Melbourne to London via SIN?

[Rangalad]

No, it was QF9 via Dubai. Leaving Melbourne at midnight meant I could fly down to Melbourne and get a days work done, before arriving into Dubai at 6am, and then on to Heathrow at 2pm. I could do that run and function at the other end. Even going via Singapore would-be ok, with a mid afternoon arrival. Getting in at 6am is the pits.

The route has an interesting past.

QF007 SYD/MEL/PER/BOM/LHR 747-200
QF009 SYD/MEL/BOM/LHR 747-300
QF031 SYD/MEL/SIN/LHR 747-400
QF029 SYD/MEL/HKG/LHR 747-400
QF009 MEL/DXB/LHR A380

 

[offshore171]

It’s a bit of a shocker that passengers from Australia’s biggest city would be forced to go via Perth or Sydney, and Qantas will have vacant slots in LHR and SIN.

Only if you limit yourself to Qantas though.

Singapore airlines is the obvious alternative if you’re set on Singapore routing, but there’s plenty of similar 1stoppers eg: Cathay, Thai, Malaysian, Emirates etc.

 

[CaptJCool]

In looking at the BITRE May 25 figures

QF/JQ fly 56% of PAX over the Tasman

USA & Japan, the UK Possibly that look higher than that

QF/JQ clean up on Indonesia (QF itself barely 20,000 JQ 88,000

They do have their head ahead on South Africa and Phillipines

THEY fly 0% direct to China and Vietnam and Malaysia

SQ/Scoot QR Thai EK CX all push QF/JQ

International Airline Activity—Monthly Publications

These reports cover monthly international aircraft, passenger, freight and mail movements, flights, available seats, seat load factors and airline market shares. Details are provided for airline, country, city pair and airport.

www.bitre.gov.au

The Paris figures look LOW and the Points Planes are a good gimmick to fill empty seats especially if the SLOW FF earners take up the offer

 

[Mattg]

I’m just wondering if, once Sydney to London via Singapore disappears, …

I thought Qantas said it planned to keep SYD-SIN-LHR once the nonstop SYD-LHR starts.

 

[AIRwin]

I thought Qantas said it planned to keep SYD-SIN-LHR once the nonstop SYD-LHR starts.

As QF31/32?

 

[dajop]

QF/JQ fly 56% of PAX over the Tasman

USA & Japan, the UK Possibly that look higher than that

The UK numbers are not really relevant as it only measures through passengers on QF1/2, 9/10 and BA15/16. This would be only a portion of travellers going to UK.

 

[Himeno]

I thought Qantas said it planned to keep SYD-SIN-LHR once the nonstop SYD-LHR starts.

They did. They said that they would keep the existing AU-UK routes in addition to the sunrise flights. They'll likely change the flight numbers so the SYD-LHR non stop is QF1/2 (and SYD-JFK non stop as QF3/4). Weather they go back to using QF31/32 for the SIN stop flight is another question.

 

[Doddler]

They did. They said that they would keep the existing AU-UK routes in addition to the sunrise flights. They'll likely change the flight numbers so the SYD-LHR non stop is QF1/2 (and SYD-JFK non stop as QF3/4). Weather they go back to using QF31/32 for the SIN stop flight is another question.

Would be an odd thing to do if the Project Sunrise flight eats up Sydney demand for premium cabins. They might end up with a lot of empty premium seats in the A380 that could be filled if flying from Melbourne. OTOH, maybe there are maintenance reasons to keep the A380 operating from Sydney rather than Melbourne.

 

[HirafuHeartAttack]

Would be an odd thing to do if the Project Sunrise flight eats up Sydney demand for premium cabins. They might end up with a lot of empty premium seats in the A380 that could be filled if flying from Melbourne. OTOH, maybe there are maintenance reasons to keep the A380 operating from Sydney rather than Melbourne.

Should your original post have been then 'Melbourne to London Via Sin - QF A380'?

I think it will take a long while for Qantas to work out the dynamics of popularity for project sunrise and they won't immediately cannabalise the steady status quo of high yield through Singapore to London from Sydney to force people to sit on a plane for 20+hours regardless of the premium heavy config of the A350s. I (and I'm sure a lot of others here) enjoy a stop over in Singapore either to stretch the legs and break up the trip, or even to add a few days in the lion city before continuing the journey.

If the loads drop and A380s go out from Sydney with half full premium cabins while the LHR direct flights are full things might change but I doubt this happens immediately upon project sunrise launching.

 

[Himeno]

Would be an odd thing to do if the Project Sunrise flight eats up Sydney demand for premium cabins. They might end up with a lot of empty premium seats in the A380 that could be filled if flying from Melbourne. OTOH, maybe there are maintenance reasons to keep the A380 operating from Sydney rather than Melbourne.

If they start to see a drop in a continued A380 SYD-SIN-LHR service after the SYD-LHR sunrise flights start, they can just reduce it to an 787 and send the A380 elsewhere (like HKG or TYO if they can work out a way around the HND restrictions with A380s), or not send the 380 to LHR and move the via SIN route to BNE.

 

[Doddler]

If they start to see a drop in a continued A380 SYD-SIN-LHR service after the SYD-LHR sunrise flights start, they can just reduce it to an 787 and send the A380 elsewhere (like HKG or TYO if they can work out a way around the HND restrictions with A380s), or not send the 380 to LHR and move the via SIN route to BNE.

Why move the SIN route to BNE and not Melbourne?

And why have the continued A380 service from Sydney competing against the Project Sunrise flights, especially for premium cabins. I would think they'd like to stack things as much as possible in the new flights' favour, at least to start with.

All these things are no doubt being considered by the strategists at Qantas. Just wouldn't surprise me if the A380 through-service switched to Melbourne to 1) make sure the new Project Sunrise flights have the best chance of full premium cabins and 2) to maximise premium capacity to London overall. But we'll see...

 

[DejaBrew]

And why have the continued A380 service from Sydney competing against the Project Sunrise flights, especially for premium cabins. I would think they'd like to stack things as much as possible in the new flights' favour, at least to start with.

Project Sunrise will be fewer seats and higher fares, primarily targeting those who value the travel time saved over the increased flight costs. You can pretty much guarantee there will be plenty of people vying for seats on the "legacy" SYD>SIN>LHR service, not to mention plenty who simply want to travel SYD>SIN. So if anything, I'd say they're banking on Project Sunrise opening up additional revenue streams rather than cannibalising existing ones.

 

[Doddler]

Project Sunrise will be fewer seats and higher fares, primarily targeting those who value the travel time saved over the increased flight costs.

This is *all* about premium seats - the higher costs won't deter those flyers if they get the direct flight.

You can pretty much guarantee there will be plenty of people vying for seats on the "legacy" SYD>SIN>LHR service,

Sure - plenty of non-premium, price-conscious people sitting in the back. Who's going to fill all the A380 premium cabin seats? Are there really so many more premium passengers wanting to fly to London based in Sydney than there are in Melbourne? To justify A350 (98 premium seats), A380 (144 premium seats) vs Melbourne A330 (49 premium seats)?

 

[moa999]

Why move the SIN route to BNE and not Melbourne?

Because ultimately with Sunrise it's expected that there will be direct flights to LHR from SYD, MEL and PER... Plus one more indirect flight via SIN.
BNE is obviously the next biggest port in Aus.

 

[Doddler]

Because ultimately with Sunrise it's expected that there will be direct flights to LHR from SYD, MEL and PER... Plus one more indirect flight via SIN.
BNE is obviously the next biggest port in Aus.

Makes sense in the longer run, if BNE is not getting Project Sunrise flights (surprising). And also in the shorter term if Melbourne gets Sunrise flights to London very shortly after Sydney. If there's a gap of a year or more though, that might be different.

 

[sudoer]

Who's going to fill all the A380 premium cabin seats?

Don't underestimate demand for SYD-SIN and SIN-LHR standalone legs!

Also plenty of J feeder traffic from MEL/BNE.

 

[Doddler]

Don't underestimate demand for SYD-SIN and SIN-LHR standalone legs!

Also plenty of J feeder traffic from MEL/BNE.

The relevance here isn't the SIN-LHR demand, as that would be fulfilled the same regardless if the A380 originates in Sydney, Melbourne, or indeed Brisbane.

This is all about Sydney-SIN-LHR vs Mel-SIN-LHR. Right now there are already far more premium seats from Sydney than from Melbourne. Adding an 350 to the mix would make the imbalance even greater. That would only seem to make commercial sense if the Sydney demand is many times bigger than the Melbourne one.

 

[DejaBrew]

That would only seem to make commercial sense if the Sydney demand is many times bigger than the Melbourne one.

Don't you think that Sydney's demand also includes demand originating and repositioning from other cities? I don't see this changing with Project Sunrise. If you move the 380 to MEL, then you're just "shifting the problem" in terms of pax needing to reposition and with more flights connecting to SYD (if I'm not mistaken, at least) than any other city, then SYD still seems as logical as any other location.

 

[Human]

That would only seem to make commercial sense if the Sydney demand is many times bigger than the Melbourne one.

I find it difficult to believe that Qantas would put a smaller aircraft on a route out of MEL if the demand existed for a larger one.

For whatever reason -- and I would guess that it's a complex set of reasons including demographics, competition, presence of high-paying corporate customers, etc -- the demand for international Qantas flights out of SYD is quite evidently greater than the demand for international Qantas flights out of MEL.

That's just the way it is. I've flown plenty of international flights out of MEL over the years, but apart from to/from NZ I've never flown a Qantas flight. Not even once.

To me, I'm in no way missing out by flying out on other (I would say, better) airlines. But obviously from this thread there's a small subset of people (perhaps with Qantas status) who think differently.

 

[DejaBrew]

I find it difficult to believe that Qantas would put a smaller aircraft on a route out of MEL if the demand existed for a larger one.

For whatever reason -- and I would guess that it's a complex set of reasons including demographics, competition, presence of high-paying corporate customers, etc -- the demand for international Qantas flights out of SYD is quite evidently greater than the demand for international Qantas flights out of MEL.

Thank you! That's a far more eloquent way of putting it and basically what I was trying to get at with my previous post.