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

[flydoc2]

The shortest route if Politics allows is the great circle which not far off flying over Hong Kong, China, Russia and Baltic.

Post #1563 & subsequent

 

[aikman]

I've never done a number two on a plane but it might be unavoidable on this flight. For that reason I will never get on this flight.

 

[mjt57]

For those flying down the back, 21 hours upright in an economy seat? Not worth a 20% premium over a 23 hour trip (including an hour stopover somewhere like Singapore or Dubai). The trip's not even 10% faster.

When we flew MEL-SIN-LHR last year, we booked time in one of the lounges in SIN. Was able to have a shower, something decent to eat and to stretch out for a nap. The SIN-LHR leg (QF1 I think, A380) was more tolerable. And the same for MEL-DXB-FCO when we flew to Europe.

For MEL-JFK trips we now stop off in LA for a day or so, do the touristy bit, then grab an afternoon flight to JFK where the daughter picks us up. Much more civilised.

I cannot, for the life of me, see the attraction of being stuck in economy for so long, especially when pax have to pay more for the "customer experience".

 

[Daver6]

I cannot, for the life of me, see the attraction of being stuck in economy for so long, especially when pax have to pay more for the "customer experience".

Not about the attraction, but if you're travelling for work your employer is unlikely to pay for you to stop over in LA or wherever for a day or two. Also, at the end of the trip, you just want to get back home ASAP.

 

[Quickstatus]

So the back rows of economy on the A350 ULR are going to have *reduced* seat pitch (32)

It’s 32-34 according to what I read (only 30% will have 32).

Yes
140 Y
- 42Y+ economy plus) 34 in (30%)
- 58Y 33 in (41%)
- 40Y- 32 in (29%)

 

[dajop]

The shortest route if Politics allows is the great circle which not far off flying over Hong Kong, China, Russia and Baltic.

Even then, the shortest route does not always mean the quickest, and the polar route could still be in play even if the shortest route was politically available. All depends on the conditions and how much extra fuel flying into a "headwind" takes vs being assisted by a "tailwind".

 

[elanshin]

140 Y
- 42Y+ economy plus) 34 in (30%)
- 58 Y 33 in (41%)
- 40 Y- 32 in (29%)

This honestly seems so random and a missed opportunity. Configure them all with the original 33 - call it economy plus (but no upcharge except location preferences) and you'd get nice marketing PR that PS only has economy plus seats.

 

[Quickstatus]

All depends on the conditions and how much extra fuel flying into a "headwind" takes vs being assisted by a "tailwind".

I remember Jb747 mentioning the Airbus cost index which is CI = cost of time / cost of fuel.
edit that was in the context that trying to make up time might not be most cost effective as saving time by flying faster eats up more fuel. Saving both time and fuel is obviously better.

 

[Quickstatus]

you'd get nice marketing PR that PS only has economy plus seats.

Ah no, the airline will be spruiking 32 as an "enhanced experience". But if people want a more luxurious step up for a "small fee" they can choose the Plus. Limit its supply which increases its price too!

 

[TeaKozy]

Not about the attraction, but if you're travelling for work your employer is unlikely to pay for you to stop over in LA or wherever for a day or two. Also, at the end of the trip, you just want to get back home ASAP.

I'd hate to be seated in one of those 32" rows and trying to actually work, especially given the duration. The extra pitch makes all the difference when the person in front reclines.

 

[mjt57]

but if you're travelling for work your employer is unlikely to pay for you to stop over in LA

That's true. But would the business travellers be stuck in economy or further forward where they can at least lie down?

Anyway, I'm refering to those of us who have to pay their own way and, again, for most of us, economy is what we can afford.

 

[Daver6]

I'd hate to be seated in one of those 32" rows and trying to actually work, especially given the duration. The extra pitch makes all the difference when the person in front reclines.

I didn't mean working during the flight. I meant a trip where you work at your destination.

 

[Melburnian1]

Although I've flown the polar route ex-TYO, it didn't even occur to me that they would fly the polar route out of SYD for the "uphill" leg.

After looking at the map, it does make sense, particularly when the Jetstream is strong.

It will be interesting to track a few of these on FR24 when they kick off, to see how it compares to more traditional routings.

For in flight tech/medical issues etc, there's not a lot of diversion options along the route by the looks of it. After they pass Japan, there's Anchorage, Alaska and not much after that.

Travelling northwest (i.e. SYD to LHR) against the prevailing winds, is the likelihood minimal, possible but fairly rare or often of these PS flights having to divert to an en route airport?

For QF9 as it was PER-LHR "express", it has rarely diverted but that's a shorter route.

 

[lovestotravel]

It’s 32-34 according to what I read (only 30% will have 32).

Even still, is 21 hours in 32 any worse than 9 + 14 hours in same?

I'd say 21 in 32 is worse than having a break to walk around for a bit and a proper toilet etc.

 

[dajop]

I'd say 21 in 32 is worse than having a break to walk around for a bit and a proper toilet etc.

I've long since concluded that aisle seats make all of the difference. I can't imagine doing 21 hrs in window or middle seat, aisle seat I'm fine with.

 

[Quickstatus]

How about the kitchen catches fire and Qantas will be losing its perfect safety record.

I doubt that Neil Perry would have airline menus that involves a Wok burner.

20 hours in 32 inches - LOL

Could be 22

Is an example of something only slightly more ridiculous than what I was replying to.

Still, what is the reality of QFi out of ADL?

Given how zealous the crew are with locking the windows on the Dreamliner you’ll be lucky to see one…

Not necessarily. It won't be completely lights out for the entire flight.

Greenland and northern Canada?

A polar route could mean the aircraft goes north of greenland depending on the prevailing winds

Once past Alaska, there are no suitable airports apart from:
Nuuk (GOH), Ilulissat (JAV) both on the south western Greenland.
Pituffik/Thule (THU) but that is a military base, but runway is long
Keflavik (KEF) Iceland
Maybe Svalbard LYR Norway - Svalbard islands

The only northern Canada runway capable is Iqaluit (YFB) north east of Hudson bay, where Boeing and Airbus go to for cold weather testing.
Perhaps Yellowknife (YZF) as well

According to gcmaps, Using boeing 777 single engine out speed, there should be no issues with a 120 minutes Etops or Edto
Dark area is Etops or Edto no go zone.
Dont know if accurate or not.

Also ,The Mercator projection maps we commonly use exaggerates the distance at the higher latitudes.

 

[WilsonM]

I'd say 21 in 32 is worse than having a break to walk around for a bit and a proper toilet etc.

Ah, but don't forget the amazing new incredibly useful Wellbeing Zone!!! Truly the lifesaver of a 21 hour flight in Y....... /s

I do think it's better than nothing, but not a gamechanger.

That being said, I've asked some friends whether they'd fly PS, and many said they're happy to pay to get to the destination as quickly as possible. Bear in mind they're all in their 20s, so perhaps can tolerate Y for longer. Personally, I wouldn't have an issue flying in Y either

 

[chitown_boy]

The 32” has piqued OMAAT’s interest: Qantas Takes Away Legroom On World's Longest Flight, Going Back On Promise

“…as someone who has been covering the industry for close to two decades, what stands out to me most about Qantas is the never ending hype…But I just can't think of another airline that so consistently overhypes what it's going to do.
We're talking announcing things so many years in advance, and also, often not actually following through on promises.”
A case of shallow brooks are noisy?

“My issues with the airline is that I think the onboard product is just whatever (aside from the friendly crews), and I don’t love all the ways the airline has tried to screw its workforce over the years.”

 

[dajop]

For in flight tech/medical issues etc, there's not a lot of diversion options along the route by the looks of it. After they pass Japan, there's Anchorage, Alaska and not much after that.

I'm no expert, but looking at this Great Circle Mapper map, overlaid with ETOPS120, QF is no stranger to routes with "not much" for diversion. The polar route is not so bad by comparison, to say SCL or JNB routes. BA and JL both use this path currently to travel Tokyo-London, for one example.

 

[levelnine]

“…as someone who has been covering the industry for close to two decades, what stands out to me most about Qantas is the never ending hype…But I just can't think of another airline that so consistently overhypes what it's going to do.
We're talking announcing things so many years in advance, and also, often not actually following through on promises.”

A telling comment from someone who writes about dozens and dozens of airlines.

Ben earlier says 'Qantas management’s ability to overpromise and underdeliver never ceases to amaze me, and I don’t think the airline gets enough criticism for it.'

Some on this forum call this pattern out. Others think the airline can do no wrong.