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

Perth to London

Old 29th Apr 2018, 09:17
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by faheel View Post
If you are going to do cat 3 because of wx, then arrivals/departure rates will fall dramatically due to extra separation required. so there will be delays.
Not at 0500 in the morning there wonít be. Delayed by whom exactly?
IsDon is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 10:29
  #322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,765
This mornings arrivals (today SUNDAY 29 April)...

0450 BA032
0505 QF009
0505 BA016
0505 IB4750
0525 BA034
0525 IB4625
0525 BA074
0530 BA023
0530 US207
0530 AA6446
0530 BA056
0530 IB4727

These are the first listed and stopping at 0530.

Basically above Cat1 landing minima at an alternate.
Thanks IsDon. Is there still a 20 minute holding fuel requirement at EGLL?
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 10:48
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,163
Originally Posted by Australopithecus View Post



Which is why QF should do their own fit-out in their own leased space. Zero risk for the airport owner.
In this particular case, there was already zero risk. They had the capacity and infrastructure already. QF just did not want to use it. So it has cost QF shareholders and WA tax payers between them 40 million(?) to duplicate existing facilities. Whilst you can't "unbuild" terminals, you want to maximise the utilization and return on what you do have, just as airlines do with their aircraft. PA understandably do not want to see that eroded any further.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 13:11
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,859
They asked for 260 below 10,000 tonight for departure ex PER. Serious with the efficiency, by the looks. Does it climb at 260 for long?
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 13:25
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 766
Qantas have done their homework on this route. More than that, thereís a genuine desire to make it work among the crews that fly it. Thereís a real buzz around the 787 operation Iíve never seen before. A pride, if you like, of proving what a determined company and crew with a capable aircraft can achieve if given the chance.
Where now are the naysayers?

Slightly off topic but can anyone point to any operation from which Qantas has had to withdraw because it 'wouldn't work' for operational reasons? Over the decades Qantas' operational planning has been second to none, frequently proving the critics wrong.
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 13:57
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 36
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs View Post
They asked for 260 below 10,000 tonight for departure ex PER. Serious with the efficiency, by the looks. Does it climb at 260 for long?
They would be doing that because that would be the minimum clean speed. 250KIAS below 10,000 so you technically need to ask for speed cancellation.

Once at 10,000 they would accelerate to around 300KIAS at a guess.
normanton is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 19:08
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 179
0450 BA032
0505 QF009
0505 BA016
0505 IB4750
0525 BA034
0525 IB4625
0525 BA074
0530 BA023
0530 US207
0530 AA6446
0530 BA056
0530 IB4727

These are the first listed and stopping
though most of these are code share with each other, so the list is only half as long
engine out is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2018, 19:40
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 6,283
Heathrow arrivals

Originally Posted by Icarus2001 View Post
This mornings arrivals (today SUNDAY 29 April)...
That list [early morning arrivals at London Heathrow) has much duplication/triplication of flights due to code shares.

Simplistically, Heathrow has about 13 arrivals each morning between 0430 and 0600 Local. It's "about" because the limit is for overall night flights, per season, but that's how it works out each day. BA have about 50%. Qantas have had one for years, they are all grandfather rights. Anything else has to hold untl 0600, but QF has one of the slots. But for pre-0600 allowed arrivals, holding would not happen unless there is some issue developed on the ground. Of Heathrow's two runways, only one is used pre-0600 on a rota basis (both are used from 0600 to 0700 for arrivals), but if there is a hangup on one things are immediately switched to the other.

Where an issue might arise would be unfavourable winds or routing, plus maybe a late departure from Perth, leading to them not arriving in the Terminal Area until just after 0600, when all the holds are quite often full and there is secondary holding further out as well. Of course, you then still always have to allow for an incident to a prior aircraft which ties up the ARFF services and closes the airport.
WHBM is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 09:52
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,163
Originally Posted by Ken Borough View Post
Where now are the naysayers?

Slightly off topic but can anyone point to any operation from which Qantas has had to withdraw because it 'wouldn't work' for operational reasons? Over the decades Qantas' operational planning has been second to none, frequently proving the critics wrong.
It's a fine line between "wouldn't work for operational reasons" and "wouldn't work for economic reasons". You can make a lot of things work operationally, depending on how much of an economic hit you are willing to take to do them. Qantas over the decades has withdrawn from a lot of routes, because operationally, it wasn't economic to do them.

Last edited by Traffic_Is_Er_Was; 30th Apr 2018 at 14:45.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 09:58
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,163
Off thread, but Jesus this site has become hard to use now. Jumps all over the place. Threads load with different "themes". Replies appear in the thread while still appearing in n the quick reply box, pages load, then disappear, then appear again only half loaded. Obviously coded by someone who doesn't actually use a forum.
Edit:while trying to edit this post, I have had it appear simultaneously in 3 different windows, had to use the back button twice as I have been redirected to advertisers sites without actually clicking on anything, had it freeze while interminably "loading more posts", close the page and relog in again, and finally have had to resort to using the mobile version to get any sense out of it. Thanks for the upgrade!

Last edited by Traffic_Is_Er_Was; 30th Apr 2018 at 10:17.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 11:43
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 887
^^^^^^^^
V-Jet is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 13:36
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 36
V-Jet and Traffic_is_er_was, exactly how much do you pay for this “service” ?
benttrees is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 14:40
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,163
As has been pointed out on other threads regarding the changes, the owners only contribute the hosting, with revenue solely from the advertising. Many users are now resorting to ad blockers to try and restore some usability to the site, which negatively impacts on the advertisers. The users of the forums contribute all of the content, which is what draws the visits for the advertising to be effective. Alienate the users, and what do the owners have left. Irrespective of how much the site costs, if you can't use it, it's worthless.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2018, 20:38
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,263
I didnt realise the first flight was a 767. Did it need much system changes ?
4Greens is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 02:50
  #335 (permalink)  
When you live....
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: 0.0221 DME Keyboard
Posts: 916
Travellers Letters

Punters starting to find that a 787 for 16 hours in economy isn't the greatest....

I recently travelled long-haul economy, two sectors in an Airbus A330 and two in the much vaunted Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

What a contrast. The A330, with eight across seating felt as spacious as economy class can be, with decent leg room and seat width. The B787 (with nine seats across) was a more of a nightmare than a dream.

Space was so tight that making even the slightest move encroached on the personal space of one's neighbour. The cabins of the two aircraft are almost the same width.

So is the B787's lower cost per seat mile really due to the innovative use of new technology, or more crudely to simply squeezing more hapless passengers into the same space?



Read more: Traveller letters: Which is better, Airbus A330 or Boeing 787?
Follow us: @TravellerAU on Twitter TravellerAU on Facebook
UnderneathTheRadar is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 08:39
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 807
Qantas 789 Y/C Pitch 32, Width 17.2
Qantas 333 Y/C Pitch 31, Width 17

Fake news?
*Lancer* is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 08:50
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Under a tree in the NT
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by *Lancer* View Post
Qantas 789 Y/C Pitch 32, Width 17.2
Qantas 333 Y/C Pitch 31, Width 17

Fake news?
How many seats across? 789 =9 & 333=8? If so, the something must be wider, or is that fake news as well you trumpet?
NumptyAussie is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 09:23
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 2,685
A330 Cabin width 204 inch
B787 cabin width 218 inch.

Toot toot!!
TURIN is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2018, 04:16
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 64
Posts: 348
My neighbour recently flew on the 9/10. He has no affiliation one way or the other with any airline, but he is a full fare business/first passenger. His review...never again. It was on time, and worked operationally, but he hated it. A sample of one, I know...
mrdeux is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2018, 04:26
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Gafa
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by mrdeux View Post
My neighbour recently flew on the 9/10. He has no affiliation one way or the other with any airline, but he is a full fare business/first passenger. His review...never again. It was on time, and worked operationally, but he hated it. A sample of one, I know...
I doubt the demographic which can afford to fly First (ie people who would usually fly EK/SQ anyway) is QFs primary concern for the Perth operation.
Maggie Island is online now  

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.