complicated than expected culminating in the use of qualified "charter" pilots which cost them an arm and a leg (to put it mildly). If I can find the source of my memory I shall PM you. cheers.

TN486 wrote:

^^Kendell and the CRJ's. Kendall were acqired by TNT-News Jun 1990, the name was retained. The CRJ's were leased and brought into service between Sep 99 and Jun 01, and were on the inventory when AN went belly up. All ac were repossessed by the lessor early 2003. There is a photo of some of the CRJ's in a AN hanger at MEL Dec 2002 in Stewart Wilson's book page 176 Ansett. The story of the rise and fall of Ansett 1936-2002.
I remember reading that the introduction of the CRJ was introduced for thin routes, but the intro into service was botched . One of the factors was the training of pilots (from prop to jet op) was a lot more complicated than expected culminating in the use of qualified "charter" pilots which cost them an arm and a leg (to put it mildly). If I can find the source of my memory I shall PM you. cheers.

I quite liked the CRJs, but a lot of people weren’t huge fans. There were introduced on CBR-BNE replacing the 146s, but the corporates/politicians were not happy at all, they had to go back to the 146s for the peak morning and evening flight to bring back a business class.

There was an issue with the number of infants on board, from memory they were capped at 3 infants per flight, which left the airport to deal with it at check in, as there was no way to stop infants going through the Res system at the time of booking.

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.

Another issue they had was AN virtually took themselves out of the group travel market to Tasmania as the 50 seat capacity of the aircraft, and the fact that Revenue wouldn’t allow a chunk of seats on group discounts on a single flight.

Another aspect was that a lot of regional markets were reasonably protected from the 767 grounding as AN were ripping aircraft from everywhere to try and cover the grounded aircraft, but there wasn’t much could be done with the CRJs on such short notice, so MKY, ROK etc schedules were largely left intact whilst getting between the capitals was a bit trickier.

Hey guys,
Re CRJs : yes, the intro was botched. Yes, Ansett ended up not using them to their full potential due to distracted management etc. Yes, I agree with Obzerva that many people - including me - did not like flying in them. I flew them often Melbourne-Hobart and return, and they were simply awful for a tall passenger like me. And as for cabin baggage.... Argh!
Re : Etihad parachuting out of Virgin Australia... I have heard rumours about Singapore and Delta sniffing around Etihad's shareholding (separately) with a chance that HNA may also parachute out in some kind of related move. Just rumours, but I have a strong feeling that VA's ownership structure may be altered in the near future.
Re : Rex Saab replacements... The ATR42 would have to be a favourite, maybe with some ATR72s for busier routes, but a single-frame replacement of 340s by -42s makes more sense. However, I think that if Embraer go ahead with their proposed 'small turboprop' of around 30-40 seats and it suits Rex's needs, Rex may jump on board fairly quickly as a 'blue ribbon' highly respected launch customer. Air New Zealand may also be interested in Embraer's ideas.
Cheers
Bunumuring

Thanks everyone, very interesting. Certainly some issues I hadn't considered - e.g. pilot training, group bookings, infant travel. Clearly Kendal/Ansett management hadn't either!

aerokiwi wrote:

Thanks everyone, very interesting. Certainly some issues I hadn't considered - e.g. pilot training, group bookings, infant travel. Clearly Kendal/Ansett management hadn't either!

I’ve thought of a couple of other points since my original post.

Originally the CRJs were loaded with KD numbers rather than AN, however before launch they did become AN.

At the time, apart from the most expensive economy fares both AN and QF operated with return fares domestically, eg 21, 14, 7 day avdance purchase fares, and all were return, they wanted all your travel spend. KD on the other hand, used one way fares, and apparently there was a bit of to’ing and fro’ing between KD and AN over the issue before AN won out. Once DJ and VQ played the necessary role of upstarts, and taking any business they could get, both AN and QF dropped their return fare structure.

Also, and I’m unable to confirm this, they did have permission from CASA to operate with a single cabin crew member, but never actually did it.

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:

Today's The Australian newspaper is reporting Etihad may be wanting to exit their Virgin investment.

Given the rest of their moves to exit investments, along with general cost cutting at EY, this is no surprise.

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.

I’m not sure adding DL to the mix is a wise course of action though, as it just reshuffles the cards around to get a potentially similar outcome.

At present there are too many hands on the pie, so less influence from multiple parties may well serve them far better.

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.

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

EK413 wrote:

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.

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

I don't think HNA is just going to pack up shop and move on so soon. I know that they have a very complicated situation to sort out but surely holding onto the VA stake can be part of their future.

JBusworth wrote:

EK413 wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

I don't think HNA is just going to pack up shop and move on so soon. I know that they have a very complicated situation to sort out but surely holding onto the VA stake can be part of their future.

It will depend on how deep their issues are.

The reality is that although they likely don’t want to exit any investment, especially one they have only taken on board lately, it would not be a shock if they had to move on.

The HKG routes would be interesting to watch if it did happen though.

JBusworth wrote:

EK413 wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

I don't think HNA is just going to pack up shop and move on so soon. I know that they have a very complicated situation to sort out but surely holding onto the VA stake can be part of their future.

Certainly not implying HNA would pack shop & move on anytime soon. Simplying throwing it out there if HNA was to clean house & offloading VA was an option things would certainly go bad to worse (VA that is).

IndianicWorld wrote:

JBusworth wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

I don't think HNA is just going to pack up shop and move on so soon. I know that they have a very complicated situation to sort out but surely holding onto the VA stake can be part of their future.

It will depend on how deep their issues are.

The reality is that although they likely don’t want to exit any investment, especially one they have only taken on board lately, it would not be a shock if they had to move on.

The HKG routes would be interesting to watch if it did happen though.

That’s a hefty bill if you ask me.

Exclusive: Amid liquidity concerns, China's HNA Group aviation fuel bill hits $476 million - sources

BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s HNA Group has amassed an estimated 3 billion yuan ($476 million) bill with a state-run aviation fuel company, two oil industry sources said, underscoring how a deepening cash crunch is plaguing core operations at the conglomerate.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hna- ... SKCN1GC0Y9

VA HKG routes will be interesting to watch.

EK413

EK413 wrote:

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.

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

If HNA sold out of VA and the HKG routes did get pulled and VA needed a quick solution as to where to send some A330s would a simple answer not be SIN?
VA could supplement a couple of SQs many existing services freeing up SQ’s own aircraft to a potential new route. VA already codeshare on SQ anyways, would it really matter if one flight out of X was VA operated with SQ code sharing on it? It’d be very much like the Tasman arrangement is currently with NZ.
The only thing the flight wouldn’t presumably have is all the other codeshares that SQ has attached, LH etc

With QF constantly expanding to the US i'd be curious to know if 787 flights between ADL-LAX running 3x a week or so on a MEL-ADL-LAX type rotation could be viable, I doubt it would be given priority over the SYD/BNE-ORD plans at the moment but it'd be interesting to know if management has considered such a route.

Obzerva wrote:

ben175 wrote:

I flew a QantasLink 717 from ADL to PER today, and it got me thinking how the route has seen regional jets become more and more common - VA fly in a F100 and the all economy 320. What’s the reason for this? Have passenger numbers declined?

Its all about resource usage. The VARA planes and crew are not being utilised to the extent as the VA crew, so maximising your resources is good financial sense. Also expansion on market for VARA to the east coast will be easier, who knows a DRW-CNS or CNS-ASP-PER could eventuate... all dependant on uptake.

angusjt wrote:

With QF constantly expanding to the US i'd be curious to know if 787 flights between ADL-LAX running 3x a week or so on a MEL-ADL-LAX type rotation could be viable, I doubt it would be given priority over the SYD/BNE-ORD plans at the moment but it'd be interesting to know if management has considered such a route.

Have been looking at this recently. The announced Dec 2018 schedule so far has the MEL-LAX Mo 2220/1740 Mo returning LAX-MEL Tu 2355/1030 Th, and the BNE-LAX We 1715/1155 We returning LAX-BNE Th 2105/0500. In both instances over 24 hours on the ground in LAX. However, there could be LAX-xxx flights on the Mo and We yet to be announced that cross over with flights xxx-LAX. Where else would a premium heavy 789 be going from LAX?

ADL would fit, maybe three nonstop and some via BNE.
LAX-BNE 2105/0500, BNE-ADL 0630/0940, ADL-LAX 1130/0830.
LAX-ADL 2230/0805, ADL-BNE 1400/1550, BNE-LAX 1715/1155.
LAX-BNE 2105/0500, BNE-ADL 0630/0940, ADL-BNE 1400/1550, BNE-LAX 1715/1155.
LAX-ADL 2230/0805, ADL-LAX 1130/0830.

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.

PA515

PA515 wrote:

angusjt wrote:

With QF constantly expanding to the US i'd be curious to know if 787 flights between ADL-LAX running 3x a week or so on a MEL-ADL-LAX type rotation could be viable, I doubt it would be given priority over the SYD/BNE-ORD plans at the moment but it'd be interesting to know if management has considered such a route.

Have been looking at this recently. The announced Dec 2018 schedule so far has the MEL-LAX Mo 2220/1740 Mo returning LAX-MEL Tu 2355/1030 Th, and the BNE-LAX We 1715/1155 We returning LAX-BNE Th 2105/0500. In both instances over 24 hours on the ground in LAX. However, there could be LAX-xxx flights on the Mo and We yet to be announced that cross over with flights xxx-LAX. Where else would a premium heavy 789 be going from LAX?

ADL would fit, maybe three nonstop and some via BNE.
LAX-BNE 2105/0500, BNE-ADL 0630/0940, ADL-LAX 1130/0830.
LAX-ADL 2230/0805, ADL-BNE 1400/1550, BNE-LAX 1715/1155.
LAX-BNE 2105/0500, BNE-ADL 0630/0940, ADL-BNE 1400/1550, BNE-LAX 1715/1155.
LAX-ADL 2230/0805, ADL-LAX 1130/0830.

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.

PA515

Both those flights are planned that way to cover for maintenance, the Ground time on the MEL-LAX in December is the same as what it is currently

Hey if we’re taking about ADL LAX what about non stop PER ???

Only kidding. Though a 787 doing CDG PER BNE LAX would be good enough.

I don’t have a problem with us westies connecting on the eastern seaboard to get to the USA.

Obzerva wrote:

EK413 wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

If HNA sold out of VA and the HKG routes did get pulled and VA needed a quick solution as to where to send some A330s would a simple answer not be SIN?
VA could supplement a couple of SQs many existing services freeing up SQ’s own aircraft to a potential new route. VA already codeshare on SQ anyways, would it really matter if one flight out of X was VA operated with SQ code sharing on it? It’d be very much like the Tasman arrangement is currently with NZ.
The only thing the flight wouldn’t presumably have is all the other codeshares that SQ has attached, LH etc

Simple it sounds why would SQ saturate their lucrative route which is currently served 5 x daily SQ & 1 x daily TZ. Also worth adding the lack of confidence from the travelling public. VA have gone from serving SYD,MEL,BNE-LAX & dropping MEL to only return to MEL-LAX route again, VA SYD-AUH dropped, PER-AUH announced and dropped before it got off the ground. Then MEL/SYD-HKG & if SQ take over switch it to SIN?!?

EK413

On 3 April 2018, Qantas will be relocating from Terminal 7 to Terminal 8 at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK).

Qantas will share the terminal with partner American Airlines, enabling customers transiting through JFK to connect to onward flights more easily.

In our new home in Terminal 8, customers will also enjoy more space at check-in and an extensive range of food and retail outlets.

qf789 wrote:

Both those flights are planned that way to cover for maintenance, the Ground time on the MEL-LAX in December is the same as what it is currently

If true for both, that means only five aircraft days available for the yet to be announced flights for the 8th 789 as there is a BNE-LAX Fr 1715/1155 Fr, LAX-BNE Fr 2105/0500 Su. Assuming the new destination is overnight in each direction that only allows for two flights a week. We and Su seems more likely than Tu and Su or Mo and We. It also means an aircraft day on the ground at BNE, or the other destination (unlikely).

BNE-LAX-JFK-LAX-BNE Daily is two aircraft, BNE-LAX Mo We Sa 1715/1155, LAX-BNE Mo Th Sa 2105/0500 one aircraft.

The 789 downtime would be four days, MEL Tu 2050 to We 1700, LAX Mo 1740 to Tu 2355, LAX We 1155 to Th 2105 and BNE Tu morning to We afternoon?

PA515

EK413 wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Wouldn’t HNA exit impact VA recent entry to the MEL-HKG & (soon) SYD-HKG services?!? I’m pretty sure HNA aren’t going to hand over those HKG slots over and pack their bags.

EK413

If HNA sold out of VA and the HKG routes did get pulled and VA needed a quick solution as to where to send some A330s would a simple answer not be SIN?
VA could supplement a couple of SQs many existing services freeing up SQ’s own aircraft to a potential new route. VA already codeshare on SQ anyways, would it really matter if one flight out of X was VA operated with SQ code sharing on it? It’d be very much like the Tasman arrangement is currently with NZ.
The only thing the flight wouldn’t presumably have is all the other codeshares that SQ has attached, LH etc

Simple it sounds why would SQ saturate their lucrative route which is currently served 5 x daily SQ & 1 x daily TZ. Also worth adding the lack of confidence from the travelling public. VA have gone from serving SYD,MEL,BNE-LAX & dropping MEL to only return to MEL-LAX route again, VA SYD-AUH dropped, PER-AUH announced and dropped before it got off the ground. Then MEL/SYD-HKG & if SQ take over switch it to SIN?!?

EK413

Sorry may have mis worded it, I didn’t mean to saturate with an additonal frequency by VA, I meant SQ pulling a flight, and having it directly replaced by VA with SQ codesharing on it. Realistically that’s all the SYD-AUH flight was, it was just operated by VA to feed in to EY

Agree the confidence would be an issue, but a good advertising campaign never hurt things.

It was only speculation, still a lot of if’s to occur before it would even be looked at.

And if HNA did sell out, Nanshan still had a holding - although not sure why as I can’t see the logic in it, can’t see VA feeding Nanshan’s QW.

VA's SYD-HKG flights have gone on sale

https://twitter.com/AusBT/status/980979413742370817

https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 0713219072