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

[justinbrett]

When I said "lots of flights" I mean lots of flights from within the US that could connect to daytime westbound departures, so it's not as if there's no feed to mid-late morning departures. Certainly easy from the midwest and Texas (as well as the west coast and rockies). There are even east coast flights that reach LAX and SFO before 10am . (eg. MIA, IAD, PHL, JFK).

But you're right about the arriving for new work day thing, which certainly is the predominant paradigm (which is exactly what I'm suggesting, as to why Sunrise 5am arrival will work). Personally though in my peer circle I'm noticing a transition to day time type flights that allow you to reach a hotel and be in better condition for the day ahead, especially as internet connectivity onboard aircraft improves and allows a full days work in the sky.

That's not the point though, LAX/SFO are the primary ports for Australian flights, if you can't do a same day connection in CA you don't have many other options.

The late evening departure, and early morning arrival, means you can practically connect to/from anywhere in the US same day.

"Lots" isn't good enough, we're looking for "all", or at least "most". It's not the trunk routes that matter - it's all those once a day American Eagle connections that need to be considered.

 

[leesionn]

3rd(?) A35K (MSN 846) was spotted June 10 with Qantas tail colours per this website

 

[mviy]

Evening arrivals could work for Sunrise if there are multiple arrivals for the same city pair or QF actually does MEL flights so domestic connections are less necessary. Though having to take a short domestic flight to connect to a Sunrise flight defeats the purpose of paying a premium for direct non-stop in the first place.

 

[Quickstatus]

it's all those once a day American Eagle connections that need to be considered.

Waiting for QF to fly seasonal non stop to SLC/DEN/MIA

 

[RooFlyer]

True. But then why oh why PS?

If you’re flying to Europe it’s a downgrade from a350 to Eurobusiness. When you could be flying non-stop from Hong Kong or Tokyo to your final destination.

Which brings us back to the situation that PS is ideal for a relatively limited number of people, plus QF diehards. If you want to arrive in London at sparrows (or will fly Qantas no matter what) - great! Anywhere else, stopover in Asia or ME and then fly on direct to your final destination, be it Birmingham or Brussels. You'll could be there quicker than via a PS flight and fly on Euro J to final destination.

But then, I'm def not the target market for PS, doing as I do, going to Europe in a stately fashion - a stop overnight in Asia, then a stop overnight in ME/Istanbul (or maybe several nights with QR's v cheap stopover Doha deal) and then onwards. All part of the holiday and all daytime flights with jetlag mostly solved by the time I reach Europe. Coming back often only one stop, as I care less how I feel on return.

 

[Quickstatus]

Can't go wrong either with a certain SQ 2 sector SYD-LHR and return where the ground time in SIN is only 50 minutes.
IIRC it is only 23hrs there and 21 hrs back (roughly)

But these days I prefer a stopover.

 

[dajop]

"Lots" isn't good enough, we're looking for "all", or at least "most". It's not the trunk routes that matter - it's all those once a day American Eagle connections that need to be considered.

I'm not necessarily talking about QF, just in general. There are plenty of morning American Eagle connections at LAX as well, probably 60% do have morning arrivals, also DFW is probably the main hub for Eagle->QF connections.

The airlines seem to make it work for Asia connections, but I guess there's probably more diaspora for point to point traffic or west coast - Asia hub - onwards traffic.

Anyway, I still think the over-riding factor is market preference for the early arrival time for hitting the ground running more than anything else, and in the context of Sunrise, SYD-LHR will flourish or die on the back of point to point traffic.

 

[justinbrett]

I'm not necessarily talking about QF, just in general. There are plenty of morning American Eagle connections at LAX as well, probably 60% do have morning arrivals, also DFW is probably the main hub for Eagle->QF connections.

The airlines seem to make it work for Asia connections, but I guess there's probably more diaspora for point to point traffic or west coast - Asia hub - onwards traffic.

Anyway, I still think the over-riding factor is market preference for the early arrival time for hitting the ground running more than anything else, and in the context of Sunrise, SYD-LHR will flourish or die on the back of point to point traffic.

I think you're being very selective.

The first AA arrival from LAS into LAX is 1124.

 

[AuSammy]

Which brings us back to the situation that PS is ideal for a relatively limited number of people, plus QF diehards. If you want to arrive in London at sparrows (or will fly Qantas no matter what) - great! Anywhere else, stopover in Asia or ME and then fly on direct to your final destination, be it Birmingham or Brussels. You'll could be there quicker than via a PS flight and fly on Euro J to final destination.

But then, I'm def not the target market for PS, doing as I do, going to Europe in a stately fashion - a stop overnight in Asia, then a stop overnight in ME/Istanbul (or maybe several nights with QR's v cheap stopover Doha deal) and then onwards. All part of the holiday and all daytime flights with jetlag mostly solved by the time I reach Europe. Coming back often only one stop, as I care less how I feel on return.

It pays to think outside the box and remember there is a wide range of preferences attitudes and circumstances across the population.

I’m not one of them but there are many who refuse to land in a ME airport or travel on a ME airline for their own reasons.

There are also those who refuse to land in a Chinese airport or travel on a Chinese carrier (Taiwan excepted) reducing options that they may be comfortable to choose.

That largely leaves them with SIN with lots of flights and options or perhaps BKK or KUL (with significantly less options / frequency) travelling via PER or PS that lets them skip those places they do not want to land.

There are also people that may have passport issues that leave them uncomfortable or unable to or unwilling to apply and pay for a visa to have a scheduled transit (Jakarta?) stop in some places.

My own circumstance is I despise interrupted journeys and going through the whole deplaning, security screening, queuing etc at a transit point. I want to get on the plane store my luggage get comfortable in my seat/bed and be taken to my destination.

 

[anat0l]

I suppose the real litmus test is whether QF will find there is a market for people willing to travel with no stopover between Australia and the destination. Moreso for those in Y. And for a premium.

Irrespective if anyone here thinks they would fly such a flight (in any class), it's hard to deny it's an interesting idea (or gamble). It'd be equally interesting to see what happens if the whole project fails to deliver.

 

[Layslow]

Qantas used to have a day flight out of LAX to SYD that left around 12.30pm and got into Sydney around 7 or 8pm, that was the pick of the bunch. I am not sure (apart from landing slot issues) why they don't spread their departures out a bit to give their customers a bit of choice of a late (evening) flight or an even later one... Apologies a bit off topic

 

[AuSammy]

I suppose the real litmus test is whether QF will find there is a market for people willing to travel with no stopover between Australia and the destination. Moreso for those in Y. And for a premium.

Irrespective if anyone here thinks they would fly such a flight (in any class), it's hard to deny it's an interesting idea (or gamble). It'd be equally interesting to see what happens if the whole project fails to deliver.

From many sources, allegedly they already have PER -> EU flights have higher occupancy and higher revenue than their other transit stop flights
(Ignoring the unusual situation with ME war that is driving higher occupancy on most non-ME carriers )

 

[mviy]

I suppose the real litmus test is whether QF will find there is a market for people willing to travel with no stopover between Australia and the destination. Moreso for those in Y. And for a premium.

Irrespective if anyone here thinks they would fly such a flight (in any class), it's hard to deny it's an interesting idea (or gamble). It'd be equally interesting to see what happens if the whole project fails to deliver.

If the whole project fails they’d possibly rip out the extra fuel tank if possible and refit the aircraft with a normal load of seats and use it for routes that could be flown by aircraft QF already has.

 

[TheRealTMA]

Which brings us back to the situation that PS is ideal for a relatively limited number of people, plus QF diehards. If you want to arrive in London at sparrows (or will fly Qantas no matter what) - great! Anywhere else, stopover in Asia or ME and then fly on direct to your final destination, be it Birmingham or Brussels. You'll could be there quicker than via a PS flight and fly on Euro J to final destination.

But then, I'm def not the target market for PS, doing as I do, going to Europe in a stately fashion - a stop overnight in Asia, then a stop overnight in ME/Istanbul (or maybe several nights with QR's v cheap stopover Doha deal) and then onwards. All part of the holiday and all daytime flights with jetlag mostly solved by the time I reach Europe. Coming back often only one stop, as I care less how I feel on return.

PS will be a failure. 22 hrs at a 20% premium. Na.

Particularly given the current quality and service by QF.

 

[dajop]

I think you're being very selective.

The first AA arrival from LAS into LAX is 1124.

Yeh, OK you've got me. Yes, 'm being somewhat selective, I could only find 14 AA arrivals before 9am , and another 5 between 9 and 10., and probably a few more AS flights to boot. And not every ticket is issued with AA connectors. I've travelled a plenty on mix and match interlines bookings such as SQ/AA, QF/UA .

 

[RooFlyer]

I’m not one of them but there are many who refuse to land in a ME airport or travel on a ME airline for their own reasons.

There are also those who refuse to land in a Chinese airport or travel on a Chinese carrier (Taiwan excepted) reducing options that they may be comfortable to choose.

That largely leaves them with SIN with lots of flights and options or perhaps BKK or KUL (with significantly less options / frequency) travelling via PER or PS that lets them skip those places they do not want to land.

There are also people that may have passport issues that leave them uncomfortable or unable to or unwilling to apply and pay for a visa to have a scheduled transit (Jakarta?) stop in some places.

Sure - totally agree. But wondering how they have travelled to Europe up to now and and then to the point when PS starts? Even PER means a stop for everyone outside Perth and a possible B737 transcontinental.

My own major dislike and point of avoidance is UK airports. I’ve landed and flown out of LHR, MAN and EDI so many times as to be scarred for life. And that was mostly before the extra extraordinarily high departure taxes..

Speaking of which, I wonder if the Brits will come up with a special ULH category for their departure tax?

 

[AuSammy]

PS will be a failure. 22 hrs at a 20% premium. Na.

I think people were aghast and naysayers at non-stop AU to the US at one stage and IIRC many on AFF said PER-LHR would never succeed - yet here we are.

 

[TheRealTMA]

I think people were aghast and naysayers at non-stop AU to the US at one stage and IIRC many on AFF said PER-LHR would never succeed - yet here we are.

IMHO. Majority of Australians are price value driven, not by flight times.

 

[AuSammy]

IMHO. Majority of Australians are price value driven, not by flight times.

From the configuration and pricing of PER-LHR QF are already extracting a 20% improvement in margin and the recent statement from the CEO Intimated she wanted to match that, not add an additional 20% on top of that.

 

[SYD]

IMHO. Majority of Australians are price value driven, not by flight times.

A majority of Australians fly to Bali, Japan and NZ.

But many of us also fly to the UK (some more regularly than others) and a lot of those are on top $. NYC similarly. There’ll be peeps (corporate) paying shedloads for these flights.

I suspect there’ll be opportunities to bag affordable fares down the back - for those happy with 33-34” pitch (or 32” without status!).