Qantas to DALLAS
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are in NYC you can fly from La Guardia (or from Washington National Airport rather than Dulles). You will get food to American Airlines domestic standards, so if you are at the back of the plane, you buy your own sandwich. This compares with flying JFK-LAX on a Qantas operated flight. Might just be a matter of a shorter taxi ride to LGA.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 5th Dimension
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JetStar 787s to SFO
Once JetStar gets its 787s they will more than likely be deployed to SFO.
Although there is some J/C trtaffic out of the City by the Bay its just not enough.
SFO is more a leisure destination which fits into Jetstar's preferred destinations criteria
Although there is some J/C trtaffic out of the City by the Bay its just not enough.
SFO is more a leisure destination which fits into Jetstar's preferred destinations criteria
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 330 would have to operate via Auckland (like QF25/25) - you couldn't viably run the 330 from Sydney to San Francisco.
AKL/SFO traffic is low yield, non-premium traffic - would not be sustainable for Qantas.
Jetstar could do it, and I think the only reason they have not yet, is because Qantas operates the route and Qantas (rightly so) does not want any cannibalisation considering the market is so "thin" as it is...
Maybe with Qantas's exit, JQ might go with the 330 from New Zealand since that's the only location where range could be achieved i.e. QF25/26 to LAX?
They are getting a couple more 330's...
AKL/SFO traffic is low yield, non-premium traffic - would not be sustainable for Qantas.
Jetstar could do it, and I think the only reason they have not yet, is because Qantas operates the route and Qantas (rightly so) does not want any cannibalisation considering the market is so "thin" as it is...
Maybe with Qantas's exit, JQ might go with the 330 from New Zealand since that's the only location where range could be achieved i.e. QF25/26 to LAX?
They are getting a couple more 330's...
Couldn't QF Mainline have kept SYD - SFO going by using A332's?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oz
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going boeing,
Thats not correct. The cabin crew operates in on Friday morning and leaves Saturday night. Thats the only day there are flights that back up.
Both UA and QF are full each night and have been for quite awhile. Air NZ are also full and gone to a daily 777.
Low yield cause they aren't asking enough $$ per seat.
Thats not correct. The cabin crew operates in on Friday morning and leaves Saturday night. Thats the only day there are flights that back up.
Both UA and QF are full each night and have been for quite awhile. Air NZ are also full and gone to a daily 777.
Low yield cause they aren't asking enough $$ per seat.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: on skybeds
Age: 43
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GoingBoing
My network tells me that the connection ex SFO weren,t too good for QF hence the alternative. As QFguy mentioned CC can/were doing 36 hrs slips in SFO as well as LAX. As for the A332 with 8 CC and 4 TC and having 1 A/B blocked off for a S/O one can argue about financials there.
Watch this space...
QF A330's to replace B767 SYD HNL from March. I think the A330 will continue HNL SFO HNL from around the same time or maybe later in the year.
This will either leave SYD HNL SYD as daylight both ways, or night both ways... One for the scheduling gurus to work out.
Cheers!
This will either leave SYD HNL SYD as daylight both ways, or night both ways... One for the scheduling gurus to work out.
Cheers!
Nunc est bibendum
Geez, ODL, I hope you're right and not just wishful thinking this one. I've been doing that with the 777 for years and it still isn't happening.
The decision WRT pulling out of direct SFO underlines the stupidity of QF not getting a decent 777 a half decade to a decade ago. From what I understand, the 744 on the route is normally 2/3-3/4 full (except around Mardi Gras time) which puts it squarely in the 777 size. Reduce the amount of fuel burned by the 744 by 40% and you've turned a marginal route into a great little money spinner.
The 777- old technology aircraft. Just as well we dodged that bullet.
The decision WRT pulling out of direct SFO underlines the stupidity of QF not getting a decent 777 a half decade to a decade ago. From what I understand, the 744 on the route is normally 2/3-3/4 full (except around Mardi Gras time) which puts it squarely in the 777 size. Reduce the amount of fuel burned by the 744 by 40% and you've turned a marginal route into a great little money spinner.
The 777- old technology aircraft. Just as well we dodged that bullet.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: australia
Age: 59
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just had a quick look in staff travel for flights to HNL through to november. only saw 767s for qf3 flights. why would we put up a modern aircraft against JQ? it might show them up!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the busiest airports I have ever seen.
Around 20 years ago now I was there, sure it is even busier now.
Very impressive sight back then, several American Airlines MD80s reversing out under their own power at the same time, NO tug/tractor.
Around 20 years ago now I was there, sure it is even busier now.
Very impressive sight back then, several American Airlines MD80s reversing out under their own power at the same time, NO tug/tractor.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bottom side of up
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole sad and sorry state of affairs at the QANTAS cluster f***can be described in two words:
"Dixon" and "B777"
If either of these two could have been changed over the last decade the place would be booming. The only reason QF mainline is not cost effective on some routes is because they have the wrong aircraft. It has all been discussed before.
It is just sad and disappointing.
"Dixon" and "B777"
If either of these two could have been changed over the last decade the place would be booming. The only reason QF mainline is not cost effective on some routes is because they have the wrong aircraft. It has all been discussed before.
It is just sad and disappointing.
Qantas (or any AUS airline) cannot operate HNL/SFO/HNL - no traffic rights and cannot get them. It's "locked up".
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 39
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Not true, they can operate, they just cant sell domestic fares for the HNL to SFO sector to anyone who is joining in HNL or SFO
To make it work QF would need to operate the SFO extension like they do to JFK - have flights from BNE, SYD and MEL arrive in HNL at around the same time and have one of those aircraft take continuing passengers from all of those flights to SFO. This represents a tripling of the number of seats to HNL and even if allowed would oversupply the Australia-HNL route. Then there's the poor fleet utilisation resulting from two aircraft waiting on the ground in HNL for hours while a third flies to SFO and back.
Nice to dream but SFO via HNL isn't going to work without an explosion in passenger numbers.