Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qatar to Canberra

Old 24th Jul 2017, 13:49
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AWOL from YWOL
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by Vertisol View Post
A daily service will be a plus for Canberra. I tried desperately to make the SIN flight ex CBR work for a recent trip to the UK but the 3/4 day a week timing meant I couldn't return direct to CBR on the day I needed so QF via Mel won my business. Prices were not too different.

Ben has written a very good piece about this Qatar flight

dijical is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 09:56
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 46
What would the duties be? 1 crew DOH-SYD, another SYD-CBR-SYD, and another SYD-DOH?
737pnf is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 10:45
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 606
Good question. 5hr turnaround in Canberra. 845 arr 1345 out.

Seems like alot of effort and expense to run such a small flight then overnight, so taking the small turnarounds into account at Sydney I'll assume they will go right through (Cabin Crew only?)
PoppaJo is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 23:46
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Canberra
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
Good question. 5hr turnaround in Canberra. 845 arr 1345 out.

Seems like alot of effort and expense to run such a small flight then overnight, so taking the small turnarounds into account at Sydney I'll assume they will go right through (Cabin Crew only?)

I have no idea how the crewing system works but would they have a smaller domestic crew to do SYD-CBR-SYD ?
Vertisol is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 01:43
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 606
No chance of the ME3 basing crew outside of their respective sandpits.

Al Baker and Unions are not two and two that's for sure. Never happen.
PoppaJo is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2017, 11:31
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Spain
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
I'm more interested in the fact that this is some sort of loophole to get extra Sydney services as they are capped at the maximum rights to Major Australian cities, hence adding a tag service to 'regional' Canberra as there are no restrictions.

What next? Doha-Brisbane-Cairns in order to fly to Brisbane.

This could end in tears. I'd be careful booking any of those new flights.
already have unrestricted rights to all Secondary airports in Australia.
Open skies agreement was signed last year.
IBE8720 is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2017, 07:27
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Sydaknee
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by PoppaJo View Post
I'm more interested in the fact that this is some sort of loophole to get extra Sydney services as they are capped at the maximum rights to Major Australian cities, hence adding a tag service to 'regional' Canberra as there are no restrictions.

What next? Doha-Brisbane-Cairns in order to fly to Brisbane.

This could end in tears. I'd be careful booking any of those new flights.
PoppaJo has hit it on the head.

QR have limited slots 'originating from and terminating in' SYD. This new Canberra flight originates from and terminates in CBR. They have the right to pick up passengers in the 'fuel' stop in SYD both ways. Therefore they now have a new SYD slot, without breaching their cap.

Smart move, it has nothing to do with CBR traffic at all. Just publicity in CBR, and a brand new SYD slot by default.

I assume they have little expectations of any major CBR traffic.
QFcrew is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2017, 12:17
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 768
QFcrew,

Sorry to rain on your parade but slots have nothing at all to do with traffic rights. If you don't have airport slots, it's just not possible to exercise those traffic rights.
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2017, 20:24
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,078
That's right Ken, as I alluded to on page1 here and IBE8720 stated above but it seems people don't have their ears turned on or just don't want to understand what they're being told here from those in the know.

P.s. That article of Ben's referred to here above is a joke. The A350 with Qatar is a duck and you won't see one of their's out in Aust until they launch the WXB1000. Their current models (900's) are burning 2+tonnes more per hour than their B773's while carrying much less. The WXB1000 hopes to be comparable. Let's see what improvements in the engines they make.
Chocks Away is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2017, 20:57
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 680
Originally Posted by Chocks Away View Post
The A350 with Qatar is a duck and you won't see one of their's out in Aust until they launch the WXB1000. Their current models (900's) are burning 2+tonnes more per hour than their B773's while carrying much less.
Mate they have been flying the A350 to Adelaide for over a year now.
wheels_down is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2017, 20:16
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,078
Yeh I realised that after I pressed submit but had to race off to work. Should have stated Canberra. Sorry about forgetting Adelaide, easy to do sometimes I guess, unless we're talking AFL

Having mentioned that, these guys are happy with them :
http://www.orientaviation.com/articl...s-praises-a350

Last edited by Chocks Away; 4th Aug 2017 at 13:07.
Chocks Away is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2017, 23:46
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here & there
Posts: 743
Their current models (900's) are burning 2+tonnes more per hour than their B773's while carrying much less.
Utter bollocks.
BuzzBox is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2017, 07:10
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 326
Completely un true. No way would a 350 be burning 2+tonne more per hour. An A350 will very quickly be cruising FL370/390/410 throughout the flight and even at max cruise thrust the fuel flow peaks ~3.7t per side. Standard fuel flow in the cruise after a few hours is around 2.7-2.8t per side
TurningFinalRWY36 is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2017, 13:05
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,078
Bollocks? Maybe. I don't know as I don't fly those. Just first hand info from a Qatari skipper that I took at face value. I shouldn't have taken it as gospel.
It's not comparing like models really, is it? A350-9 vs B777-3ER ~ 65tonne difference. Many variants of the RR Trent WXB engine & I believe they utilise the 84000lb model. Maybe someone actually there (QR) can elaborate on what I was told?
Anyway, back on topic, good luck on the new Canberra run, which is good for Sydney punters with more seats available, especially during holiday/peak periods. Also good for Canberra with another International global network connection. Private owners may have to put in more airbridges, the way they're going
Happy Landings.
Chocks Away is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2017, 14:10
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Spain
Posts: 96
Coming to Chocks Away's defence.

He is correct, thought that information is quite old. I don't fly the A350, but certainly when we first got them, they were burning well above planned estimates.
I believe that is is now where it should be from what Airbus promised. The problem from my flat mate is when they fly faster than planned, the fuel burn goes high.
IBE8720 is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2017, 15:10
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 326
OK? But what aircraft won't have a fuel problem if they fly faster than planned? The 350 is efficient at M.85 so curious how fast QR were flying them
TurningFinalRWY36 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 00:54
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here & there
Posts: 743
The bit that I took exception to was the suggestion that current A359s are burning "2+ tonnes more per hour" than the B773. If that were true, the airlines that operate them would be kicking and screaming. We've got 17 of them in service to date and although there have been a few issues, fuel burn isn't one of them.

After analysing all the data from the last few years of operation, Airbus now reckons the aircraft is more efficient at higher cruise speeds than M0.85. We're being told that the typical cruise speed is being bumped up to M0.86-ish as a result.
BuzzBox is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 04:28
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Spain
Posts: 96
I am not A350 pilot. So I do not know how fast they were flying them.

Fuel Burn was alot more than expected when first flights started. And Mr AL Baker was 'kicking and screaming'.
Fuel Burn is now where Airbus expect, but if you fly faster than M0.85 then fuel burn is alot.

Not like A320 where if you fly faster you can even save fuel on a flight. For exact information must ask A350 pilot.

Buzzbox, you fly A350 then you may have better information.
IBE8720 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 05:16
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here & there
Posts: 743
Ok, but was he kicking and screaming about fuel consumption? He has certainly made a lot of noise about delivery delays and cabin quality control issues, as have other airlines, but there are no media reports about performance issues.

We have had no issues with the aircraft not meeting its performance specs. Indeed, as I said above, the aircraft's speed schedule is set to be modified because the aircraft is more efficient at a slightly higher speed than it has been operating to date.

Consider some figures from a couple of today's long haul flights to the same destination, one operated by a B777-300ER and the other by an A350-900. The revenue payload carried by the aircraft on these flights was almost the same. The B777 only carried about 500kg more payload, but it burnt almost 19 tonnes more fuel than the A359.
BuzzBox is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 06:09
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Eternal Beach
Posts: 1,032
Was that to Kuwait?

halas
halas is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.