Qantas Sunrise special event tonight

[Quickstatus]

I wonder if the CoG was an issue with max fuel, no cargo and all pax in front of wing

 

[DC3]

I think 15.5 hours in EY F SYD-AUH is long enough in a premium cabin to get the general idea ...

Agree that F on the EY A380 is great. Hard to beat, even if it can’t fly for 20 hours non-stop.

 

[Quickstatus]

They said 50pax
I’m assuming that includes the 6 CC.
If so that means 2 were relegated to PE.

 

[HockeyMonkey]

They said 50pax
I’m assuming that includes the 6 CC.
If so that means 2 were relegated to PE.

I understand it was 40 pax and 10 pilots/cabin crew

 

[levelnine]

Unsurprisingly, the 'research' flight was anything but a proper research flight. Just a PR stunt to get some free media air time.

If the true purpose were to conduct research, people would have been sat in Y because AJ has repeatedly stated he wants Project Sunrise to have Y seats and the people sitting in Y will suffer far more than the people sitting in J.

 

[amaroo]

Just a PR stunt to get some free media air time.

<snip>

Branson would be proud of the effort and result

 

[DC3]

Unsurprisingly, the 'research' flight was anything but a proper research flight. Just a PR stunt to get some free media air time ...

Yes, some brilliant PR there.

 

[kpc]

Unsurprisingly, the 'research' flight was anything but a proper research flight. Just a PR stunt to get some free media air time.

If the true purpose were to conduct research, people would have been sat in Y because AJ has repeatedly stated he wants Project Sunrise to have Y seats and the people sitting in Y will suffer far more than the people sitting in J.

Agree 1000% !!!!

 

[Quickstatus]

Research compared to what?

 

[moa999]

I think the advantage of the ULH is simply that you get to control more of the flight. Anything over 8hrs is already long and boring anyway.

But as seen on this test, you can use a flight to effectively take the first jetlag hit, something that may not be so possible if it's interrupted by a 2-3hr stopover and associated security checks etc.
(Coming back from London, I preferred the Dubai stopover as you then had a lengthy second leg, whereas from Singapore it's too short. Going over it's the opposite)

And from a pax experience perspective the difference between the existing PER-LHR flight to these ones, won't be significant imho

 

[Quickstatus]

if this ever comes about, a 2000-2100 hr departure from JFK and 0600-0700 arrival into SYD would be ideal.
Current QF12 departure wastes an afternoon which may be an issue for J/premium pax.

 

[Melburnian1]

While QF7879 was a B789, jb747 posted a most interesting comment in the QF delays thread about how far the flight would have got to had it conveyed 200 not 40 passengers.

Hint: not Sydney.

We need technical advice but at first glance it is difficult to see the economics stacking up. Parameters such as having to carry extra fuel, diversion risks, extra catering that adds weight all mitigate against success, even with QF notoriously high fares.

 

[Guvner]

Seems like a solution without a problem. Who is screaming for this service other than shareholders and execs on bonuses?

 

[Austman]

I think 15.5 hours in EY F SYD-AUH is long enough in a premium cabin to get the general idea.

I thought it would be too.

But in reality it was completely different.

The additional 4 or more hours made it a very different flight experience. And not stopping somewhere, with all the cabin “disruption” ca 2 hours before and after as well as the stopover time itself only added to that difference.

 

[Captain Halliday]

I’m not sure everyone came off the test flight feeling like 25 million dollars.

AJ wore dark glasses all the way through the post flight media conference.

That’s a PR fail.

 

[muppet]

Seems like a solution without a problem. Who is screaming for this service other than shareholders and execs on bonuses?

Anyone who has missed their connection in Singapore or LAX for example.

Anyone just getting to sleep and being woken for cafe breakfast.

 

[rginoz]

I fly for leisure these days, so there is no incentive for me to endure these types of extra long flights, for the sake of a couple of hours time saving. I'd much prefer to break up a long journey with some stopovers, even if only a couple of hours transiting through somewhere such as Doha. A shower and a bit of walking around does wonders to refresh the body, but an overnight sleep in a proper bed is even better still.

Maybe business people want to get from A to B as quickly as possible, but they aren't going to fill the Y cabin on a JFK to SYD or LHR to SYD non-stop flight. I'm reminded of the time when the Concorde ceased flying. Did its former business travellers and others stop travelling, or did they simply go back to subsonic Boeings and Airbuses?

 

[Guvner]

Anyone just getting to sleep and being woken for cafe breakfast.

My bad. I’ve overlooked the obvious.

 

[Quickstatus]

We need technical advice but at first glance it is difficult to see the economics stacking up.

The787-9 was not configured/built for these missions. Hence a different aircraft is required - one which is still on the drawing board despite all the hype.
Sort of like VH-OJA when it did LHR-SYD. That was marketing hype as well but much more of a technical feat than ZNI
Remember that non carbon fibre 4 engine with 1989 technology OJA flew 400nm further (though it was flying with the prevailing winds) than ZNI. Total flight time for OJA was about 50minutes longer as well.

 

[Austman]

I'm reminded of the time when the Concorde ceased flying

It’s really not a great comparison. New York to London/Paris is a relatively short non-stop flight even In sub-sonic aircraft.

But it does demonstrate some of the issues of selling a premium only product, which Qantas is not proposing.