Perth to London

[Asturias56]

Dead weight cost and something else to go wrong and giving you AOG

Some Minimum Wage operative driving a set of steps is much cheaper, can be used 24/7 and on multiple aircraft

[Transition Layer]

The latest rumour I’m hearing and it has been said before is Jetstar 787s back to mainline and Jetstar use the 321 Neos. Actually makes some sense.
It also makes sense for JQ that the aircraft return to QF in time for their first major checks and the parent company foots the bill, while the little brother gets the new factory fresh jets with no maintenance costs.

From what I’ve seen, JQ have no trouble filling the 787s to Bali once a day but there’s probably more money to be made sending 2 full 321s twice a day instead.

[Slezy9]

Occasionally I see Virgin disembark from the front via air-bridge and the rear via ramp and then up the stairs. I know this does not suit hot or wet weather and can run fowl of ICAO standards. If I recall Air Asia at KLIA2 wanted to continue with using roll up stairs and walking pax along the tarmac but the Malaysian DCA said no to that and made them include air-bridges in the new terminal. The resaon given at the time was the ICAO "requirement" for RPT pax to be "contained" and that walking across the tarmac for jet operations is not really compliant. I shudder to think how regional airports cope.


Gold Coast? Everyone (international included) does it at OOL. Scoot and Jetstar 787s included.

[Going Boeing]

It also makes sense for JQ that the aircraft return to QF in time for their first major checks and the parent company foots the bill, while the little brother gets the new factory fresh jets with no maintenance costs.


We won’t mention that QF Engineering in Narita were ordered to buy a qantity of B787 spare parts - this was before QF had any B787’s and there are no intentions for QF to operate B787’s to Japan. Yet more subsidising of JQ International.

[ebt]

We won’t mention that QF Engineering in Narita were ordered to buy a qantity of B787 spare parts - this was before QF had any B787’s and there are no intentions for QF to operate B787’s to Japan. Yet more subsidising of JQ International.



You're assuming that doesn't get re-charged onto Jetstar, minus adjustments for inter-company transactions. If you can prove that, I'd be interested to see it. And surely any other provider would also have some spares on-hand for one if their customer has an AOG, even if it comes from a pool?

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

The resaon given at the time was the ICAO "requirement" for RPT pax to be "contained" and that walking across the tarmac for jet operations is not really compliant.
It's not a requirement, it's only an ICAO recommendation as a risk mitigator ie to remove passengers from the dangerous ramp environs. If it was a requirement, there would be thousands of non-compliant airports around the world. Those that do it manage just fine.

[HOBAY 3]

I don't follow your reasoning. Why would Qantas go out and buy a less efficient and less profitable aircraft to fly one of its most profitable routes? It's one thing to use widebodies to fly tag flights that fill their schedule and help out at peak times; it's another to invest in dedicated planes that would be less profitable.

Surely the better answer would be to buy larger capacity planes that are built for shorthaul flying, like the 737-10, A321 or 797 - which seems to be Qantas' plan. Or, if there are a stack of other unserved routes to just buy more 737s?

(But, as has been said above, QF and VA's current profitability is largely the result of capacity restraint, so not sure that I'd want to dump a stack of extra planes into the shorthaul market just yet.)

By the time 737-10, A321, or 797 is in the fleet, how full will MEL-SYD be based an annual growth and no potential to schedule extra flights because they're already going every 10 minutes in peak? The sweet spot is 80% load factor because you need some wiggle-room for delayed passengers and seasonal variation (I hazard a guess Friday, being the busiest day of the week, would be operating low to mid 90 percentile).

Remember MEL-SYD is either the second or third busiest route in the world; we're not talking about your average sector here with only several flights per day - it needs bigger aircraft! Using your logic, ANA should sell up all those 777s and buy more 737s for HND-CTS.

More 737s isn't the answer anyway as pilots are coming up short, so in the meantime, why not redeploy the existing JQ 787s?

[PlasticFantastic]

By the time 737-10, A321, or 797 is in the fleet, how full will MEL-SYD be based an annual growth and no potential to schedule extra flights because they're already going every 10 minutes in peak? The sweet spot is 80% load factor because you need some wiggle-room for delayed passengers and seasonal variation (I hazard a guess Friday, being the busiest day of the week, would be operating low to mid 90 percentile).

Remember MEL-SYD is either the second or third busiest route in the world; we're not talking about your average sector here with only several flights per day - it needs bigger aircraft! Using your logic, ANA should sell up all those 777s and buy more 737s for HND-CTS.

More 737s isn't the answer anyway as pilots are coming up short, so in the meantime, why not redeploy the existing JQ 787s?

Qantas will definitely need to upgauge MEL-SYD. Redeploying JQ's 788s is definitely an option. But, I don't think it would be the best option. Not just because the 788 isn't a particularly efficient plane for high frequency, shorthaul flying, but also because:

QF isn't starting from a blank slate, and has other options - for example, it has A330s that it can use on tag flights during the day, given that most of their international flying is overnight; and it could free up some of those A330s to do more domestic flying by the early 2020s if it takes more 789s or 78Js (the A330s would be nearly fully depreciated by then, so fairly cheap to run a few domestic legs a day); as it takes on more 789s for QFi, it may be possible to schedule those for some peak hour flying to swap them between MEL/SYD/BNE bases, since QF usually schedules them for early morning arrivals (depending on QFi's route decisions, of course); it has also been able to free up 737s by redeploying ex-JQ A320s to Network - I haven't looked at Network in a while, but there may be the option to do a bit more of that; and
QF has some clearly foreseeable fleet decisions coming up over the next few years that would risk making JQ's 788s an expensive short-term move - for example, QF looks like it will order the NMA, for delivery by 2025-ish; it may well also order A320/1neos to replace the 737NG fleet - if so, it could draw on some of the existing QF Group order book to take A321neos from the early 2020s. These would both be far more efficient for the SYD-MEL route, meaning that QF would need to recover the cost of refitting the JQ788s within only a few years, and would risk being left with a fleet of 788s without crew rests (can those be retrofitted?) that would be a poor fit for QFi operations.

ANA and JAL have already committed to fleets of 777 and 787s for domestic and shorthaul international flying. That's more about slot congestion at HND than it is about the thickness of the routes. From all reports, it's not particularly efficient. But, once they have the fleet, it might not make much sense for them to change it. In any case, you'd have to expect that they'll both be lining up for the NMA to replace a good chunk of those fleets, if Boeing can make it work.

As for QF's own shortage of 737 pilots, are you suggesting that JQ's current 788 crew walk straight into the same roles at QF? If not, it'd just result in more retraining inside QF, which is a fair chunk of the cause of the current shortage...

[Going Boeing]

You're assuming that doesn't get re-charged onto Jetstar, minus adjustments for inter-company transactions. If you can prove that, I'd be interested to see it. And surely any other provider would also have some spares on-hand for one if their customer has an AOG, even if it comes from a pool?

QF Engineering fought hard to not have the parts on their books, insisting that they should be in JQ’s inventory but an instruction came from a very high level that they must be held in QF International inventory. You wouldn’t insist on that if you were subsequently going to charge JQ when the parts are used.

When you take into account the previous history, such as the promise (when they were operating A330’s) that JQ would pay for their A330 simulator time which was total BS. The then head of QF Flight Training repeatedly tried to get payment from JQ but after a while he was told that no money would be forthcoming and if he didn’t stop his submissions he would lose his job.

Also, all the fuel uplifted by Qantas Group aircraft in HNL is paid for by QF International, yet JQ International still doesn’t make a profit despite many subsidies. If they were making a profit, Joyce would show it on the books but he keeps all those figures hidden.

[rog747]

Just read that recently Sir Richard Branson Virgin Atlantic UK wants ASAP to operate LHR-PER non stop with 787-9 and eventually with the A350ULR to SYD if Airbus can tweak the range.

Virgin says our current 787-9 fleet doesn't currently have the right cabin configuration for this PER route, we are always evaluating new destinations for our customers - and Perth is a great city."

[Icarus2001]

I did say at the start of this Perth-London experiment that if it becomes the "game changer" that Joyce touts then the European airlines will jump on it pretty quickly. Advantage lost, back to competing on service and price.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/virgin-atlantic-london-australia-flights-richard-branson-qantas-perth-a8606376.html

https://thewest.com.au/news/aviation/richard-branson-says-virgin-wants-to-launch-perth-to-london-direct-flights-ng-b881000561z

The only caveat would be that Branson has a long history of saying things for his own reasons but nothing happening. A little like Joyce and the business class Malaysian venture, Jetstar Hong Kong...

[dragon man]

The advantage Qantas has this time is that only Australian and UK carriers can fly it, no 5th or 6th freedom rights to middle eastern or Asian carriers so competition is limited.

[maggot]

The advantage Qantas has this time is that only Australian and UK carriers can fly it, no 5th or 6th freedom rights to middle eastern or Asian carriers so competition is limited.
Well that's just a matter of time and more lobbying

[dragon man]

Well that's just a matter of time and more lobbying

Well they havnt managed it across the Pacific and they tried that for years. Personally I don’t think the Australian government would be that stupid.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

The MEL/SYD airport infrastructure is creaking at the knees with 737's every 10 minutes. How do you reckon they'd go with B797 or A330 loads cycling at that frequency?

[Ken Borough]

How do you reckon they'd go with B797 or A330 loads cycling at that frequency

Wide bodies woukd see a significant frequency reduction. An A330 every ten minutes? :ugh:

[HOBAY 3]

Wide bodies woukd see a significant frequency reduction. An A330 every ten minutes? :ugh:

Yep, you'd still have a flight every 15 minutes, but you'd have a higher wide-body:narrow-body ratio. By the time demand has grown enough to require wide-bodies every 15 minutes, SWZ will be open which will relieve the pressure for some time.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

By the time demand has grown enough to require wide-bodies every 15 minutes, SWZ will be open which will relieve the pressure for some time.
And at the MEL end?

[PlasticFantastic]

And at the MEL end?

Is MEL slot-constrained?

[HOBAY 3]

And at the MEL end?

There's already a significant component AVV-SYD, which is counted in the BITRE figures for Melbourne-Sydney.

[VH DSJ]

And at the MEL end?

Aren't they building a parallel east-west runway at YMML? When is that planned to be finished?

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Is MEL slot-constrained?
As far as I know, MEL does not have a slot system for Domestic Ops.
Thus, a 2018 Productivity Commission report found that:
Capacity on the current crossing runway system is being exceeded today, with scheduled flight cancellations and delays becoming increasingly frequent, and recovery from delays becoming more difficult to achieve.

[Scooter Rassmussin]

Government should build all the new runways and take a minimum of 51% ownership of each airport,
the tax payer deserves their Airports to be efficient and should also share in the obscene profits .

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Nice one Comrade!

Governments can barely build roads these days.

[dragon man]

Government should build all the new runways and take a minimum of 51% ownership of each airport,
the tax payer deserves their Airports to be efficient and should also share in the obscene profits .

Maybe you are to young to remember but we the people used to earn the airports until the Howard government sold them and then we the people got screwed as is usually the case when governments sell tax payer assets.

[morno]

Going Boeing,
Lots of accusations there about JQ that without proof are just a load of crap.

[Icarus2001]

You may need to do a little reading about which party decided to lease the FAC airports.

[Mk 1]

Nice one Comrade!

The most perfect business you can own is a monopoly as you control price and supply and can vary either. To add the cherry to the top of this sundae, make it in an industry with high barriers to entry (massive costs) and you can sit there farming your profits as others cannot get into the business to steal your thunder. I am a capitalist at heart, but blind freddy should have known that selling airports, power companies etc was one of the worst decisions made.

[engine out]

Discussions of Syd-Mel and airport ownership. Do I detect a complete thread drift? I am sure there is another thread on Qantas fleet requirements. Can we get back to what a disaster this route is, with it’s poor passenger numbers and huge amounts of diversions/cancellations, or did everybody get bored when it turned out Qantas may have got something almost right for a change.

[Comoman]

https://thewest.com.au/news/aviation/passengers-fume-as-qantas-perth-to-london-flight-qf9-cancelled-ng-b881077589z

QF9 cancelled - passengers stuck.

[130herc]

In October, Qantas said the flight was operating with a capacity of 92 per cent, on average, and 94 per cent in premium classes. The capacity is the highest of any of the airline’s international routes.


Probably because its their smallest long-haul plane.
Are these numbers accurate anyway?

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Load factor performance on a new route can be misleading depending on how many sale fares were released to stimulate the new route, and what periods of travel these fares existed for. If these numbers exclude deeply discounted fares, and they're pricing at a premium (due to the benefit of this route), then this is a good result considering there are a few options ex Perth to London, be it an extra stop for all pax excluding Perth pax.

It would be better to see the rASK performance on this market.

[PlasticFantastic]

Load factor performance on a new route can be misleading depending on how many sale fares were released to stimulate the new route, and what periods of travel these fares existed for. If these numbers exclude deeply discounted fares, and they're pricing at a premium (due to the benefit of this route), then this is a good result considering there are a few options ex Perth to London, be it an extra stop for all pax excluding Perth pax.

It would be better to see the rASK performance on this market.

That is ordinarily true, but when was the last time you saw a sale fare on PER-LHR? Every time I've checked, there is a serious premium in all classes for this route. Qantas is on the public record that it is their single most profitable route, and performing well ahead of expectations. Unless you think they are blatantly lying (which would likely be a criminal offence, given it would be market-sensitive information), in this case I would say it is fairly safe to say that this route has excellent RASK and profitability.

[Asturias56]

https://thewest.com.au/news/aviation/passengers-fume-as-qantas-perth-to-london-flight-qf9-cancelled-ng-b881077589z

QF9 cancelled - passengers stuck.

Risk you take on any flight that only has a single flight a day - I've been impressed by how FEW problems they've had TBH

[V-Jet]

One question that almost can’t be answered here with any accuracy, is how many east coast FF are ‘forced’ to use points to get to Europe via PER. It suits Qf to make those seats bought with points to be as expensive as possible.

I think PER-LHR is a fantastic service, but as an additional service to Europe, not a seat reducing replacement...

[PPRuNeUser0198]

That is ordinarily true, but when was the last time you saw a sale fare on PER-LHR? Every time I've checked, there is a serious premium in all classes for this route. Qantas is on the public record that it is their single most profitable route, and performing well ahead of expectations. Unless you think they are blatantly lying (which would likely be a criminal offence, given it would be market-sensitive information), in this case I would say it is fairly safe to say that this route has excellent RASK and profitability.

If that is the case re fare picing then this is a great outcome for Qantas (I have not done any fare comparisons). The other part to it is also that people will try it to see if it is a better way to travel over current routings, so I think there would be a percetange of RPK's that simply wanted to get to London faster which is really a misnomer at the end of the day - it is still one stop to London for the majority (only PER consumers benefiting) - it just happens to be in Australia. End of the day - some will love it and some will loath it. For me - I could not stand sitting onboard for that long. I've done DFW twice - once in J and once in P - and I still hated it. I don't know how others can do it in Y. I just could not do that long. But that is me.

We'll see how it continues over the coming cycles.

[dragon man]

Have to apologise, it’s not Perth to Paris but a second Perth to London service. Mid year start I believe.

[On eyre]

DM - do QF have a third LHR slot assuming QF1/2 is continuing ?

[Beer Baron]

it is still one stop to London for the majority
Nope, the majority of passengers are to/from Perth. The stats show approximately 70% of available seats are filled by passengers flying to/from PER. So for most of the customers it is very much non-stop.

[SandyPalms]

QF have 4 slot pairs at LHR. I think at one point there were 5 but I’m not sure if this is still the case.

[dragon man]

QF have 4 slot pairs at LHR. I think at one point there were 5 but I’m not sure if this is still the case.

4 slots is correct, two are leased to BA. Is it an extra service or a replacement for QF 1/2 , I don’t know.

[Transition Layer]

Second service to London from Perth? How boring and predictable.

Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin...anywhere else would have been better!

[SandyPalms]

If that is true, I would guess the agreement (as has been alluded to) with Perth airports is for services to LHR, AKL and SIN, so they can operate as many as they like to those ports. A way of getting around Perth airport??

[Asturias56]

Second service to London from Perth? How boring and predictable.

Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin...anywhere else would have been better!
Because you don't get the point to point demand you get on UK-Australia anywhere else on the Qantas Network..... friends of mine in the UK always say they used to get far cheaper Australia bound tickets on QF (especially in PE and Business) if they flew to Amsterdam or Paris - now of course QF, like BA, have cut most of those other routes

Even Emirates is far cheaper out of Paris to Australia than out of London -

[PlasticFantastic]

Second service to London from Perth? How boring and predictable.

Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin...anywhere else would have been better!
If there is anything to the rumours that QF will retire two of its A380s at their D-check (presumably OQA and OQB, since they are MSN 14 and 15 - I think I recall that Airbus had fixed it's production issues by about MSN 20?), then this could also reflect QF planning for ways in which it could adjust it's schedule to remove two A380s worth of flying. Replace QF1/2 SYD-SIN-LHR with a B787 SYD-PER-LHR. And perhaps put another A330 on SYD-SIN to handle regional traffic.

Pure speculation, building on others' rumours.

[Slezy9]

Qantas' Perth to London direct flight has been grounded at the 11th hour for the second time this month, with passengers asked to disembark after sitting on the plane for two hours.

The 17-hour flight, which departs Perth once a day, was scheduled to take off at 7.40pm on Wednesday evening.

WA member for Moore, Shane Love, who was booked on the flight, tweeted the journey was delayed because the crew was not provided with a flight plan.

"The captain has said he will not be able to fly in the 20 hours allowed and cancelled the flight!" he said.
Radio 6PR caller, Andy, said his wife, who was travelling back to Britain for urgent family reasons, had been caught up in the delay.

"They sat on the plane for two hours due to delays before they were told they would have to disembark," he said.

"They were given a taxi voucher to Metro Hotel.

"My wife is frustrated, she thought she'd be halfway to England by this morning."

A Qantas letter provided to passengers said the delay was due to a technical issue impacting the airline's ability to provide a flight plan.

"Despite the best efforts of staff, our technical crew have run out of allowable working hours under CASA regulations and they cannot operate this evening," it read.

"You'll now be leaving Perth tomorrow morning."

Andy said his wife had been rescheduled on a later direct flight departing at 11.15am on Thursday.

A Qantas spokeswoman said, despite the crew's best efforts, the delay in providing the flight plan - which was due to a technical issue not related to the aircraft - had a knock-on effect which meant the crew would exceed their allowable working hours.

"Passengers were provided with overnight accommodation, transport and meal vouchers," she said.

"There is no impact to today's regular scheduled Perth to London flight."

The delayed service comes a week after engineering issues cancelled the service on January 17 with passengers transferred to other flights within 24 hours.

The direct flight, which travels 14,498 kilometres, has been operating since March 2018 using the 787-9 Dreamliner.

Earlier in the week, Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce told Radio 6PR the new direct service to London had been a success for the airline and had generated $100 million in free publicity for WA.


https://www.smh.com.au/national/western-australia/qantas-perth-to-london-direct-flight-cancelled-again-after-passengers-spent-two-hours-on-tarmac-20190124-p50tcq.html

[Capt_CheeseDick]

Yes, it departed PH about that time today.
Approx 45 pax only onboard as others elected to go with EK & QR last night... ouch!

[Icarus2001]

and had generated $100 million in free publicity for WA.

https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/barnett-explains-14-million-public-funding-for-perthlondon-flights-20161212-gt97yx.html

So that FREE publicity cost $14 million. What a nice round number $100 million is. It was probably calculated by the same Q accountant that calculates the Jetstar profits.

What a game changer.

[normanton]

Sounds like a weird explanation to me.

Do they not have reserve crew they could call out?

[SeenItAll]

Second service to London from Perth? How boring and predictable.

Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin...anywhere else would have been better!



I would guess that the problem is that Qantas is a Oneworld carrier, and that the most logical second destination would be a Oneworld hub in Europe that is a bit closer to PER than is LHR. This would allow the collection of PAX from a large number of origination/termination points -- and make the flying range a little less extreme than to LHR. But the only OW hub satisfying the second requirement is HEL -- which is not a terribly convenient gathering point for the bulk of EU traffic. So LHR is likely to be the choice for any second service.

[*Lancer*]

I would guess that the problem is that Qantas is a Oneworld carrier, and that the most logical second destination would be a Oneworld hub in Europe that is a bit closer to PER than is LHR. This would allow the collection of PAX from a large number of origination/termination points -- and make the flying range a little less extreme than to LHR. But the only OW hub satisfying the second requirement is HEL -- which is not a terribly convenient gathering point for the bulk of EU traffic. So LHR is likely to be the choice for any second service.

Moscow could be fun :ok:

[Qanchor]

.......delayed because the crew was not provided with a flight plan.

Sounds like a weird explanation to me.

I’m tipping on that particular day the fuel tanks weren’t big enough

[Capt Fathom]

I’m tipping on that particular day the fuel tanks weren’t big enough
If that was the case they'd reduce the payload, not cancel the flight!

[knobbycobby]

London and Gatwick both forecast below Cat 1 visibility. Doubt they could carry the fuel.
Large headwinds so I’d guess they couldn’t get the duty below 20 hours either.
Gamechanging stuff.

[cessnapete]

London and Gatwick both forecast below Cat 1 visibility. Doubt they could carry the fuel.
Large headwinds so I’d guess they couldn’t get the duty below 20 hours either.
Gamechanging stuff.

Aren’t QF 787 Cat IIIC. No cloud base,100m vis as most LHR Operators?

[CurtainTwitcher]

Aren’t QF 787 Cat IIIC. No cloud base,100m vis as most LHR Operators?
Do those operators flight plan arrive at LHR with just above fixed reserves in those conditions? If so and they divert, can the crew continue do another sector to land at LHR?

[Ken Borough]

Surely someone must know the truth! Were any other services canx or delayed as a result if not having a FPL?

[neville_nobody]

Aren’t QF 787 Cat IIIC. No cloud base,100m vis as most LHR Operators?


You still need an alternate, which may have been the flight planning problem.

[CurtainTwitcher]

I'm hearing that the new flight planning system (constellation) takes quite a bit of time to run each version of the plan.
Pure and utter uncorroborated scuttlebutt (this is a rumour network) is the flight planners don't have good visibility into the "internals" of the plan in progress to see where it is trending to add manual tweaks. Basically it spits out a complete plan. If the plan isn't suitable for whatever reason (read reduced payload), the planners have to completely re-run the plan (about 30 min) with the tweaks to see what pops out. Wash rinse and repeat.

[maggot]

Bonuses all round then!

[Tuner 2]

QF 787 is CAT3B (0' RA / 75m) and can make use of reduced alternate weather criteria to use alternates below standard alternate criteria but above CAT1 RVR/vis.

[Qanchor]

If that was the case they'd reduce the payload, not cancel the flight!

Fathom,
Full tanks are full tanks, reducing payload/blocking seats doesn’t miraculously produce more fuel when the tanks are already full.
What I was implying, (perhaps a little too subtly), was that maybe with the enroute winds and TAF for arrival, full tanks was less than the min op fuel required, even with no pax/freight.
RD got it.

[knobbycobby]

It’s not a question of aircraft capability. It’s the fuel policy and also flight time limitations.
If both Heathrow and Gatwick are below CAT 1 visibility you cannot take advantage of the reduced alternate weather criteria.
Unsurprinsingly during winter it’s not uncommon for many airports to all be under CAT 1 visibility in the morning hours.

[Capt Fathom]

Full tanks are full tanks, reducing payload/blocking seats doesn’t miraculously produce more fuel when the tanks are already full.

No, but the lower fuel burn produces more range. But you knew that already! :=

[cessnapete]

It’s not a question of aircraft capability. It’s the fuel policy and also flight time limitations.
If both Heathrow and Gatwick are below CAT 1 visibility you cannot take advantage of the reduced alternate weather criteria.
Unsurprinsingly during winter it’s not uncommon for many airports to all be under CAT 1 visibility in the morning hours.

Planning on a forecast that is 17 hours old when you arrive? In my airline on ULR flights plan for somewhere en route that is forecast to be above CAT l and reflightplan if possible with actuals nearest your planned destination?

[Qanchor]

So why didn’t the flight depart?

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Planning on a forecast that is 17 hours old when you arrive? In my airline on ULR flights plan for somewhere en route that is forecast to be above CAT l and reflightplan if possible with actuals nearest your planned destination?

I think we've already established that for QF9/10 to work - its LHR or LGW only due to the disruption factor of going elsewhere - departing for an alternate and betting the sheep station on an improvement is very different to departing better than CAT1 and running the risk of a deterioration to the point that no CAT3B is possible (I'm not a flyer for a living - out of curiosity, what are the rules if an airfield goes below CAT1 when enroute for a ULR flight? Must re-plan including fuel to an alternate - enough fuel to miss then divert or, if not enough for that, must divert?)

Doesn't explain why it didn't depart though - the good ol'fashion rumour about a new flight planning software sounds pretty Qantas-like also.

[cessnapete]

I think we've already established that for QF9/10 to work - its LHR or LGW only due to the disruption factor of going elsewhere - departing for an alternate and betting the sheep station on an improvement is very different to departing better than CAT1 and running the risk of a deterioration to the point that no CAT3B is possible (I'm not a flyer for a living - out of curiosity, what are the rules if an airfield goes below CAT1 when enroute for a ULR flight? Must re-plan including fuel to an alternate - enough fuel to miss then divert or, if not enough for that, must divert?)

Doesn't explain why it didn't depart though - the good ol'fashion rumour about a new flight planning software sounds pretty Qantas-like also.

All airlines will have their own rules at replanning en route. From my experience in Uk and based at Lhr, vis lower than CatIII happens very infrequently, cloud base is not a factor. So unless there are long ATC delays you are guaranteed to land with the reliability of modern avionics. Most of the LR flights on my airline arrived between 0500 0700 (tel:0500 0700) as QF Perth, so no long ATC delays at that time, and of course 2 Cat III parallel landing runways available, 3 if you include LGW which is approx the same fuel from the arr Fix.

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Here is a suggestion - perhaps they could plan a refuel stop somewhere like oh - I don't know - Dubai :}

[Troo believer]

Constellation is the problem.

[ruprecht]

Constellation is the problem.


How can you blame Constellation? It calculates the fuel to 3 decimal places... :rolleyes:

[Derfred]

Constellation is the problem.

Capricorn is still there pumping out flight plans for other fleets... why can’t they whip out a backup Capricorn plan?

[catseye]

Capricorn is still there pumping out flight plans for other fleets... why can’t they whip out a backup Capricorn plan?
About 4 mins for a LHR - SYD fpl when OJA was being planned in Capricorn.