Qantas to Launch SYD-AKL-JFK (June 2023)

Can't wait for project sunrise to kick in.
I suppose the question I would have is how much time saving are we looking at here? If we use the current longest route, SIN > JFK as an example we see that the nonstop flight with SQ clocks in at close to 18 hours:
Screenshot 2023-10-13 at 02.13.23.png
Given SYD > JFK is slightly longer (9,950 mi for SYD vs 9,537 mi for SIN) would it not be reasonable to assume it will take close to 19 hours? So what you save maybe a couple hours versus having to connect at AKL as the current workaround QF has. And some would argue that it's not that bad getting to spend a couple hours at LAX or DFW having been on a plane for so darn long. I cannot comment for other members on this forum, but is a real treat to walk off my SYD > DFW flight earlier this week into the warm embrace of the AA Flagship lounge where I could get a shower and have a lunch of champions:

Screenshot 2023-10-13 at 02.16.07.png

Another thing to keep in mind (and I'm unsure how QF will handle this when project Sunset comes to New York) is how the cabin is configured. It is my understanding that the current SYD to JFK service (via AKL) is a several class configuration consisting of Economy, Premium Economy and Business. Now I don't know about you but the prospect of sitting in the middle seat of a cramped plane for so long without so much as a noticeable layover to break up the journey doesn't sound too tempting. Contrast this with SQ which (sensibly) made the decision to only offer PY and J service on the plane. This not only allowed them to reduce weight to make the journey possible but also resulted in a better experience. After all, no one complains when they are flying Premium cabin on most quality airlines even if the journey is a bit on the long side.

-RooFlyer88
 
I suppose the question I would have is how much time saving are we looking at here? If we use the current longest route, SIN > JFK as an example we see that the nonstop flight with SQ clocks in at close to 18 hours:
View attachment 349895
Given SYD > JFK is slightly longer (9,950 mi for SYD vs 9,537 mi for SIN) would it not be reasonable to assume it will take close to 19 hours? So what you save maybe a couple hours versus having to connect at AKL as the current workaround QF has. And some would argue that it's not that bad getting to spend a couple hours at LAX or DFW having been on a plane for so darn long. I cannot comment for other members on this forum, but is a real treat to walk off my SYD > DFW flight earlier this week into the warm embrace of the AA Flagship lounge where I could get a shower and have a lunch of champions:

View attachment 349897

Another thing to keep in mind (and I'm unsure how QF will handle this when project Sunset comes to New York) is how the cabin is configured. It is my understanding that the current SYD to JFK service (via AKL) is a several class configuration consisting of Economy, Premium Economy and Business. Now I don't know about you but the prospect of sitting in the middle seat of a cramped plane for so long without so much as a noticeable layover to break up the journey doesn't sound too tempting. Contrast this with SQ which (sensibly) made the decision to only offer PY and J service on the plane. This not only allowed them to reduce weight to make the journey possible but also resulted in a better experience. After all, no one complains when they are flying Premium cabin on most quality airlines even if the journey is a bit on the long side.

-RooFlyer88

Naaa, Sunrise QF3/QF4 will be much better than the current QF3/QF4. There is no point breaking the journey in two where one of the legs is a short 3h flight. Sure, if you want to discuss other routes, we can agree that breaking the travel in half, or maybe 1/3 2/3 is appealing. I like QF1/QF2 via SIN, I won't like sunrise QF1/QF2 in Y. But on QF3, having the hassle of a connection in AKL just after 3h of flight time doesn't sound appealing at all; similar reasoning can be applied on QF4.
 
But on QF3, having the hassle of a connection in AKL just after 3h of flight time doesn't sound appealing at all; similar reasoning can be applied on QF4.

Agree that Sunrise SYD-JFK sounds better than having a short + long sector. But I prefer short->long in preference to long->short (I prefer say SIN-HKG-SFO to SFO-HKG-SIN for that reason). SYD-AKL-JFK.JFK-DFW-SYD sounds like the best way to do it without sunrise IMHO.
 
No fifth freedom/domestic rights between HNL-JFK.

In addition, no BNE and MEL service to HNL, whereas you do to AKL, and thus support single stops from the three eastern seaboard cities. Even when it used to go via LAX (which is the same situation as HNL -regarding domestic traffic right LAX-JFK) they had MEL/BNE/SYD services all connecting to the LAX-JFK sector.
 
Why don't they route via HNL? That would make the segments more even and boost capacity to an important and popular destination
Not just that, everything becomes a lot simpler. You clear immigration at HNL, not a major international airport like LAX or DFW. Meaning for those not blessed with Global Entry, they won't be waiting in line for an hour. Second, it makes domestic connections simple. There are many flights to major US destinations on OneWorld and partner airlines including Seattle (AS), Phoenix (AA), Anchorage (AS) to name but a few. Third the weather is much nicer in Hawaii meaning you are less likely to encounter Wx. Fourth, the terminals are relatively small and easy to navigate.

Where I do see a potential issue and likely why QF chose AKL as the connection point is there is very little service to HNL. Contrast that to AKL where QF and its luxury brand, JétStar operates a number of nonstop flights daily to AKL not just from SYD but also BNE, MEL and even HBA if you can believe it (through QF's NZ subsidiary, Aer New Zealand).

I suppose the real question is what would the logistical challenges of running SYD > JFK (via HNL) look like? For instance, presumably they would want to arrive at a time where passengers could connect with partners to other US destinations. This would seem to suggest arriving in the afternoon Honolulu time since much of the traffic takes off around that time.

No fifth freedom/domestic rights between HNL-JFK.
Didn't QF run fifth freedom between LAX and JFK pre-pandemic? I would be surprised if the DoT would deny such a request from QF. Such a move would greatly expand capacity to a popular US destination whose economy relies on travel & tourism bucks. If the DoT is worried about QF competing on that domestic route, they could prohibit the sales of such tickets so that only people travelling to/from Australia can book those flights. However, it may very well be in the public's interest to permit QF to run HNL > JFK domestically as well since there is no OneWorld carrier offering non-stop service, with only three nonstop flights daily to the island.

-RooFlyer88
 
Didn't QF run fifth freedom between LAX and JFK pre-pandemic? I would be surprised if the DoT would deny such a request from QF. Such a move would greatly expand capacity to a popular US destination whose economy relies on travel & tourism bucks. If the DoT is worried about QF competing on that domestic route, they could prohibit the sales of such tickets so that only people travelling to/from Australia can book those flights. However, it may very well be in the public's interest to permit QF to run HNL > JFK domestically as well since there is no OneWorld carrier offering non-stop service, with only three nonstop flights daily to the island.

-RooFlyer88
QF had no fifth (or 8th) freedom rights between LAX and JFK, as only passengers originating/going onto Australia were permitted onto the flights. In addition, the only passengers permitted to fly JFK-LAX only is if the ticket-holder(s) had LAX booked as a stopover with a onward flight to Australia within the next 48 hours, iirc.

JFK-LAX on QF pre-Covid mildly worked due to QF operating LAX as a scissor hub with all flights from the East Coast arriving at the same time with the 'transfer' passengers from all 3 ports consolidated into the onward 787 from LAX to JFK and vice-versa from JFK with connections onward to Australia.
 
Sponsored Post

Struggling to use your Frequent Flyer Points?

Frequent Flyer Concierge takes the hard work out of finding award availability and redeeming your frequent flyer or credit card points for flights.

Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, the Frequent Flyer Concierge team at Frequent Flyer Concierge will help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

QF had no fifth (or 8th) freedom rights between LAX and JFK, as only passengers originating/going onto Australia were permitted onto the flights. In addition, the only passengers permitted to fly JFK-LAX only is if the ticket-holder(s) had LAX booked as a stopover with a onward flight to Australia within the next 48 hours, iirc.
Even if the predecessor to QF3 (i.e. SYD > JFK via LAX) could only transport people to/from Australia, one could argue that there still was a benefit with that routing over this new one. In particular, flying the return to SYD, one would not need to re-clear security at LAX since they were already cleared through TSA at JFK and at least for domestic to international flights in the US, there is a recognition that TSA security clearance at one point is valid somewhere else.

The other benefit I see, and perhaps this will change once QF refurbishes the AKL lounge, was that you had the luxury of enjoying not just the OneWorld LAX lounge (which I am told is leagues ahead of AKL) but also a number of other OneWorld operated lounges that were a mere walk away airside from the TBIT terminal like the AA Flagship lounge. And as pointed out before, since you already cleared security at JFK, there would be no need to worry about security again meaning you got to enjoy these lounges to the fullest. Now some will rightly point out that QF is refurbishing the AKL lounge but IMHO it will never hold a candle up to the likes of SIN or MEL for that matter for the simple reason being that space is limited in that lounge. Yes they can make the lounge a little nicer in terms of amenities but without doubling the size of the lounge I just can't see how it will compete with a QF SIN or LAX lounge. Perhaps QF will obtain the space of the Strata lounge across the lounge precinct from them (thereby solving this problem) but that would then mean that the Strata lounge would need to find its own space as that lounge is used not just for Priority Pass members but also a number of airlines that don't have a lounge at the airport like LA.
JFK-LAX on QF pre-Covid mildly worked due to QF operating LAX as a scissor hub with all flights from the East Coast arriving at the same time with the 'transfer' passengers from all 3 ports consolidated into the onward 787 from LAX to JFK and vice-versa from JFK with connections onward to Australia.
I can understand why QF would make LAX a major hub for them compared to say HNL or even SFO. In particular, LAX is arguably the busiest hub in North America that Qantas can fly its birds to. This serves people from a number of airports well since there are usually backup options should their flight to/from LAX go IRROP as there are alternates available to them not just from OneWorld partners but other airlines. So if your JFK > LAX flight gets cancelled for instance, well you can fly American or Alaskan but also Delta or United as they have operations out of the major New York airports like JFK and EWR.

-RooFlyer88
 
The other benefit I see, and perhaps this will change once QF refurbishes the AKL lounge, was that you had the luxury of enjoying not just the OneWorld LAX lounge (which I am told is leagues ahead of AKL) but also a number of other OneWorld operated lounges that were a mere walk away airside from the TBIT terminal like the AA Flagship lounge

As someone who did the old JFK-LAX-SYD multiple times not once on either the outbound or the return leg did I ever have sufficient time to visit a lounge in LAX unless stopping over (which I rarely do because well i hate Los Angeles).

Outbound because of the crazy long immigration queues in LAX, then the need to drop bag and re-clear security, you are lucky to have time to pee before boarding the second leg.

Return, being a late afternoon departure from JKF there were often thunderstorms delaying departure then upon landing at LAX only time to use the loo and a rush to new gate where the LAX-SYD leg was usually already boarding. The one time it left JFK on time, there was still only about 20 mins from arriving to boarding so not enough for a meal and shower.

LAX is arguably the busiest hub in North America that Qantas can fly its birds to

Disagree QF flies into DFW from SYD and MEL which is a much larger AA hub than LAX, and most QFFs will fly AA in US domestically if connecting.

DFW is the second busiest airport in the USA (LAX is only #5). IME clearing immigration and security at DFW has always been quicker for Aussies than at LAX who are ineligible for pre-clearance. Connections to mid west, east coast, mexico and central america all better out of DFW than LAX.

Once sunrise happens it will be fabulous to/from fly to JFK directly. But if they were to divert from the AKL stop-over in the mean time Id prefer DFW to LAX.
 
Last edited:
As someone who did the old JFK-LAX-SYD multiple times not once on either the outbound or the return leg did I ever have sufficient time to visit a lounge in LAX unless stopping over (which I rarely do because well i hate Los Angeles).

Because of the crazy long immigration queues in LAX, then the need to drop bag and re-clear security, you are lucky to have time to pee before boarding the second leg.

Being a late afternoon departure from JKF there were often thunderstorms delaying departure then upon landing at LAX only time to use the loo and a rush to new gate where the LAX-SYD leg was usually already boarding. The one time it left JFK on time, there was still only about 20 mins from arriving to boarding so not enough for a meal and shower.
I suppose the issue there is about the timing of such connecting flights, something which Qantas should have some control over.
Disagree QF flies into DFW from SYD and MEL which is a much larger AA hub than LAX, and most QFFs will fly AA in US domestically if connecting.
I will concede that DFW is the larger hub for AA, no doubt about that. Indeed, the only way I could get to PIT from SYD in one stop on OneWorld was flying QF to DFW then connecting onto AA's pit service. What I will point out here was that I had a 2.5 hour scheduled layover (which turned out being a 3.5 hour layover as the flight arrived an hour early). After clearing immigration (5 mins with GE), collecting my bag and clearing TSA pre-check it took me about an hour to reappear airside at DFW. At which time I enjoyed the AA Flagship lounge there.

But to your point about LAX not being a major hub for OW, whilst that was the case pre-COVID when SYD > LAX > JFK was operating, things have changed quite a bit. In particular, I draw your attention to Alaska Airlines joining OneWorld which does have a substantial presence out of LAX.
DFW is the second busiest airport in the USA (LAX is only #5). IME clearing immigration and security at DFW has always been quicker for Aussies than at LAX who are ineligible for pre-clearance. Connections to mid west, east coast, mexico and central america all better out of DFW than LAX.
For me, a Canadian who has Global Entry it makes no difference where I land. The process is always the same now: walk up to a Global Entry machine, it scans my face, then I walk up to the immigration counter and there is someone calling my name and they just let me through. There is no need to reach for a passport or answer any questions, it's that simple. What I will point out is that yes, the queues for people not fortunate to have this benefit are shorter at DFW than LAX and certainly JFK.

In terms of the busiest airport those figures can be misleading. I mean Atlanta is the busiest airport in the US but I've only flown through it once, and this is someone who flies frequently to the US. The airport is a nightmare to navigate, making even the maze known as Frankfurt seem simple. The other issue is that Atlanta is a Delta/SkyTeam hub which automatically excludes a large number of passengers (including myself) from consideration. I mean when I flew out of Canada for the US, Delta was never an option since it always involved a connection (remember Canada is Star Alliance country thanks to Aer Canada controlling the skies over there) and no lounge access. Yes other airlines do fly into Atlanta but it is predominantly a hub for Delta. A similar argument could be made for Dallas. Yes, Dallas may be the second largest hub, but it's simply because they are a hub for American Airlines. Well guess what? Times have changed! Alaska Airlines has joined OneWorld and so we must consider Alaska's route network in addition to American. LA is a major hub for Alaska. So the point I am trying to make is sure Atlanta or Dallas are larger in terms of flights, but in terms of diversity LAX will remain number one. No other airport in America has as many connection options to as many destinations as LAX since everyone flies in there. You got tons of Star Alliance, OneWorld and SkyTeam flights.

Realize two that LAX is in a unique situation here. LA is the second largest city in the United States. But despite this, they only have one airport: LAX. Now some will argue what about John Wayne (SNA) or Ontario (ONT) airports. Well those are tiny airports that serve short haul destinations. Contrast that with a city like New York (the largest city in the US might I add) where they have two major international airports: JFK and Newark, in addition to the smaller regional airport of LGA. Traffic is split off between these airports. United operates out of Newark whereas Delta and American operate out of JFK. Star Alliance is also split in that regard between EWR and JFK with some carriers operating flights out of both (i.e. SQ comes to mind).

Once sunrise happens it will be fabulous to/from fly to JFK directly. But if they were to divert from the AKL stop-over in the mean time Id prefer DFW to LAX.
The key question will be what that experience is like. Yes I understand that Qantas has spent considerable resources researching the impact of ultra long flights. But you could do all the research you want on an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you are stuck middle seat on a 19+ hour flight to JFK in Y you are not gonna be happy. Again, there is a reason why SQ wisely chose to only offer PY and J cabins:

Now sure, maybe for most of us who have the luxury of affording to pay for business be it by points or money and so it won't be a bad experience, but please realize not everyone will have that luxury. And the convenience of taking one flight instead of two will be trumped by the discomfort of being trapped in a narrow tube for 19 hours. Not good if you are claustrophobic if you ask me!

-RooFlyer88
 
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Not just that, everything becomes a lot simpler. You clear immigration at HNL, not a major international airport like LAX or DFW. Meaning for those not blessed with Global Entry, they won't be waiting in line for an hour. Second, it makes domestic connections simple. There are many flights to major US destinations on OneWorld and partner airlines including Seattle (AS), Phoenix (AA), Anchorage (AS) to name but a few. Third the weather is much nicer in Hawaii meaning you are less likely to encounter Wx. Fourth, the terminals are relatively small and easy to navigate.

Perhaps, though going through security there a couple of weeks ago was a bleeding nightmare and took the best part of 45 minutes. I've had better at LAX. Of course, that's date and time dependent no doubt, but still HNL is small, but also congested - specially at peak times (I was there late morning and the place was overflowing with flights to Japan, Mainland(of course) and other places).

That aside, and yes, CBP doubtless easier (though I won't recount my first entry into the US some 30 years ago which happened to be at HNL and it was a horrid process, but that was a whole other time and place - though I did have flashbacks going through the terminal there as not much seems to have changed).

The real issue is, apart from QF service, is that HNL is a leisure destination. Even if they could have rhe rights to fly HNL-JFK, or even do it as they once did via LAX with just throug pax - which probably wouldn't generate the demand due to lack of feed from other Oz cities). QF would not want to mix high leisure demand to HNL with leisure/business demand to JFK. The two don't really mix imo - and if QF didn't sell SYD-HNL(or even if it ran say MEL-HNL-JFK timed to connect with SYD-HNL) that would be ridiculous - but if they did, they would run the risk of sabotaging both demand to HNL *and* JFK.

AKL works better for this for all the reasons stated and HNL really probably wouldn't.

And besides, as we know, this is just a stop gap iil Project Sunrise so it doesn't really make much sense anyway - to me at least.
 
I'm on QF3/4 in a month's time - does anyone know at JFK if you can use the same AA/BA Premium check-in area (and premium security entrance) if you're in J or OWE (maybe OWS too?) Or does QF have its own counters?
 
I'm on QF3/4 in a month's time - does anyone know at JFK if you can use the same AA/BA Premium check-in area (and premium security entrance) if you're in J or OWE (maybe OWS too?) Or does QF have its own counters?
QF has its own counters - they are located to the far left-hand side of the terminal when you enter.

The BA/AA Premium Check-in will only accept the following pax:

This exclusive service is available for specific American Airlines passengers including those in Flagship First and Business, and Concierge Key members. For Flagship itineraries, AAdvantage Executive Platinum, AAdvantage Platinum Pro, and AAdvantage Platinum members are eligible. British Airways passengers flying First, Club World, and Executive Club Gold and Silver also have access to this facility.
The whole QF check-in experience at JFK, including Business/Priority lanes, is very underwhelming, and I say this as a P1 who has previously been given an escort through security (on my insistence).
 
I have curated some comments re this from this thread:





GE = global entry US customs
Appreciate it, I guess these are all about 8-10 months from when QF3/4 launched so was hoping to see if anyone had more recent experiences. Now that the route has had a chance to settle in.
 
Appreciate it, I guess these are all about 8-10 months from when QF3/4 launched so was hoping to see if anyone had more recent experiences. Now that the route has had a chance to settle in.
I’ve flown it a few times since and just about to do QF4 again.

I have GE so can’t comment on US Immigration at JFK. I also sometimes get an F host at AKL so that speeds things up but from my general understanding it’s not as much of a shambles as a transit experience as it was at the beginning of the route.
 

Enhance your AFF viewing experience!!

From just $6 we'll remove all advertisements so that you can enjoy a cleaner and uninterupted viewing experience.

And you'll be supporting us so that we can continue to provide this valuable resource :)


Sample AFF with no advertisements? More..
Back
Top