Qantas Project Sunrise goes ahead, 12 new A350-1000s ordered

[docjames]

So, I wonder if there'll be any crazy Brits or Americans who are going to fly LHR-JFK the long way round

Not that crazy - and can be priced better.

I had a QF/AY fare that was way cheaper to use AY and do MEL-LAX-ORD-JFK-HEL-SIN-MEL than it was to do the return via LAX ex-JFK. Sure, longer travel time, but pretty easy.

Similarly, EK/QR both a viable one stop option into Aus from NY.



Also, I dont doubt the renders are done to get feedback / build interest (And expect stacks more sunrise announcements), but also expect QF wont reveal everything too soon lest they give competitions an idea of what they are doing (eg. doors on J suites).

 

[justin23]

I can't see these flights being the cheapest either. I'm pretty certain QF will charge a premium because its non-stop. There are plenty of people who'd rather do that in Y than have a layover ot stop somewhere. For me there is one too many seats per row in both Y+ and Y, for a flight that long. My last trip to europe was actually via SIN and DXB. I quite liked the shorter flights. Someone like me would love the old Kangaroo route, allow me to pick and choose a stopover along the way, that would be ideal, but i get not everyone wants that. One stop seem acceptable to most, i've done SCL in Y+ and that was manageable. I've got a good J fare for later this year on LATAM.... just hoping I don't get screwed over, as they currently are not flying the day of the week i leave.

 

[jakeseven7]

So what do we think will be the first European link to be opened up after London and New York launch....?

Frankfurt?
Paris?
Berlin?

 

[Berlin]

So what do we think will be the first European link to be opened up after London and New York launch....?

Frankfurt?
Paris?
Berlin?

Paris, then Frankfurt. As much as would love (and pay for) it, I fear Berlin will be a pipe dream.

 

[dajop]

My view is that it will prompt these carriers to worry a bit because their Australia to hub flights are often the ones most in demand. We all know how you can save huge amounts of cash and find huge amounts more reward availability by starting your trips to LHR/JFK from our nearby neighbours (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, etc).

It depends if the A380 service via SIN continues or not. 2 A350 flights will have 50% more J, 33% more PY, 15% less F and 18% less Y.

SQ LHR services are more likely to suffer than the ME3, which have a much bigger catchment due to geography, but there is still a huge market for origin/destination SIN-LhR flights anyway.

 

[HS-TQE]

CDG (AF/KLM) and SCL (LatAM). I know the later isn't Europe, but it has been mentioned previously.

Any other 'secondary' Europe destinations will probably be via PER on 789s in a scissor-hub arrangment.

 

[dajop]

So what do we think will be the first European link to be opened up after London and New York launch....?

Frankfurt?
Paris?
Berlin?

Will it be SYD-FRA next (or CDG) or will MEL-LHR come first?

 

[jakeseven7]

Paris, then Frankfurt. As much as would love (and pay for) it, I fear Berlin will be a pipe dream.

There is a tonne of business travel to Frankfurt, I don't know much about Berlin. Frankfurt is a finance hub $$$.

But also Paris is a reasonable business hub as well I guess - a lot of French HQ's there and a big wealth French population in Melbourne especially. Connecting the Paris with the Paris of the Southern hemisphere

 

[HS-TQE]

Will it be SYD-FRA next (or CDG) or will MEL-LHR come first?

Would logically be MEL-LHR after the initial SYD-LHR/JFK, and depends on the aircraft utilisation. 4-5 aircraft would be in service for the initial routes.

It should normally be 2 aircraft per route, but QF could want a operational spare.

 

[dajop]

Would logically be MEL-LHR after the initial SYD-LHR/JFK, and depends on the aircraft utilisation. 4-5 aircraft would be in service for the initial routes.

It should normally be 2 aircraft per route, but QF could want a operational spare.

IIRC, there was a committment to NSW that Project Sunrise would be "based" (whatever that means) in Sydney for the first five years. I assume this means no LHR crew, and the A350 crew would be based in SYD, so operating a MEL service would still fit within this idea, but involve paxing crew or SYD-LHR-MEL-LHR-SYD rotation.

 

[Lynda2475]

SCL (LatAM)

There are already SYD-SCL flights on existing aircraft, so this wouldnt be a new route and at 12 hours ish, it isnt ULH.

At the moment I only consider SIN-EWR, DFW-SYD. DFW-MEL and PER-LHR to be ULH routes. 12-13 hour flights to US/SA or ME are just Long Haul, not Ultra Long Haul.

I agree after SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR, likely to see SYD-CDG or MEL-LHR. I would expect SYD/MEL/BNE-SIN --> LHR to continue as this will continue to be popular with Y travellers.

 

[moa999]

Watched Nonstop Dan's review of the EWR-SIN nonstop and his issues with food and such, he made perhaps the most important point about these ULH flights - the time lag and body clock displacement is a real thing.

But that's to me the biggest advantage of the non-stop flights - you as the passenger have complete control (particularly with dine on demand).

The best jetlag strategy in my view is to get it done on the flight. Set your watch to arrival time zone immediately you get onboard (or even before that), and try and get the switch done on the flight.

A forced stopover can break that strategy.

The old Qantas flights to JFK worked pretty well for it with the early morning LAX arrival. Coming back (flying West) us easier.

 

[AIRwin]

At the moment I only consider SIN-EWR, DFW-SYD. DFW-MEL and PER-LHR to be ULH routes.

SIN-LAX and SIN-SFO?

 

[Lynda2475]

A forced stopover can break that strategy.

Agree

the old Qantas flights to JFK worked pretty well for it with the early morning LAX arrival. Coming back (flying West) us easier.

Not sure I agree there SYD-JFK was good, because you arrived early evening, so by the time you got into NYC you could have a early dinner and go to bed on schedule (10-11pm). I never experienced any jet lag on the way over, and I flew Y and didn't sleep at all on the SYD-LAX or LAX-JFK legs, so I was nice and tired and ready to sleep on schedule once in NYC.

Coming back, arvo flight out of JFK and late night departure from LAX with crack of dawn arrival in SYD. If in J or F fine because you likley slept and are ready to face the day, however if in PE or Y likely no sleep at all so a much bigger struggle to stay awake til 10pm Sydney time to get back on right schedule. I used to come home, shower, go out for breaky, do a grocery shop, do all my laundry etc but was still usually ready for bed by 7pm, which meant being awake at 3am.

YMMV of course.

 

[Lynda2475]

SIN-LAX and SIN-SFO?

Sure wasn't across those routes, but point remains flight durations up to 14 hours (like SF0-SYD) are just LH not ULH.

 

[dajop]

SIN-LAX and SIN-SFO?

And SIN-JFK! (Now I am being pedantic as SIN-EWR was mentioned and it is more or less the same flight except a few miles at the end. )

 

[Berlin]

There is a tonne of business travel to Frankfurt, I don't know much about Berlin. Frankfurt is a finance hub $$$.

But also Paris is a reasonable business hub as well I guess

Pretty sure it'll be Paris and Frankfurt, because that's where the money sits (plus logistics, flight connections all that: Berlin just doesn't have all this to the same degree as Frankfurt, as sad as I am to say this.

 

[Daver6]

Has there been any mention of these flights being daily? If they're not, that's a massive downside too.

 

[dajop]

Would ZRH get a look in? Certainly miles ahead of Berlin. (Following the money - and far better place to transit than CDG , LHR or FRA). Would need a deal with LX though.

 

[justinbrett]

Has there been any mention of these flights being daily? If they're not, that's a massive downside too.

With 12 aircraft, that's enough for at least 5 pairs of routes flying daily, with spares.

So enough for SYD/LHR, MEL/LHR, SYD/JFK, MEL/JFK and SYD/CDG.