CBR-DOH flights foreshadowed

[MEL_Traveller]

In a press conference this arvo, Canberra Airport CEO Stephen Byron confirmed Qatar’s Canberra-Doha service will be “direct” (no Adelaide stopover) ...

The word 'direct' is normally a flag to a frequent flyer that the flight stops somewhere, but the CEO actually says 'non-stop'. Although interestingly 'non-stop' is only mentioned 'to' Doha. That leaves open the possibility the inbound might be via another city on a triangular routing.

 

[Daver6]

Re: Qatar to Canberra

I hope PER gets the QR A350 as previously planned.

I believe i was meant to be the 787 and was meant to happen about 18 months ago.

If this does eventuate, it will hopefully mean more award J seats back in to Australia even if you still need to connect on to your final destination.

 

[NZflygirl]

Re: Qatar to Canberra

I believe i was meant to be the 787 and was meant to happen about 18 months ago.

If this does eventuate, it will hopefully mean more award J seats back in to Australia even if you still need to connect on to your final destination.

I'll take a 787 too.

I've only flown one trip with them but I guess I wouldn't be too surprised if they didn't go with the 787. I was doing midweek flying and J was full both ways! End of EU shoulder season I think, and less J seats on the 787 they'd lose a few $$ if they are indeed this full a lot of the time. Y full both ways too and their A320's full both ways in both classes.

 

[NM]

In a press conference this arvo, Canberra Airport CEO Stephen Byron confirmed Qatar’s Canberra-Doha service will be “direct” (no Adelaide stopover) ...

In aviation terms, "direct" does not mean "non-stop". Direct means the same flight number for the through flight that can be sold as AAA-CCC even if there is a stop in between and operates as AAA-BBB-CCC. QF's QF9 operates MEL-DXB-LHR and can be sold as MEL-LHR which is marketed as a "direct" flight.

Though I expect the plan would be non-stop to CBR and then onwards to a NZ destination. I expect an NZ tag would be unlikely to use the same flight number, in which case NZ-DOH would not be "direct" or "non-stop".

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Though I expect the plan would be non-stop to CBR and then onwards to a NZ destination. I expect an NZ tag would be unlikely to use the same flight number, in which case NZ-DOH would not be "direct" or "non-stop".

i can't think of an instance where a NZ tag (in fact almost anywhere in the world) doesn't use the same flight number as the long haul? DOH-NZ would be non-stop to Canberra and direct to NZ.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Re: QR to CBR

What are taxes like to CBR? More or less than SYD or MEL?

 

[Mattg]

Re: QR to CBR

I would be very happy to see them operate something like DOH-CBR-AKL!

What are taxes like to CBR? More or less than SYD or MEL?

Slightly higher than SYD and MEL.

 

[DavidFlynn]

The word 'direct' is normally a flag to a frequent flyer that the flight stops somewhere, but the CEO actually says 'non-stop'. Although interestingly 'non-stop' is only mentioned 'to' Doha. That leaves open the possibility the inbound might be via another city on a triangular routing.

Methinks you're reading to much into this – in my experience most people will be speaking of a flight "to" X, not "to and from X" based on their 'home' port... so just because Byron said "to Doha" doesn't mean no non-stop on the way back – it just reflects that he is speaking with a CBR-centricity to a domestic audience for who the flights are Canberra to Doha.

As to direct vs non-stop: yes, CEO said non-stop, and I/we (me/AusBT) use 'direct' interchangeably with that in writing for the mainstream audience, who quite understandably consider direct and non-stop to be the same thing (it's also preferable for the sake of variety in language than repeating 'non-stop'). If there's a stop-over between cities then we call that out as a stop-over.

 

[DavidFlynn]

Re: Qatar to Canberra

I believe i was meant to be the 787 and was meant to happen about 18 months ago.

It was actually supposed to have been both

Qatar originally promised the Boeing 787 for Perth from Feb 2013, shortly before the 787 was grounded due to those pesky battery problems; then (I think in May 2014) the A350 was promised for 2015; most recently (mid-2016) the A350 has one again been name-checked against Perth... fingers crossed that Perth gets the A350 eventually, maybe next year..?

 

[DavidFlynn]

Re: Qatar to Canberra

Similar to the UA service that was SYD MEL a while back

Yep, and going back quite a bit further Cathay Pacific also had a SYD-MEL tag. While those tags couldn't be sold to the public they used to be available to staff... so Sydney's CX staff used to love hopping onto the SYD-MEL leg and jetting down to Melbourne for lunch! And a few years back as a Christmas gift, UA sent selected Aussie travel/aviation media a pair of SYD-MEL business class return tickets for the B747's tag service – it was quite fun, doing that as a domestic leg!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Methinks you're reading to much into this – in my experience most people will be speaking of a flight "to" X, not "to and from X" based on their 'home' port... so just because Byron said "to Doha" doesn't mean no non-stop on the way back – it just reflects that he is speaking with a CBR-centricity to a domestic audience for who the flights are Canberra to Doha.

As to direct vs non-stop: yes, CEO said non-stop, and I/we (me/AusBT) use 'direct' interchangeably with that in writing for the mainstream audience, who quite understandably consider direct and non-stop to be the same thing (it's also preferable for the sake of variety in language than repeating 'non-stop'). If there's a stop-over between cities then we call that out as a stop-over.

Non-stop to/from Canberra doesn't preclude a tag to New Zealand though. There are also examples where non-stop is used in one direction only... the QF 747 services to DFW were an example. They were non-stop only from sydney, requiring a stop in BNE on the reverse.

Using direct and non-stop interchangeably on a travel related website can lead to problems and perpetuates readers making mistakes in regard to the difference.

If you look for example at travel to China... transit without visa requires passengers to fly non-stop to and from the Chinese city they intend to stay in. 'Direct flights' which may stop in a secondary city will invalidate an extended TWOV. People can, and do, get caught out because they thought 'direct' meant non-stop. Is it not better to get in the habit of using the right terminology so people can make informed decisions?

a stopover also has a distinct meaning... quite different from a transit for example.

 

[DavidFlynn]

Using direct and non-stop interchangeably on a travel related website can lead to problems and perpetuates readers making mistakes in regard to the difference. If you look for example at travel to China... transit without visa requires passengers to fly non-stop to and from the Chinese city they intend to stay in. 'Direct flights' which may stop in a secondary city will invalidate an extended TWOV. People an, and go, get caught out because they thought 'direct' meant non-stop. Is it not better to get in the habit of using the right terminology so people can make informed decisions?

Points well made and taken, but we'd rather use terminology that speaks to the mainstream audience in their language (a practice developed from my time as a tech journo, which is in some ways similar to aviation) and then expand on any conditionals as appropriate – as we've done in articles about the visa-free stopovers in Beijing etc – instead of just saying things like "non-stop" and "direct" and assume the average reader knows their avspeak-meanings.

 

[Sparkies]

That's great news for Canberra.

 

[kermatu]

Brilliant news if it pans out. Have utilized the SQ direct service from WLG already and suspect will use SQ an Qatar for longer haul flights in future.

 

[GoneMissed]

Bringing this one back up, has anybody heard anything more on the commencement of these flights? Supposedly these are starting in February 2018 but there's been no news for a few months now. Hoping to book flights to Europe in the next month or so, given Singapore Airlines are around $500 cheaper ex CBR than Qantas, Emirates etc. ex Sydney. Just makes a hell of a lot more sense flying out of here. Unfortunately I can't use/earn Qantas points with Singapore though so Qatar would solve that problem!

 

[ftm]

I'd heard the SQ operation was doing very badly, on both legs, but particularly between Canberra and Wellington. So perhaps QR are reviewing the idea?

 

[emirates777]

I have heard the opposite. SQ is very happy with how the flight is faring. The Canberra-Wellington loads in particular have been great. Apparently the flight to Singapore operates on a 60-40 split in terms of passengers in favour of wellington.

 

[Himeno]

1st, the SQ flight is going quite well. They seem to be happy with it.
2nd, QR is known to throw out ideas of places they would like to go. Their release last year of going to CBR was never saying they would.
3rd, the Qatar-AU air service agreement allows 7 flights extra a week to the 4 limited ports, provided such a flight to to/via another minor port. And this is precisely what QR said such a CBR route would do. DOH-SYD-CBR. Qatar Airways may combine Canberra-Sydney on new Doha service

 

[Strategic Aviation]

SQ is very happy with how the flight is faring. The Canberra-Wellington loads in particular have been great.

Singapore Airlines' Canberra flights draw few to the capital - The Canberra Times

This translated to an average of about 145 passengers travelling to Canberra on each 266-seat Boeing 777-200 from Singapore and just 67 on the same sized plane from Wellington.

The outbound figures were similarly low. An average of 65 passengers on each flight from Canberra to Wellington boarded in the capital while the Singapore route saw 111 Canberran outbound passengers.

The Singapore flights were a slight improvement on September's numbers, when an average of 142 passengers from Singapore travelled to the capital, while the Wellington route saw a reduction from 94 each flight.

Singapore Airlines to review Singapore to Canberra to Wellington route - ABC News

Singapore Airlines has announced a review of its international flights to and from Canberra, but the company insists it remains committed to the region.

 

[dajop]

Singapore Airlines' Canberra flights draw few to the capital - The Canberra Times

Hard to draw any conclusions from this article, and the quote you've taken from it, which discusses the first full month of operations. Could be a little deceptive as to real story (or not). It would be more interesting to look at last two months.