|
Originally Posted by OneDotLow
(Post 10176340)
LAX - JFK is dropping capacity, but BNE - LAX is being supplemented by the QF55/56, a 744 3xweekly until December and a 787 4x weekly after that. https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/me...eptember-2018/ |
That is all well and good, but we were pretty full in both directions between LAX and JFK last week. https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/sowee.gif Whether that makes it more viable economically is for the wizard yield managers to determine. |
Originally Posted by C441
(Post 10176421)
I was told recently that many of the travellers between LAX and JFK and return are code-shares. It is these pax that Qantas plan to offload when the 787 starts the service. Whether that makes it more viable economically is for the wizard yield managers to determine. |
I reckon there will be a lot of grief from this. Neither Lax or JFK managers want the 787 to replace the jumbo, they want more seats not less. The additional service in the afternoon is not the answer as pax can’t get connections to all points east in the USA. If you look at Melbourne loads instead of 90% plus load factors on the 380 the 787 service has dropped the 380 to about 70/75% load factor and similar for the 787. So now both services are not profitable IMO.
|
I reckon that's exactly the market QF is chasing these days This. Have a look at how many business seats are fitted in the 787's. When they reduced capacity to make more room, they didn't take it out of the pointy end. |
The 744s are config’d for 58J + 36W (apart from OEB of course), 789s have 42J + 28W - a significant drop in high yield seating. I imagine the strategy is to start a new US service (BNE - ORD perhaps) to supplement the lost seats to JFK. |
If you disregard premium economy as being high yield, the 744s have 56 business and 306 economy seats. The 789s have 42 business and 194 economy seats. Capacity is down for sure, but the high yield percentage per airframe is up. Even if you lump premium economy in with business, high yield seats per frame is still up. Add in significantly more economic operation, and QF can afford to drop capacity, especially if it means every one of those high yield seats will be occupied.
|
Originally Posted by Traffic_Is_Er_Was
(Post 10177484)
If you disregard premium economy as being high yield, the 744s have 56 business and 306 economy seats. The 789s have 42 business and 194 economy seats. Capacity is down for sure, but the high yield percentage per airframe is up. Even if you lump premium economy in with business, high yield seats per frame is still up. Add in significantly more economic operation, and QF can afford to drop capacity, especially if it means every one of those high yield seats will be occupied.
|
Originally Posted by TURIN
(Post 10175628)
A330 Cabin width 204 inch
B787 cabin width 218 inch. Toot toot!! |
Originally Posted by NumptyAussie
(Post 10179596)
maths is not your strong point then?
|
As the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft could carry 236 passengers, its monthly capacity was 14,160 seats — meaning that month, capacity reached only 75.5 per cent of the potential maximum. With a Load factor of 75.5% at the height of a northern summer, as the north descends into the cooler months, this is not a good metric. As we postulated at the commencement of the service, it may well be ok in the warmer northern months but marginal where fuel, payload and crew tour of duty limits impact on the operation in a European winter. With the lower CASK and more yield premium due the configuration, the margins will be okay. The problem for Qantas, other than operational restrictions, during a northern winter is that where as once Qantas ran four flights to Europe with AVERAGE yearly load factors on 80% (in the last two years of service 2012, 2013) a new service in a northern PEAK can't hold 80%. Qantas operate far less seats than they did in FY13, not having over sold services on a daily basis ought concern, fort fumble. IFF the operational restrictions north bound are prevalent in the northern winter Q4 this year, then it is highly probable another quiet 'schedule change' reflecting 'customer feedback' sees this service sent via Singapore. A six year random walk for little Napoleon, only to return to Europe via Singapore, like most other airlines. Like a defeated third Reich commanding non existent battalions to defend Berlin, what next? |
Oh dear Rated De, for someone who claims to analyse company performance you missed a pretty key point in the story you linked to. However, the figures only captured passengers flying between Perth and London, and did not take into account passengers using the route to fly between London and Melbourne, or connecting in Sydney and other locations. I actually think the fact they are filling three quarters of the flights solely with passengers to/from Perth shows it must be performing quite well. That leaves only 60ish seats that they need to sell to ADL, CBR, MEL, ASP, PHE, BNE, KGI, BME, DRW, SYD to fill the flight. As has been discussed at length on this forum, this won’t be most people’s preferred route from the east coast to LHR, but with Perth pax already filling most of the plane they need only sell a small number of seats to LHR out of Australia's secondary cities to make the service a commercial success. |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10227024)
https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...9d4240a8e184e1
With a Load factor of 75.5% at the height of a northern summer, as the north descends into the cooler months, this is not a good metric. As we postulated at the commencement of the service, it may well be ok in the warmer northern months but marginal where fuel, payload and crew tour of duty limits impact on the operation in a European winter. With the lower CASK and more yield premium due the configuration, the margins will be okay. The problem for Qantas, other than operational restrictions, during a northern winter is that where as once Qantas ran four flights to Europe with AVERAGE yearly load factors on 80% (in the last two years of service 2012, 2013) a new service in a northern PEAK can't hold 80%. Qantas operate far less seats than they did in FY13, not having over sold services on a daily basis ought concern, fort fumble. IFF the operational restrictions north bound are prevalent in the northern winter Q4 this year, then it is highly probable another quiet 'schedule change' reflecting 'customer feedback' sees this service sent via Singapore. A six year random walk for little Napoleon, only to return to Europe via Singapore, like most other airlines. Like a defeated third Reich commanding non existent battalions to defend Berlin, what next? Have a look at the 12-13k Flexi J fares that are typically bought by corporates on the PER-LHR route. Multiply that by the 42 seats and you start to get an idea of how strong this route is. |
How many FF’s are ‘forced’ to use their points to LHR via PER from SYD/MELBNE when they want via Asia. Anecdotally, that’s a decent number of pax. |
If it’s 75% load factor for solely PER/LHR/PER then I reckon QF would be extremely happy! Plenty of people connecting from other ports onto the QF9/10. Domestic schedules have been rejigged where necessary to allow it. Bring on CDG and/or FRA! |
I did mention here prior to this route beginning, that for various reasons I thought it might primarily be supported out of Perth, with traffic from other Cities merely providing a bit of extra revenue. Regardless of where the pax originate, Anyone with access to Staff Travel can see that getting a seat on it is a tough ask, it does look very successful so far.
Sure, it’s still early, and the below figures are from the very early weeks of the service, but they are the official figures. By all means check my arithmetic, but it’s certainly positive; https://bitre.gov.au/publications/on...ivity_1805.pdf MEL-PER-LHR: Seats: 14632 pax : 13397 Thats a load factor in the 90s, a point at which on many other routes Airlines will experience ‘Spill’ to other Airlines(something to be avoided if possible), and then typically look at putting on additional services. For the international portion of the QF 9, 25% of the Pax seem to be originating from Melbourne, While much of the rest of the Load (as confirmed by the above-posted article), is originating from Perth. Certainly, we are yet to see a Northern Winter and it’s possible effects on this route, both for loads and possible diversions or what-not, but at the moment you’d have to have bit of positivity about it. Surely even some initial doubters are coming around. Like many, I’m not happy about the overall reduction in capacity to Europe over the last few years. However, with more of these aircraft on the way, we could see some more direct routes into Europe thanks to this one ending up a success, growing the footprint once again. For a long time, there hasn’t been much to like about QF management, but credit where it’s due, this looks like being something positive. |
I think you are all missing the point.
Customer service, https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...14156a15ee.jpg |
Once again De Rated has proven that he is full of it. Not only does he post unsubstantiated rubbish all over this site, for reasons unknown, he has now proven he can’t read, or at least can’t comprehend. Using big words doesn’t change the content of your posts fella, we can all see through it. He has at least one qrewroom poster fooled. One would be led to believe they are one in the same? Give it a rest RD. I understand this is a runmour network, but your BS may frighten the more vulnerable amongst us. And that’s just simply being an AH. Appologies if this this fool is a female. Not wanting to be uniclusive. |
Fatguyinacoat,
If you call someone out you have to have to give a reason. You cant just rant that someone is full of it. This just makes you look like a troll |
Here's exactly how many people take Qantas' 17-hour non-stop flight to London
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.