Non-stop Sydney-to-London flights by 2022 (AJ)

[michaele]

Non-stop Sydney to London flights could happen by 2022, says Qantas.

Real strategy or posturing for the EK renewal?

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ndon-flights-could-happen-by-2022-says-qantas

 

[Flying Fox]

Similarly

Airbus, Boeing close in on Qantas' long haul dream: The Kangaroo route non-stop

I'd like to give it a go in J or F but its all about fuel efficiency vs $/barrel.

 

[Daver6]

I wonder how that sits with the rumour I heard that QF are considering MEL to TLV direct.

 

[docjames]

I wonder how that sits with the rumour I heard that QF are considering MEL to TLV direct.

I'd say they are mutually exclusive!

Interesting rumour, and there would be decent ex-AU loadings i'd have thought.

 

[RichardMEL]

And QF did recently announce a more involved partnership with LY .....

 

[mviy]

If this happens the PER to LHR route may be shorter lived than first thought. One would expect that once MEL/SYD-LHR non-stop starts the PER-LHR non-stop flights will stop.

MEL-TLV direct would be a nice addition. Currently it would take about as long to get to TLV as it would to get to LHR.

 

[Ansett]

[FONT=&quot]“The kangaroo route is probably the most competitive on the globe,” Joyce said. “[Flying non-stop] takes us off this superhighway of very competitive conditions of capacity which is priced, in many cases, under costs.”

What is stopping other airlines doing the same like BA and other European airlines one stop to Australia.
This would have to put a dent in the ME 3 if it was to happen.[/FONT]

 

[docjames]

Given the PER-LHR flight is (will be) MEL-PER-LHR, i'd expect in some respects the MEL flight will probably remain as MEL-PER-LHR and it'll only be SYD-LHR nonstop.


It also seems to be that AJ is trying to drive the competition / product offered ("guaranteed") by airbus and boeing as they look for the longer term 744ER and 380 replacements (778/9 vs 350LR)

 

[mviy]

Given the PER-LHR flight is (will be) MEL-PER-LHR, i'd expect in some respects the MEL flight will probably remain as MEL-PER-LHR and it'll only be SYD-LHR nonstop.

I doubt it. I reckon they'd get the PER pax to fly to MEL/SYD and from there on to LHR. MEL-PER-LHR only makes sense as an option if it's not practical to fly MEL-LHR non-stop. Market pressure perceived/otherwise will force QF's hand. If QANTAS doesn't do MEL-LHR non-stop another airline may seek to use flying such a route to take market share from QF.

If QF can't sustain three direct to LHR services a day they could shift the PER-LHR flight to another European city or perhaps move the plane to flying more MEL-LAX services or other routes again.

 

[Dalescott]

Hell of a long time at the back of the plane. You would need sleeping pills just to stay sane.

 

[Danger]

I wonder if there'd be a market for an aircraft configured how SQ used to do their New York flight, with something like 80 J seats be entire plane.

 

[mviy]

I wonder if there'd be a market for an aircraft configured how SQ used to do their New York flight, with something like 80 J seats be entire plane.

You'd need to be able to sustain a very high level of travellers willing to pay cash to fly J. I think it would be very challenging to sustain that demand.

 

[dajop]

If this happens it will need a change in paradigm as to timing of flights, which would probably mean a lunch time departure from LHR and early evening arrival into SYD.

The traditional SYD departure from LHR - at the moment QF 2 with a 21:35 departure from LHR (as per current schedule) would reach SYD about 2:30am during the northern summer and 4:30am during northern winter. You hit curfew problems at both ends.

This would mean a non stop needs to depart from LHR 7am - 5pm during northern summer (arriving into SYD from midday to 10pm) or a narrowed window during northern winter - 7am to 3pm ( 2pm to 10pm arrival). Early morning arrival into SYD would be possible during northern winter (10pm departure = 5am arrival) but difficult during northern winter.

 

[Skyring]

If this happens it will need a change in paradigm as to timing of flights, which would probably mean a lunch time departure from LHR and early evening arrival into SYD.

The traditional SYD departure from LHR - at the moment QF 2 with a 21:35 departure from LHR (as per current schedule) would reach SYD about 2:30am during the northern summer and 4:30am during northern winter. You hit curfew problems at both ends.

This would mean a non stop needs to depart from LHR 7am - 5pm during northern summer (arriving into SYD from midday to 10pm) or a narrowed window during northern winter - 7am to 3pm ( 2pm to 10pm arrival). Early morning arrival into SYD would be possible during northern winter (10pm departure = 5am arrival) but difficult during northern winter.

The evening LHR departure is convenient for businessfolk and tourists alike. Spend the day in London, head out to the airport, maybe grab some sleep on the plane. A daytime departure means another night in London (or nearby) with not a lot to show for it. That would drop the benefit of saving a few hours a little.

For me, a reasonably tall bloke, the thought of spending 20 hours or so in a standard economy seat is one major reason to choose a different flight. Having a break halfway is a big bonus, and if I had to spend another night in London to make the direct flight, why not take that overnight stay in Dubai or Singapore instead? It'd work out much the same, timewise.

 

[RichardMEL]

I wonder if there'd be a market for an aircraft configured how SQ used to do their New York flight, with something like 80 J seats be entire plane.

If SQ couldn't make it work with their lower costs you have to wonder.

Now true, they used the guzzling A345 and will restart the effort with the 350ULR and see how it goes with the more efficient twin, but still SQ has a massive cost advantage AND $$$ (markets) at both ends to likely make it work....

... doubt QF could claim the same. Maybe SYD-LHR but still think costs would be far too high for the revenue gain.

 

[Skyring]

If SQ couldn't make it work with their lower costs you have to wonder.

Now true, they used the guzzling A345 and will restart the effort with the 350ULR and see how it goes with the more efficient twin, but still SQ has a massive cost advantage AND $$$ (markets) at both ends to likely make it work....

... doubt QF could claim the same. Maybe SYD-LHR but still think costs would be far too high for the revenue gain.

Qantas would be looking at experience from PER-LHR direct. Maybe they can make it work, but I'd really want something like PE to make the thing bearable.

On the other hand, SYD-LHR in J or F direct, I could live with that.

One more factor for me is that I'm happy with the Dubai hub. If I'm travelling to somewhere in Europe other than the UK, then I prefer to fly Dubai to Lisbon or Frankfurt or wherever, rather than to Heathrow's dubious pleasures and then some coughpy little BA A320 to make the final leg.

The talk of other carriers stepping in to cover the route if Qantas pikes seems a little hollow to me. BA could do it, because they own one end of the route. But CX doesn't - they do everything out of HKG, and it's kind of hard to argue fifth freedom on a route that stretches so long.

 

[dajop]

The evening LHR departure is convenient for businessfolk and tourists alike. Spend the day in London, head out to the airport, maybe grab some sleep on the plane. A daytime departure means another night in London (or nearby) with not a lot to show for it. That would drop the benefit of saving a few hours a little.

Yes that's why it needs a paradigm shift. From a business perspective the theory is you arrive in the morning ready and raring to go with a full day ahead. But from a from this perspective flight time is no longer dead time, with laptops and inflight wifi aiding productivity/connectivity.

Having done the SIN to EWR on SQ several times when it operated, the timing was fantastic. Lunchtime departure meant you could do some work or calls before getting on flight, and you arrived into New York around 6pm, and either connected to somewhere or went and had dinner before a good night sleep ready to hit the ground running the next morning. In flight you had 20 hrs to manage as you pleased - between meals, getting some work done, sleeping and watching movies, without the constraints of a landing and take off. I would take the lunch time departure in preference to late evening any and every time.

 

[Daver6]

MEL-TLV direct would be a nice addition. Currently it would take about as long to get to TLV as it would to get to LHR.

Especially if you want to stick with OW. From Perth it is 24+ hours to get to TLV. Even with CX now flying there, the HKG connections are horrendous.

 

[samh004]

You'd need to be able to sustain a very high level of travellers willing to pay cash to fly J. I think it would be very challenging to sustain that demand.

The benefit of that though is the cargo capacity is probably a lot larger than with 200+ economy seats each expecting their luggage to make the flight. Thus, ability for extra revenue from selling belly space?

The talk of other carriers stepping in to cover the route if Qantas pikes seems a little hollow to me. BA could do it, because they own one end of the route. But CX doesn't - they do everything out of HKG, and it's kind of hard to argue fifth freedom on a route that stretches so long.

I'd love to see fifth freedom flights SYD-LHR-NYC (take your pick of airports) and SYD-NYC-LHR (same deal) to essentially recreate RTW services on one carrier. Let alliance (or non-) partners route customers from the two stops.

 

[mviy]

80 Business seats a day would be a lot though. I can't see them filling that regularly unless they either drop prices and/or do a lot of upgrades, but you want to fill most of the seats with passengers paying cash if possible.