Pressure to let foreign airlines fly domestic

[oz_mark]

FOREIGN airlines would be allowed to fly domestic passengers between Australia's big capital cities to improve competition in the aviation industry under reforms being pushed by the Federal Government's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

In a submission to a Government review of aviation policy, the department is arguing for a significant freeing up of the complex web of trade agreements and local regulations which limit competition on international and domestic air routes.

Pressure to let foreign airlines fly domestic - News - Travel - smh.com.au

 

[kpc]

Good idea...why fly an empty plane bet Syd and Mel etc?

 

[oz_mark]

Good idea...why fly an empty plane bet Syd and Mel etc?

Even Qantas do that!

 

[kpc]

Even Qantas do that!

I don't know why QF doesn't sell seats when the A380 flies bet Syd and Mel....I'm sure there would be a lot of interest (and sales!!) in experiencing the A380, if only for a hour or so:?::idea:

 

[comint]

What a bloody excellent idea!

It is laudable that in this country there is more competition to some regional centres in Queensland, than between Melbourne & Sydney. A city pairing, which is supposedly one of the world’s top 3 routes?

 

[SeaWolf]

I dunno, I can see competition issues here.
For example, suppose fictitious international airline Elbonian Airways, the flag carrier of fictitious country Elbonia, starts carrying passengers between SYD-MEL. Because all their employees are Elbonian citizens employed in Elbonia they only have to comply with pay/conditions laws from Elbonia. So they pay the staff a bowl of rice a month with no sick/annual/maternity leave etc. It's dirt cheap for them and creates an issue for Australian carriers that can't get away with slave labour wages and thus have higher costs. Also, Elbonia doesn't tax its flag carrier, at all, whereas the Australian carriers are all paying corporate tax, another huge edge for Elbonian Airlines.

I'm sure there are other issues lurking in the background too.

 

[v8Statesman]

I dunno, I can see competition issues here.
For example, suppose fictitious international airline Elbonian Airways, the flag carrier of fictitious country Elbonia, starts carrying passengers between SYD-MEL. Because all their employees are Elbonian citizens employed in Elbonia they only have to comply with pay/conditions laws from Elbonia. So they pay the staff a bowl of rice a month with no sick/annual/maternity leave etc. It's dirt cheap for them and creates an issue for Australian carriers that can't get away with slave labour wages and thus have higher costs. Also, Elbonia doesn't tax its flag carrier, at all, whereas the Australian carriers are all paying corporate tax, another huge edge for Elbonian Airlines.

I'm sure there are other issues lurking in the background too.

True, but all Elbonaian airlines would pick up was a small seqment of leasure travelers. I am very sure Elbonaian airlines will not have 20+ flights a day (or even daily) between the pairs. Good for tourisim. NO affect on corporate market.

 

[NM]

True, but all Elbonaian airlines would pick up was a small seqment of leasure travelers. I am very sure Elbonaian airlines will not have 20+ flights a day (or even daily) between the pairs. Good for tourisim. NO affect on corporate market.

Maybe they could ship all their old 737-200 and DC-9 aircraft to Australia and operate 20+ return flights a day (may need to schedule 30+ per day to make 20 work after considering fleet reliability).

 

[SeaWolf]

True, but all Elbonaian airlines would pick up was a small seqment of leasure travelers. I am very sure Elbonaian airlines will not have 20+ flights a day (or even daily) between the pairs. Good for tourisim. NO affect on corporate market.

True, but I could certainly see someone like Emirates operating PER-SYD on a daily basis. The difference between SYD-PER-DXB and SYD-DXB is only about 200miles, they could fly via PER and make some extra cash on domestic segments, then pick up more international passengers to replace the domestics at PER.

 

[v8Statesman]

True, but I could certainly see someone like Emirates operating PER-SYD on a daily basis. The difference between SYD-PER-DXB and SYD-DXB is only about 200miles, they could fly via PER and make some extra cash on domestic segments, then pick up more international passengers to replace the domestics at PER.

MMM a Chance for F on a PER-SYD flight. The thought.MMMMM

 

[crazydave98]

What a bloody excellent idea!

It is laudable that in this country there is more competition to some regional centres in Queensland, than between Melbourne & Sydney. A city pairing, which is supposedly one of the world’s top 3 routes?

laud·a·ble (lô

d

-b

l)
adj. Deserving commendation; praiseworthy.

 

[SeaWolf]

Having had another look at the article I've noticed that DFAT is proposing that they only allow this if Australian airlines get reciprocal rights. I can't imagine many other countries agreeing to this.

 

[crazydave98]

I don't know why QF doesn't sell seats when the A380 flies bet Syd and Mel....I'm sure there would be a lot of interest (and sales!!) in experiencing the A380, if only for a hour or so:?::idea:

Hey, good idea, even I would be up for that. But suspect I would have a very, very, good choice of seats on the A380 and the QF B767-300ERs flying at a similar time would be mostly empty.

One of the problems with the whole "let international carriers fly domestically" idea is that they either have to operate "D sticker" through the international terminals (3hr checkin for a 90min flight anyone?) or the aircraft have to be towed across active runways at peak hour and operate from the domestic terminals. I can't see Qantas letting EK park an A380 at its SYD domestic terminal, and there is only one gate on T2 (to which Qantas has first right of refusal so could block a competitor) that takes Code E aircraft - the one where they used to park the B743 for trans-continental fligths. But then again, isn't the A380 a Code F aircraft anyway ...so it won't fit and I can't see SACL developing the terminal and taxiways for one or two domestic A380 flights a day.

 

[crazydave98]

Having had another look at the article I've noticed that DFAT is proposing that they only allow this if Australian airlines get reciprocal rights. I can't imagine many other countries agreeing to this.

And I can't imagine any Australian airlines wanting that right. The only possible exception would be that Jetstar would love to be able to fly from say Hawaii to Las Vegas topping up with local pax instead of having to supply their own feed, and likewise maybe Qantas would try to cash in on Rainman to get more LAX-JFK services.

 

[NM]

And I can't imagine any Australian airlines wanting that right. The only possible exception would be that Jetstar would love to be able to fly from say Hawaii to Las Vegas topping up with local pax instead of having to supply their own feed, and likewise maybe Qantas would try to cash in on Rainman to get more LAX-JFK services.

I agree with the LAX-JFK route, although it would annoy AA somewhat. But HNL and LAS are both leisure destinations. I would not expect a great deal of traffic between the two. More traffic from other airline hub locations to each of HNL and LAS than between them. But LAS would probably be attractive for a significant through passenger loading from Australia. Perhaps marketing HNL as a nice stopover location. But there is little stopping that being done now.

 

[crazydave98]

I agree with the LAX-JFK route, although it would annoy AA somewhat. But HNL and LAS are both leisure destinations. I would not expect a great deal of traffic between the two. More traffic from other airline hub locations to each of HNL and LAS than between them. But LAS would probably be attractive for a significant through passenger loading from Australia. Perhaps marketing HNL as a nice stopover location. But there is little stopping that being done now.

fair enough, I didn't pick the best example - maybe HNL-LAX or SFO (one stop providing clear product differentiation from QF).

Now here's a related scenario for you. Qantas makes sod-all from its investment in Air Pacific. If I were Alan Joyce I would be saying to the Fijian Government "Hey guys, thanks for your decades of partership in Air Pacific but it really isn't working for us any more. So we're going to give you back our 46% share for free - it's all yours. Oh and by the way tomorrow we're starting JQ flying Australia-Fiji and using our existing traffic rights to continue onwards to North America because the A330 and damned B787-9 won't fly non-stop Australia-USA anyway and we don't want to directly cannibalise Qantas brand by flying the same routings. "

 

[NM]

fair enough, I didn't pick the best example - maybe HNL-LAX or SFO (one stop providing clear product differentiation from QF).

I could see that working.

Now here's a related scenario for you. Qantas makes sod-all from its investment in Air Pacific. If I were Alan Joyce I would be saying to the Fijian Government "Hey guys, thanks for your decades of partership in Air Pacific but it really isn't working for us any more. So we're going to give you back our 46% share for free - it's all yours. Oh and by the way tomorrow we're starting JQ flying Australia-Fiji and using our existing traffic rights to continue onwards to North America because the A330 and damned B787-9 won't fly non-stop Australia-USA anyway and we don't want to directly cannibalise Qantas brand by flying the same routings. "

I think unlikely, but certainly an interesting scenario. I think they would expect at least some financial compensation for "selling" their stake in FJ.

Not sure about the 787-9 not doing Aus-USA non-stop. According to Mr Boeing, the 787-8 (initial delivery for JQ) should have a range of at least 7650nm which is 8800 miles. BNE-LAX (a route I cud see as possible for JQ) is 7161 miles. Again according to Mr Boeing, the 787-9 (what QF expects to have with a roo tail) has a range starting from 8000nm (or 9200 miles) which will easily make trans-Pacific to/from some interesting alternate ports in both directions viable.

 

[docjames]

Now here's a related scenario for you. Qantas makes sod-all from its investment in Air Pacific. If I were Alan Joyce I would be saying to the Fijian Government "Hey guys, thanks for your decades of partership in Air Pacific but it really isn't working for us any more. So we're going to give you back our 46% share for free - it's all yours. Oh and by the way tomorrow we're starting JQ flying Australia-Fiji and using our existing traffic rights to continue onwards to North America because the A330 and damned B787-9 won't fly non-stop Australia-USA anyway and we don't want to directly cannibalise Qantas brand by flying the same routings. "

Do we know if QF makes/loses money from it's arrangement/ownership with FJ?


I agree - JQ via NAN to LAX (or DFW to hook up with AA's hub) would be a good option.

I'd like to see on JQi

SYD/BNE/MEL - NAN - DFW/SFO vv
- NAN - YVR vv
- NAN - MEX vv
- HNL - YVR vv
- HNL - LAX/SFO/DFW vv


PER-Sth Africa (JNB) or PER-Mauritius could target leisure travellers.
EU/UK flights we know are coming (bet on Paris, Rome and Athens as some/all of the first few destinations). Do the 787s have range from Asia to make it to Dublin as that would be a good option too?

You could also do a "milk-run" on JQ with Port Vila, NAN, Samoa and back to AUS (and then do other direction alternate days)

I'd like to see QF do YVR on it's own Aircraft (selling excess capapcity to US/Canadians) but i believe they've tried this before?

Unless you want to throw MASSIVE capacity at the bloodbath that is US domestic flights, anything more than direct in from o/s is a total loss maker (on QF or JQi) unless it "plugs-in" to a ready-made market (QF doing LAX-JFK). A QF flight direct to DFW would be useful to hook into the "hub" but if it has to go via LAX it's no good (may as well change at LAX to AA), and nothing in the fleet has the range to do AUS-DFW currently (? would a 77W / 772 make this distance?)

Any ideas on how JQ are going with thier vietnam flights? As i kind-of like the idea of it being the stop-point for JQi to Europe. An alternative would be MNL.....but i think that's unlikely - suspect it'll end up being BKK or Vietnam, with QF maintaining/expanding hub out of SIN.

Ah, so many options, so many money-losers.....

 

[NM]

Do the 787s have range from Asia to make it to Dublin as that would be a good option too?

Easily. The 787 should have a range of 8800 miles. That is more than the 744-ER. So Asia to anywhere in Europe will be a doddle for them.

 

[crazydave98]

I could see that working.

I think unlikely, but certainly an interesting scenario. I think they would expect at least some financial compensation for "selling" their stake in FJ.

Not sure about the 787-9 not doing Aus-USA non-stop. According to Mr Boeing, the 787-8 (initial delivery for JQ) should have a range of at least 7650nm which is 8800 miles. BNE-LAX (a route I cud see as possible for JQ) is 7161 miles. Again according to Mr Boeing, the 787-9 (what QF expects to have with a roo tail) has a range starting from 8000nm (or 9200 miles) which will easily make trans-Pacific to/from some interesting alternate ports in both directions viable.

Why would the Fijians pay for their own execution? In their interests to delay as long as they could and only way for Qantas to short-circuit would be to dump their stake which they know (and know the Fijians know) would be worthless as soon as known that JQ would operate instead. What makes the scenario unlikely is the international politics - Australia seen to be picking on poor little Fiji and the Australian government wanting to keep the peace and telling Qantas to pull its head in.

As for B787-9, take it from someone who has worked in fleet planning that you shouldn't believe everything manufacturers tell you about range. Qantas and Jetstar know better.
from New Jetstar chief unveils expansion plans | The Australian
"Buchanan says New Zealand is important to Jetstar because its 787s, even the bigger 787-9, are configured in a way that makes it unlikely they can make it directly to the west coast of the US from Australia's eastern seaboard."