VA's PER-HBA must have strong forward bookings because despite being yet to launch, additional flights have been scheduled over the peak season on December 20, 23, 30; and January 6.

PER-HBA 1130-1850 20/12
PER-HBA 1230-1950 23/12, 30/12, 6/1

HBA-PER 1930-2125 20/12
HBA-PER 2030-2125 23/12, 30/12, 6/1

I expect the Sunday flights in particular will prove popular, given the non-stop,service operates on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday only during normal season.

qf789 wrote:

More on swing gates for MEL, plans include to have international flights from both QF and VA terminals within 5 years, having 3 swing gates in that time frame and adding up to another 5 swing gates by the late 2020’s

https://www.ausbt.com.au/melbourne-airp ... ource=grid

So making already small and tight gate lounges, smaller by installing additional corridors to allow this?

qf2220 wrote:

keithball288 wrote:

bunumuring wrote:

Sydney needing a second airport?
Absolutely.
As long as it doesn't turn out to be another under-used Avalon...
Hopefully small fleets of Jetstar and Tigerair planes will be based at SWZ for leisure and capital city flights, with a few QF and VA mainline ('premium') flights to and from MEL and BNE daily topping it out initially.
It will be interesting to see if Air Asia X pulls 'an Avalon' and moves Sydney flights to SWZ. I could also see Cebu Pacific move there and potentially Norwegian start flights into SWZ from Singapore/Bangkok or wherever!
Cheers
Bunumuring

See that's what I'm Worried about that maybe there is not going to be enough air traffic for a second airport.

There isnt if youre thinking of a second airport as big as the current SYD, but there is for a smaller one, which is what is being planned. Freight will more than likely go out there as that is where a lot of Sydney's industrial precincts are. I suspect that domestic flights will be biggest out there for now, with some QF/JQ/VA/TT flights originating from SWZ instead of SYD which would reduce travel of people from the West, the Blue Mountains, Southern Highlands, South Coast etc as they wouldn't need to come to the far east of the city for flights. International probably will remain strong at SYD for a long time but some multi frequency carriers may relocate one of their flights there to take advantage of no curfew.

My question around this is if some of the bilaterals may be changed once SWZ becomes operational to encourage greater frequencies.

I think, especially initially, it will largely be o&d domestic flights and maybe low costs international operations at SWZ. Low cost holiday flights to places like OOL, CNS and MCY as well as additional flights to the other capitals, largely catering for outbound tourism topped off by business from the western suburbs, and VFR inbound travellers who need to head to the west side of the city.
SYD will remain the airport of choice for the vast majority of inbound tourism and business travellers who will largely be headed for the CBD and other habour/Ocean side areas for which SYD with the quick rail link is best positioned. There’s probably enough business demand in the west for a token QF and VA presence on the east cost triangle and maybe other larger cities like PER and ADL.

Personally as a MEL resident going for a city break to SYD I would continue to use Kingsford Smith due to ease and speed of access.

I see the Air China BNE flights, suspended from end AUG to 17JAN, revert to 4x/weekly, then reduce to 3x/weekly, then no schedules loaded after March 2019.

QF BNE to new North American destination. I think the daily (and additional 787 flights) suit the O&D market just fine and there'll be a lot of low hanging fruit/garbage yield that NZ/VA/FJ/HA can pick up. Personally I can't see a new route starting, even if the QF/AA JVA is approved.

qf2220 wrote:

keithball288 wrote:

bunumuring wrote:

Sydney needing a second airport?
Absolutely.
As long as it doesn't turn out to be another under-used Avalon...
Hopefully small fleets of Jetstar and Tigerair planes will be based at SWZ for leisure and capital city flights, with a few QF and VA mainline ('premium') flights to and from MEL and BNE daily topping it out initially.
It will be interesting to see if Air Asia X pulls 'an Avalon' and moves Sydney flights to SWZ. I could also see Cebu Pacific move there and potentially Norwegian start flights into SWZ from Singapore/Bangkok or wherever!
Cheers
Bunumuring

See that's what I'm Worried about that maybe there is not going to be enough air traffic for a second airport.

There isnt if youre thinking of a second airport as big as the current SYD, but there is for a smaller one, which is what is being planned. Freight will more than likely go out there as that is where a lot of Sydney's industrial precincts are. I suspect that domestic flights will be biggest out there for now, with some QF/JQ/VA/TT flights originating from SWZ instead of SYD which would reduce travel of people from the West, the Blue Mountains, Southern Highlands, South Coast etc as they wouldn't need to come to the far east of the city for flights. International probably will remain strong at SYD for a long time but some multi frequency carriers may relocate one of their flights there to take advantage of no curfew.

My question around this is if some of the bilaterals may be changed once SWZ becomes operational to encourage greater frequencies.

Your last point is a great one, it would prove to the easily incentive for international ops.

If they're going for growth, then yes bilateral easing would work, even if it's just excluding SWZ from the SYD cap for a daily service.

Otherwise there's going to have to rely on flights being transferred from SYD, which apart from Cebu and Air Asia, I can't really see too much happening there off the top of my head.

From memory, VA and TT said they'll be at SWZ from day 1, can't recall if QF, JQ or ZL have said the same thing.

Hey Obzerva,
My mum, who lives very close to Badgerys Creek and thus follows developments there carefully, insists that she heard a radio report that Alan Joyce said that Qantas would NOT Mainline flights to SWZ and maybe not fly into SWZ at all for the foreseeable future but Jetstar would.
No idea about REX's intentions.... I suspect it would not be a priority for them.
As for changes in bilaterals, maybe Qatar and Emirates would be interested? Both have a strong public awareness and could perhaps fill a daily flight from SWZ. Scoot may also switch, and would allow further differentiation from the premium Singapore Airlines offering into SYD.
Cheers
Bunumuring

bunumuring wrote:

maybe Qatar and Emirates would be interested?

Aren't EK and QR loads to SYD average at the moment? Even though loads will likely pick up, to go to SWZ, EK and QR would need premium facilities like lounges, to fit with their brand profile - would SWZ provide this?

Cheers,

C.

Interesting to see that PER is now the biggest unserved market ex-NAN. That being said, I recall recently that FJ said they weren't looking at PER, and AFAIK, there's no more space in the bilateral? It would be neat to see PER - NAN materialize.

See: https://www.anna.aero/2018/08/14/fiji-a ... n-in-2018/.

Cheers,

C.

Jetstar has been accused on using overseas based crew on domestic flights who are being paid as little as $100 per week

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-14/j ... s/10107814

bunumuring wrote:

Hey Obzerva,
My mum, who lives very close to Badgerys Creek and thus follows developments there carefully, insists that she heard a radio report that Alan Joyce said that Qantas would NOT Mainline flights to SWZ and maybe not fly into SWZ at all for the foreseeable future but Jetstar would.
No idea about REX's intentions.... I suspect it would not be a priority for them.
As for changes in bilaterals, maybe Qatar and Emirates would be interested? Both have a strong public awareness and could perhaps fill a daily flight from SWZ. Scoot may also switch, and would allow further differentiation from the premium Singapore Airlines offering into SYD.
Cheers
Bunumuring

Your mum heard correctly, QF doesn’t intend to operate from SWZ initially. They may need to move at least part of their cargo operations out though since the overnight slots at SYD are being cut when the new airport opens (and those slots are used for lucrative express post/freight).

VA and TT will both fly from SWZ, as will JQ (which I guess will probably be the airports largest airline). It will be interesting to see how JQ splits their international ops, all at SWZ or perhaps 787s at SWZ and A321LRs serving some bigger cities from SYD as well? I could see them adding nonstop service to SIN and NRT from SWZ. Rex will stay at SYD for sure, their market is heavily skewed to eastern parts of the city.

I think D7 is a given, probably 5J as well. I expect SQ will add a redeye out of SWZ, I could see TZ operating to both airports. A lower cost airport might also attract further low cost carriers, especially combined with the A321LR.

Hey planemanofnz,
I haven't seen any reports about any lounges/premium facilities being designed into SWZ. I'm very sure that there would be consideration given, under the watchful eyes of QF and VA, and I agree with you that for QR and EK (and any other network/legacy/full service carrier) to use SWZ, they would demand such facilities.
Perhaps, at least in the initial stages of the airport's development, a common user lounge or pay-per-visit facility may be constructed.
Cheers,
Bunumuring

Yes QF says that now but once VA goes out there QF will follow. They won't want to see VA get an edge. An 1.5 or 2 hourly service to MEL and/or BNE would probably generate a bit of traffic.

keithball288 wrote:

bunumuring wrote:

Sydney needing a second airport?
Absolutely.
As long as it doesn't turn out to be another under-used Avalon...
Hopefully small fleets of Jetstar and Tigerair planes will be based at SWZ for leisure and capital city flights, with a few QF and VA mainline ('premium') flights to and from MEL and BNE daily topping it out initially.
It will be interesting to see if Air Asia X pulls 'an Avalon' and moves Sydney flights to SWZ. I could also see Cebu Pacific move there and potentially Norwegian start flights into SWZ from Singapore/Bangkok or wherever!
Cheers
Bunumuring

See that's what I'm Worried about that maybe there is not going to be enough air traffic for a second airport.

There will surely be a late night bank from SWZ which SYD can't handle at the moment. I guess the cargo traffic will also be diverted somehow (especially domestic ones as 737 can now takeoff and land during the midnight)

The bad news being BAe-146 freighters may soon be retired after SWZ opens.

Michael

bunumuring wrote:

I haven't seen any reports about any lounges/premium facilities being designed into SWZ.

It seems like SWZ will have lounges - see page 79 (page 88 of the PDF) of this: http://westernsydneyairport.gov.au/file ... t_Plan.pdf.

AFAIK, AVV doesn't have this (any plans to build one there?), so it'll be a point of difference for SWZ in attracting full-service carriers.

Cheers,

C.

qf002 wrote:

I think D7 is a given, probably 5J as well. I expect SQ will add a redeye out of SWZ, I could see TZ operating to both airports.

I'm pretty sure there'll be an AKL link too - not sure on which carrier(s), though.

Cheers,

C.

Interesting to hear this from 5J - "Bookings for Melbourne flights are "definitely starting out stronger" compared to Sydney when it started."

See: http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/08/14/ ... rism-trade.

Cheers,

C.

MU and QF seem to be enhancing their partnership, with further cooperation in capacity deployment.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/china-eastern ... agreement/.

It'll be interesting to see if QF ends up doing MEL - PVG, and MU with PER - PVG. Any other ideas?

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

bunumuring wrote:

I haven't seen any reports about any lounges/premium facilities being designed into SWZ.

It seems like SWZ will have lounges - see page 79 (page 88 of the PDF) of this: http://westernsydneyairport.gov.au/file ... t_Plan.pdf.

AFAIK, AVV doesn't have this (any plans to build one there?), so it'll be a point of difference for SWZ in attracting full-service carriers.

Cheers,

C.

Page 33 of the same 2016 Airport Plan 'concept design' says the SWZ stage 1 terminal size will be in the 65,000 m2 - 90,000 m2 range, with a 'long term' size of 689,000 m2. This CAPA profile - https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/newairports/western-sydney-badgerys-creek-airport - states 65,000 m2 for stage 1. The Airport Plan compares SYD T3 at 78,000 m2.

Also on page 33 they talk about 'integrated terminal' and 'swing' gates, somewhere else it mentions duty free facilities. And they forecast the first runway will be at capacity by 2050, less than 25 years after SWZ opens. Big call.

The contract to "assist WSA Co to manage the airport design project" was only awarded in June this year, to Bechtel, the company that managed construction of Hong Kong International Airport. So we're a little way from seeing a firm terminal design. But the last major greenfield airport we built was over 50 years age - half a century! - Airport design has come a long way in that time. SWZ will have a mid-field terminal, that's a good start. Swing gates part of the design from the get-go, also looking good.

I often read in the local media of land being bought in the area for 'logistics' facilities - Mirvac was the latest I read of, just last week: https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/tract-of-land-near-badgerys-creek-airport-sells-for-71-million/news-story/c9357ed29fb331a27117ee3da97a4c62. The CAPA profile mentions a Costco "warehouse and distribution facility at Kemps Creek, part of Western Sydney Airport's planned 'Aerotropolis' economic precinct." Before SWZ this area was little more than small acreages and market-garden type farms. Freight is looking good.

MooLor wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

bunumuring wrote:

I haven't seen any reports about any lounges/premium facilities being designed into SWZ.

It seems like SWZ will have lounges - see page 79 (page 88 of the PDF) of this: http://westernsydneyairport.gov.au/file ... t_Plan.pdf.

AFAIK, AVV doesn't have this (any plans to build one there?), so it'll be a point of difference for SWZ in attracting full-service carriers.

Cheers,

C.

Page 33 of the same 2016 Airport Plan 'concept design' says the SWZ stage 1 terminal size will be in the 65,000 m2 - 90,000 m2 range, with a 'long term' size of 689,000 m2. This CAPA profile - https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/newairports/western-sydney-badgerys-creek-airport - states 65,000 m2 for stage 1. The Airport Plan compares SYD T3 at 78,000 m2.

Also on page 33 they talk about 'integrated terminal' and 'swing' gates, somewhere else it mentions duty free facilities. And they forecast the first runway will be at capacity by 2050, less than 25 years after SWZ opens. Big call.

The contract to "assist WSA Co to manage the airport design project" was only awarded in June this year, to Bechtel, the company that managed construction of Hong Kong International Airport. So we're a little way from seeing a firm terminal design. But the last major greenfield airport we built was over 50 years age - half a century! - Airport design has come a long way in that time. SWZ will have a mid-field terminal, that's a good start. Swing gates part of the design from the get-go, also looking good.

I often read in the local media of land being bought in the area for 'logistics' facilities - Mirvac was the latest I read of, just last week: https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/tract-of-land-near-badgerys-creek-airport-sells-for-71-million/news-story/c9357ed29fb331a27117ee3da97a4c62. The CAPA profile mentions a Costco "warehouse and distribution facility at Kemps Creek, part of Western Sydney Airport's planned 'Aerotropolis' economic precinct." Before SWZ this area was little more than small acreages and market-garden type farms. Freight is looking good.

Would BNE, that opened in 1988, be considered 'greenfields'? Regardless, airport design has come along way in even 30 years!

It is quite impressive how some airports have just nailed the design elements and made arriving, departing or transiting such a pleasure. ZRH is one of my all time favourites.

keithball288 wrote:

Does Sydney Really Need A second Airport. What are your thoughts?

Desperately. Not ideal to split traffic across two airports, but with SYD being in such a 'special' location yet with no room to grow, it is probably the best we can hope for. The ill-thought-out privatisation of SYD precludes SWZ initially being done as a proper replacement.

The SYD area / footprint is one of if not the smallest of the capital city airports - busiest airport, smallest footprint. Their capacity issues impact the state economy, as does their monopolistic behaviour.

The SWZ business case - http://westernsydneyairport.gov.au/files/WSA_Business_Case_summary.pdf - draws from an '2012 Joint Study on aviation capacity in the Sydney Region', and states:

- forecast demand for aviation services within the region would place considerable capacity pressure on KSA [SYD] well before 2030
- KSA is projected to reach its long-term aircraft movement capacity by 2037.

The more recent ramp-up of Chinese traffic may well have blown those 2012 forecasts out of the water.

SYD is going to attract most of the incoming visitors and business traffic for the foreseeable future. That still leaves Sydney residents' outbound travel; SWZ will be closer to many / most of their homes. The Sydney radio weekend (road) traffic reports routinely say something like "Airport drive is heavy around the international terminal offramp, with traffic backed up into the M5-east tunnel". Who wants to deal with that? And if traffic is backed up into the M5-east tunnel, they're coming from the west...

The few times I've been in the area I have noticed an EK A380 sitting on the end of the SYD runway at 05.59 waiting for the clock to tick over. Those pax are checking in from 02.30 or 03.00, and they're not getting there by public transport at that hour - SWZ might suit many of them better, and a slightly earlier departure might suit EK better. MEL has movements during the SYD curfew hours; those same airlines can take advantage of SWZ's curfew-free status.

I also expect airlines like VN & NZ to serve SWZ - airlines with plenty of VFR traffic into and out of Sydney. And of course all the LCCs that currently serve SYD, their fares should reflect much lower landing fees. (Compare SYD airfares to other major Australian departure points to get an idea of the difference). Airlines like KE and TG flying large aircraft into SYD might prefer smaller aircraft across the two airports.

And JAL has also signed a new agreement with MU.

https://blueswandaily.com/japan-airline ... agreement/

Still don't see either MU or CZ shifting from skyteam to oneworld given CX likely vote against it.

Velocity7 wrote:

Would BNE, that opened in 1988, be considered 'greenfields'? Regardless, airport design has come along way in even 30 years!

It is quite impressive how some airports have just nailed the design elements and made arriving, departing or transiting such a pleasure. ZRH is one of my all time favourites.

I could well be wrong, but a BNE greenfield airport opening in 1988 does not ring a bell. Where was the old BNE?

planemanofnz wrote:

Interesting to hear this from 5J - "Bookings for Melbourne flights are "definitely starting out stronger" compared to Sydney when it started."

See: http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/08/14/ ... rism-trade.

Cheers,

C.

Being a past customer of 5J, my inbox has suffered a deluge of "MEL - MNL $199 return" marketing email in the past few weeks. I'll be pleased when they fill a few planeloads and turn off the faucet!

MooLor wrote:

Velocity7 wrote:

Would BNE, that opened in 1988, be considered 'greenfields'? Regardless, airport design has come along way in even 30 years!

It is quite impressive how some airports have just nailed the design elements and made arriving, departing or transiting such a pleasure. ZRH is one of my all time favourites.

I could well be wrong, but a BNE greenfield airport opening in 1988 does not ring a bell. Where was the old BNE?

Eagle Farm. About 5km South West of the now BNE Domestic terminal which opened in 1988. Very limited amounts of the infrastructure from Eagle Farm were utilised in the new terminals or runways etc (possibly sans part of a taxiway at the very southern extremities of the airport precinct near what was the old International terminal which is now a freight/cargo terminal). So many fond memories as a child/teenager. My wife worked for AN at both airports and we often recount stories of the old Eagle Farm 'hangar'

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Farm_Airport
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Airport

MooLor wrote:

Velocity7 wrote:

Would BNE, that opened in 1988, be considered 'greenfields'? Regardless, airport design has come along way in even 30 years!

It is quite impressive how some airports have just nailed the design elements and made arriving, departing or transiting such a pleasure. ZRH is one of my all time favourites.

I could well be wrong, but a BNE greenfield airport opening in 1988 does not ring a bell. Where was the old BNE?

BNE was a new airport built right next to the old (Eagle Farm) airport. The old international terminal was actually located near the new airport land with a very long taxi so it is really a bit of a hybrid. I can't remember what the situation is with the runway and whether the current runway was used at all when the old airport was operating.

I only went through the old airport a couple of times; the domestic terminal was very small and they used to hang the flight numbers on the bottom of the roll up stairs so you knew which plane to board. Those were the days of the two airline policy so typically a TN and AN flight to the same destination would be boarding at the same time.

moa999 wrote:

And JAL has also signed a new agreement with MU.

https://blueswandaily.com/japan-airline ... agreement/

Still don't see either MU or CZ shifting from skyteam to oneworld given CX likely vote against it.

Though the big Chinese airlines have joined global alliances, I don't know that they take them too seriously and are probably more interested in bilaterals like CZ/QF anyway. For example Air China (Star) owns 20% of Cathay Pacific (Oneworld) and neither has ever expressed any inclination of coalescing in the same alliance or even working very close together in a partner arrangement.

Velocity7 wrote:

MooLor wrote:

Velocity7 wrote:

Would BNE, that opened in 1988, be considered 'greenfields'? Regardless, airport design has come along way in even 30 years!

It is quite impressive how some airports have just nailed the design elements and made arriving, departing or transiting such a pleasure. ZRH is one of my all time favourites.

I could well be wrong, but a BNE greenfield airport opening in 1988 does not ring a bell. Where was the old BNE?

Eagle Farm. About 5km South West of the now BNE Domestic terminal which opened in 1988. Very limited amounts of the infrastructure from Eagle Farm were utilised in the new terminals or runways etc (possibly sans part of a taxiway at the very southern extremities of the airport precinct near what was the old International terminal which is now a freight/cargo terminal). So many fond memories as a child/teenager. My wife worked for AN at both airports and we often recount stories of the old Eagle Farm 'hangar'

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Farm_Airport
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Airport

Yeah, I grew up in Nth Qld and the Brissy airport was always referred to as 'Eagle Farm' - did not realise the new terminals were such a drastic redevelopment of the site, so I've learned something, thanks.

But I meant 'greenfield' in the sense "denoting or relating to previously undeveloped sites for commercial development or exploitation"; an airport built from scratch, like Wellcamp. In fact Wellcamp's wikipedia page refers to it as "the first major greenfield public airport development in Australia since Melbourne Airport opened in 1970". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toowoomba_Wellcamp_Airport

Cheers.

I remember arriving at the old BNE international terminal on a BA 747 and the captain announcing, 'after we land we'll have the longest taxi in the world to the gate'. I also remember my reaction when I saw the terminal, akin to 'what the hell is this- a cargo shed?' Turns out it was lol

I’ve learnt something new as well. Didn’t realise BNE was such a drastic nor such a recent redevelopment. Personally not a fan of BNEs layout so quite surprised it was pretty much built from scratch. Now quite interested in the old Eagle farm airport, anyone got any airport diagrams, overhead imagery and or photographs of the terminals and aprons as it was at its peak during the 1980s?

eta unknown wrote:

I remember arriving at the old BNE international terminal on a BA 747 and the captain announcing, 'after we land we'll have the longest taxi in the world to the gate'. I also remember my reaction when I saw the terminal, akin to 'what the hell is this- a cargo shed?' Turns out it was lol

Actually, it became a cargo shed after it was no longer used as a terminal. But, it was better than the previous "sheds" at the old airport.

Don't forget that Adelaide built a brand new international and domestic terminal (with swing gates for the international services) in 2005 - which although didn't require new runways, everything else was new. The old international terminal "shed" was replaced, and the old domestic terminal was abandoned at the other side of the airport. Prior to this, there was (from memory) 1 international airbridge at the old international terminal, but there were no airbridges for the domestic terminal - it was all walking across the tarmac.

ArtV wrote:

Don't forget that Adelaide built a brand new international and domestic terminal (with swing gates for the international services) in 2005 - which although didn't require new runways, everything else was new. The old international terminal "shed" was replaced, and the old domestic terminal was abandoned at the other side of the airport. Prior to this, there was (from memory) 1 international airbridge at the old international terminal, but there were no airbridges for the domestic terminal - it was all walking across the tarmac.

Sounds much like OOL now no air bridges, just walking across the Tarmac even for an 787 and A332.

[twoid][/twoid]

qf2220 wrote:

Yes QF says that now but once VA goes out there QF will follow. They won't want to see VA get an edge. An 1.5 or 2 hourly service to MEL and/or BNE would probably generate a bit of traffic.

Agreed! Seems like a good base for some 717s with Cobham Crew shouldn’t be too far off the JQ cost base but with higher yield. MEL,BNE,ADL, and maybe a 738 to PER?

I feel SYD still has a fair amount of room, they just need to move the freight sheds, and the government needs to review Qantas drive I think it is, as the land on the other side is also airport property.

planemanofnz wrote:

MU and QF seem to be enhancing their partnership, with further cooperation in capacity deployment.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/china-eastern ... agreement/.

It'll be interesting to see if QF ends up doing MEL - PVG, and MU with PER - PVG. Any other ideas?

Cheers,

C.

I know QF move a lot of people via CZ and MU, but o do feel there is a premium market that won’t fly with these carriers. MEL-PVG was previously flown but didn’t stick. Surely with MU on the other end it could this time. Although MU fly is it a daily 330 and 77W to MEL. Could still be too much capacity.

Hey MooLor,
I totally agree with what you say.
I have heard that a large international hotel chain has rights to a big area near the SWZ site with plans to develop a golf resort and premium airport hotel. Accor has opened a premium hotel at Warwick Farm (the William Inglis - and it's truly magnificent!) plus others in Liverpool and the west. Campbelltown, Penrith and Blacktown all have new hotel complexes built and/or being built. While these are not directly SWZ-related, except the proposed golf resort, I bet all had an eye on the SWZ potential when developing their business plans.
As for logistics companies, they have definitely made their moves to secure prime real estate as you state.
The whole 'Aerotropolis' concept for SWZ will inevitably become a NSW election point leading up to the elections in March next year. I suspect some announcements are being held back to make the most of the 'campaigning climate' that will heat up leading to March 2019.
I truly hope that a more inspiring, 'differentiating' name than 'Sydney West' will also be announced for SWZ, but it will inevitably still be known as 'Badgerys Creek' to locals and ex-locals like me.
Cheers
Bunumuring

smi0006 wrote:

I know QF move a lot of people via CZ and MU, but o do feel there is a premium market that won’t fly with these carriers. MEL-PVG was previously flown but didn’t stick. Surely with MU on the other end it could this time. Although MU fly is it a daily 330 and 77W to MEL. Could still be too much capacity.

When MEL-PVG can be regularly purchased at $400-$500 just to fill the planes (non-stop, not transfers) any high yield margin that it might have would have been trashed. And MEL-PVG is one of the few intercontinental routes from China that has more than one Chinese carriers flying (CA and MU for this one; same goes for SYD-PVG and others like PVG-FRA/CDG)

Michael

smi0006 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

qf2220 wrote:

Yes QF says that now but once VA goes out there QF will follow. They won't want to see VA get an edge. An 1.5 or 2 hourly service to MEL and/or BNE would probably generate a bit of traffic.

Agreed! Seems like a good base for some 717s with Cobham Crew shouldn’t be too far off the JQ cost base but with higher yield. MEL,BNE,ADL, and maybe a 738 to PER?

I feel SYD still has a fair amount of room, they just need to move the freight sheds, and the government needs to review Qantas drive I think it is, as the land on the other side is also airport property.

I recon they could run 737s in from BNE/MEL bases and not worry about their own base there. Keeps costs lower.

Some hills residents are voicing concerns over the future parallel runway at PER. Darlington has been mentioned as one suburb however this suburb would not end up in the direct path of airways coming into PER

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/travel ... b88929781z

smi0006 wrote:

I feel SYD still has a fair amount of room, they just need to move the freight sheds, and the government needs to review Qantas drive I think it is, as the land on the other side is also airport property.

I doubt it. The land on the other side of Qantas Drive is owned by the NSW government. It is the Botany Freight line,which gives rail access to the container port. Nobody is getting that! The line is effectively the northern boundary of the airport from Botany Rd to just pass the jet base where the railway crosses the Alexandra Canal, from which point the canal forms the northern boundary until it meets the Cooks River behind the ITB. So there is definitely no room there.

Gemuser

a320fan wrote:

I think, especially initially, it will largely be o&d domestic flights and maybe low costs international operations at SWZ. Low cost holiday flights to places like OOL, CNS and MCY as well as additional flights to the other capitals, largely catering for outbound tourism topped off by business from the western suburbs, and VFR inbound travellers who need to head to the west side of the city.
SYD will remain the airport of choice for the vast majority of inbound tourism and business travellers who will largely be headed for the CBD and other habour/Ocean side areas for which SYD with the quick rail link is best positioned. There’s probably enough business demand in the west for a token QF and VA presence on the east cost triangle and maybe other larger cities like PER and ADL.

Personally as a MEL resident going for a city break to SYD I would continue to use Kingsford Smith due to ease and speed of access.

If SWZ is going to be a curfew-free airport, it might be more of an interest to EK than we think. From what I know and have heard, EK414 is a very tight turn around due to services from London and Europe landing all within the same time which have a lot of transfers onto EK414, and because of how close it comes to hitting the SYD curfew. It might allow EK to lax the timetable a little bit to allow for a later departure from DXB?

EK operate into three of the five airpots in London (LHR, LGW and STN) and it could allow for a similar set up in Sydney. Obviously London is a lot bigger than Sydney and all three airports have their merits for EK, but if the fare is cheap enough - people will use it.

Thanks,
Mitch

Mitchul wrote:

a320fan wrote:

I think, especially initially, it will largely be o&d domestic flights and maybe low costs international operations at SWZ. Low cost holiday flights to places like OOL, CNS and MCY as well as additional flights to the other capitals, largely catering for outbound tourism topped off by business from the western suburbs, and VFR inbound travellers who need to head to the west side of the city.
SYD will remain the airport of choice for the vast majority of inbound tourism and business travellers who will largely be headed for the CBD and other habour/Ocean side areas for which SYD with the quick rail link is best positioned. There’s probably enough business demand in the west for a token QF and VA presence on the east cost triangle and maybe other larger cities like PER and ADL.

Personally as a MEL resident going for a city break to SYD I would continue to use Kingsford Smith due to ease and speed of access.

If SWZ is going to be a curfew-free airport, it might be more of an interest to EK than we think. From what I know and have heard, EK414 is a very tight turn around due to services from London and Europe landing all within the same time which have a lot of transfers onto EK414, and because of how close it comes to hitting the SYD curfew. It might allow EK to lax the timetable a little bit to allow for a later departure from DXB?

EK operate into three of the five airpots in London (LHR, LGW and STN) and it could allow for a similar set up in Sydney. Obviously London is a lot bigger than Sydney and all three airports have their merits for EK, but if the fare is cheap enough - people will use it.

Thanks,
Mitch

Whilst we may see an EK flight into SWZ, I don’t see EK414 going anywhere, it connects from many of the large EU markets and whilst there will be people for which SWZ would be more convenient the majority of pax especially those inbound on their Australian holidays will want to go to SYD for its close and convient access to inner city and tourist suburb hotel districts. Especially when arriving late in the evening.

SWZ is probably more of a problem than an opportunity for QF, because it splits the market and requires cost duplication.

I think that the Eastern Suburbs and Inner West will always be better served by SYD than SWZ, along with inbound corporate fliers. But the toll roads will link SWZ pretty quickly to many of Sydney's residential suburbs (e.g. northern suburbs M2/7, western suburbs M4 and south/south west M5), especially when avoiding the inner city traffic delays and driving contra peak is taken into account. Those corridors are not small in terms of business fliers, especially M2/7. I doubt QF can completely ignore that, certainly in terms of MEL and BNE.

The rail link looks like it is going to be slow, 40 minutes via Leppington and/or 50 minutes via Blacktown/Parramatta and that assumes express services. A briefing I attended for work about two years ago said an express SWZ - Blacktown - Parramatta - Strathfield - City - North Sydney service would be economic whatever airport traffic looks like, because it links Sydney's 3 main CBDs, but 50 minutes from the airport feels long. Without the nut of CBD access cracked for inbound fliers, it seems difficult to imagine many foreign airlines will look at SWZ positively unless curfew busting is involved, they are a new comer who can't get slots or much cheaper landing fees are offered. Maybe AKL and DPS internationally?

Air Asia X D7 207 AKL-OOL-KUL took off 6 hours late from AKL yesterday (reason unknown) so missed curfew in OOL. The flight went to BNE instead (planned before departure from AKL) and after a quick stop continued on to KUL

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/XAX207

D7 must have this plan in place with ground handlers, BAC etc for when this occurs... interesting that they didn't just cancel it but I guess they can check everyone in in OOL and then bus them up to BNE with their luggage?

Are there any links to say that QF would not be at SWZ from opening day ? I'm sure I've heard Joyce say that they will have a presence there from the start. QF could easily fill domestic flights to all capital cities and with a lot of corporate offices moving out west around the large business parks in the region, there would be a healthy souce of premium passengers. I can't see QF doing international flights, except for the possibility of a couple of trans Tasman services. In fact I really doubt there would be many international flights at all, unless an airline has the need to operate outside of SYD curfew hours. The night domestic freight flights will probably move, but I have doubts that international will move in the short term, there is so much infrastructure built around the Mascot area to handle it and a lot of these companies would be loathe to move west and then need to truck their freight for an hour or so. When there is significant international service at SWZ then they will will be more likley to move.

jupiter2 wrote:

Are there any links to say that QF would not be at SWZ from opening day ? I'm sure I've heard Joyce say that they will have a presence there from the start. QF could easily fill domestic flights to all capital cities and with a lot of corporate offices moving out west around the large business parks in the region, there would be a healthy souce of premium passengers. I can't see QF doing international flights, except for the possibility of a couple of trans Tasman services. In fact I really doubt there would be many international flights at all, unless an airline has the need to operate outside of SYD curfew hours. The night domestic freight flights will probably move, but I have doubts that international will move in the short term, there is so much infrastructure built around the Mascot area to handle it and a lot of these companies would be loathe to move west and then need to truck their freight for an hour or so. When there is significant international service at SWZ then they will will be more likley to move.

It will be interesting to see who moves and who doesn't when it opens... if not enough people move, expect to see some form of government intervention to effectively force airlines to move services out there. I think QF/VA's attitude to the airport will be a major influence in its early success - if QF/VA are eager to establish a sizeable presence out there then expect other (international) airlines to follow.

smi0006 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

qf2220 wrote:

Yes QF says that now but once VA goes out there QF will follow. They won't want to see VA get an edge. An 1.5 or 2 hourly service to MEL and/or BNE would probably generate a bit of traffic.

Agreed! Seems like a good base for some 717s with Cobham Crew shouldn’t be too far off the JQ cost base but with higher yield. MEL,BNE,ADL, and maybe a 738 to PER?

I feel SYD still has a fair amount of room, they just need to move the freight sheds, and the government needs to review Qantas drive I think it is, as the land on the other side is also airport property.

By the time SWZ opens, it is likely the 717s will be Coke cans. They are already coming up to 20 years old.

SYD cannot be extended for political reasons. Even the removal of the hourly cap would be politically brave and the removal of the curfew would be political suicide. There is also the issue that SYD is very poorly located for much of the Sydney population. From east to west Sydney is about 100kms. SYD is located as far east as you can go.

[twoid][/twoid]

tullamarine wrote:

moa999 wrote:

And JAL has also signed a new agreement with MU.

https://blueswandaily.com/japan-airline ... agreement/

Still don't see either MU or CZ shifting from skyteam to oneworld given CX likely vote against it.

Though the big Chinese airlines have joined global alliances, I don't know that they take them too seriously and are probably more interested in bilaterals like CZ/QF anyway. For example Air China (Star) owns 20% of Cathay Pacific (Oneworld) and neither has ever expressed any inclination of coalescing in the same alliance or even working very close together in a partner arrangement.

Thats a poor argument though. There is no other ow carrier in China nor Star operator in HK for CA / CX to have Jv with. Same with australia, until VA joins ST, there is no reason for CZ/MU to prefer VA over a much stronger airline such as QF.

downdata wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

tullamarine wrote:

moa999 wrote:

And JAL has also signed a new agreement with MU.

https://blueswandaily.com/japan-airline ... agreement/

Still don't see either MU or CZ shifting from skyteam to oneworld given CX likely vote against it.

Though the big Chinese airlines have joined global alliances, I don't know that they take them too seriously and are probably more interested in bilaterals like CZ/QF anyway. For example Air China (Star) owns 20% of Cathay Pacific (Oneworld) and neither has ever expressed any inclination of coalescing in the same alliance or even working very close together in a partner arrangement.

Thats a poor argument though. There is no other ow carrier in China nor Star operator in HK for CA / CX to have Jv with. Same with australia, until VA joins ST, there is no reason for CZ/MU to prefer VA over a much stronger airline such as QF.

The issue is the global alliances are very much a '90s construct that is not really very relevant 20 years later. In many ways the alliances have never achieved much of what they claimed to be about. They were supposed to offer a common rewards program, common service & product standards and even joint aircraft orders. None of these have been achieved and even the major proponents of the alliances such as BA and UA treat their own pax different from alliance pax with only their pax being allowed into certain lounges and reward seats often only held for their own program members. The JVs such as EK/QF and VA/DL offer a much more integrated approach than the global alliances have ever achieved.

Although as shown by VAs ever changing lounge list, bilaterals are far more haphazard for pax.

While I agree the alliances havent delivered everything they are generally more consistent, even if changes to FF programs have pushed greater earn to the primary over other airlines in the alliance (eg QFs Simply Fairer changes a few years ago)

Also alliances ate governed by iron clad rules that airlines cannot break - AA might not be friendly with QR, they will still have to provide lounge access to their OWS/OWE members. On the other hand, with “virtual” alliances such as one which VA operates, access could be pulled with barely any notice (see *A lounge at LAX)