HNL is no solution.

It is at least an hours flight off track, and the aircraft would have to dump fuel to land to get fuel (it would still be well over Max landing weight). Nadi or Noumea remain (usually) the best alternatives to pick up fuel.

Neither can you plan to do a fuel stop. The CASA concession is for a planned single sector operation.

N

noip,

Can't plan to do a fuel stop? It's called a SLIP!

Please don't tell me this service wouldn't be economical if QF had to actually put those pesky crew up in a NAN hotel for 48 hrs. Disregarding any crew benefit, QF might actually to able to get a full commercial load from DFW to SYD, bags included!

BNE is a nonsense - still a tad too far and the suits don't want to go there anyway - they want to go to SYD or MEL. I have been directly told that by a top-end-of-town guy. They like SYD-DFW (and then maybe onto an east coast US city such as NYC, Washington or Boston) but won't go (east coast US city)-DFW-BNE-SYD when coming home, they will go (east coast US city)-LAX-SYD.

This service should be SYD-DFW and then DFW-NAN-SYD.

Time will tell as to whether it changes. But I can just hear AJ saying: "Oh no, if we actually have to spend money on hotels and allowances it wouldn't be returning the cost of capital, blah blah blah....!"

U

You are either deliberately mis-representing my reply := , or you did not read it.

If you want to argue in favour of planned multi-sectors, fine. That is a different situation to the one I was addressing. It also has its own set of problems.

N

Not misinterpreting, not not reading, not having a go at you.

Stating what I think is obvious. DFW-BNE is stretching it and is not where the customers really want to go. Will be interesting if 6 months down the line we see changes - either a change to DFW-NAN-SYD or more likely an "enhancement" whereby "QF announces an exciting new addition to the network - a codeshare with AA on DFW-LAX, replacing the current QF8", which will offer guests more choice, convenience, blah blah blah"

We launched the service at the time of year when the head winds are the strongest and BNE has been subject to some weather related holding requirements and thus the aircraft divert for the extra gas. I reckon it'll settle down once we pass through the end of June/ July.

I'm still dirty that we've withdrawn from SFO though. I'll be particularly dirty when J* pick it up soon.

U,

No probs ...

My comments with regard to the single tour of duty remain. I don't see the sector as significantly different to LAX-MEL. It is early days yet.

Interestingly, you would get about 40 - 45 tonnes payload for an A380 on that sector.

:)

N

Which has longer legs with a decent load - an A380 or a 744ER? Is there a chance of a 380 doing a DFW-SYD reliably all year round?

Ok, I'll go out on a limb .... My back-of-the-envelope calculations tell me that you could do DFW-SYD reliably on an A380 (no alternate or tempo stuff) with 250 or maaayybeee 300 pax and their bags. It would be back to the days of the SP out of LAX ... First/Bus/Prem Econ.

I've allowed for an appropriate headwind component.

Unfortunately, the ER would not work. The A380 wins purely on fuel capacity ( oh .. er .. and the crew rest ) . When they up the MTOW it will get better.

N

Ps ... having said that .. I don't see going to BNE as a major problem. Not everyone wants to go to SYD and you can get domestic connections to most places out of BNE.

Mind explaining that statement!

No probs,

When Airbus approves an increase to the Max Takeoff Weight, then the aircraft will be able to depart at a heavier takeoff weight.

Is there anything else I can help with?


N

To mollify you to my answer .. all I know is that the A380 is structurally built to be able to handle a greater takeoff weight than currently certified. The wing is certainly built to greater weight tolerances. I am lead to believe that Airbus has flown the A380 to 600 tonnes.

To compare to the 747 .. it was initially certified to 330 tonnes or thereabouts. It is now 412.7 tonnes. Do you think the A380 will stay at 569 tonnes?

We shall see.

How 'bout the 3 class 380, no P class?

I assume by reference to the higher MTOW 380 you are talking about the -800R?

Isn't the A380 wing over sized for the current MTOW and fuselage to allow for the same wing to be used in a later stretched heavier version with more seats for approx same range??
I'm sure I read that in past few yrs.
Is that what you are referring to noip?

Noip and aussie027.

Airbus has a MTOW increase of 4 tonnes to 573 tonnes in the pipeline. The first delivery is to BA followed by EK. Rumour has it there is a slight reduction in the range.

There is work being done on a further major A380 upgrade for possible customer CX who are insisting upon HKG-JFK capability without sacrificing payload. EK are also part of this project who are looking for DXB-LAX capability. The upgrade will include a MTOW of around 593 tonnes, more thrust, more fuel capacity, strengthening of the wings and changes to the fly by wire control laws to reduce flight loads due to the increased weight.

The wing dimensions will remain the same but there will be some major internal strengthening. You may recall the first A380 wing test failed to meet the certification requirement and further strengthening was required.

The current A380 is very 'heavy' with the EOW being over 100 tonnes heavier than the B747-400ER.

I know this sounds synical but given the current environment with QF and their Pilots, could this route be a ploy by AJ to bait the pilots to call fatigue in NOU? Therefore overnight the aircraft there costing the company money in accom and associated costs and then going to the press saying that this is an AIPA tactic to help them get their "massive 200k p/year payrise" which is a fabricated number as has been discussed in other forums. Maybe i am watching too much of the X-files...

Cargo - would'nt put it past them but the ten gallon hat on a two pint management head DFW thing is will continue to perpetuate its own streses for Q with or without AIPA - not least being the odd tonne or two of pax bags left on the ground for AA to shuttle to LAX and then have them hauled across the PAcific by a 747 or 380. It was and will be a spec run at best.

B772 is correct - besides the 380 itself sometimes struggles with a fuel load of 230 tonnes to make the hop - esp this time of year. There are some lessons in physics 101 that need to be learned and the education is already expensive!

Will Jetstar start SFO services later this year, with one or both new A330s expected soon? I heard a routing of SYD-AKL-SFO as too long to go non stop.

Or maybe SIN-AKL-SFO?

does anybody know how many diversions on DFW-BNE since the start of the route? to date there's only 1 so far out of 10+ flights?

Almost as important; what is the restricted average revenue payload.

QF8 Mid Pacific Refills
 

@ runesta

I too would be interested so as to figure out chance of connecting BNE-PER after a DFW-BNE flight later this year. The SYD-DFW inaugural flight May 16th was great, but can anyone give an estimate of how long a diversion for refueling might delay arrival into BNE?

Oh, and I dont think the crew on the inaugural QF7 knew about the Glen Rose nuclear plant just south west of Dallas. We did a quick loop around the north of it. I think it has restricted airspace.

FN