Singapore-Cairns flights to resume

[Fruitcake]

I spotted this on the AAP wires - I'd normally look for something more prestigious than ninemsn to link to but it's the only web-accessible story I can see at present:
Singapore-Cairns flights to resume

Direct flights from Singapore to Cairns are set to resume after a six-year hiatus.
AAP understands an announcement will be made at the state government's Destination Q conference in the far north Queensland city next week.

The last direct flight from Singapore to Cairns was operated by the Qantas-owned Australian Airlines in June 2006.

Jetstar would operate the new flight.​

Fantastic news for FNQ, especially on the heels of CZ apparently heading in CNS later this year:
http://www.aviationbusiness.com.au/news/cairns-to-get-china-southern

 

[anat0l]

Fantastic news for FNQ...[/URL]

It's only fantastic if you will fly JQ, though. Perhaps the tourism is one thing for the el cheapo travel....

Besides, 'direct' doesn't mean non-stop; it could be JQ doing CNS-DRW-SIN on one flight number (big deal...)

I suppose in raw terms from the government's point of view, a connection is a connection is a connection.

 

[dajop]

Will be interesting to see what comes of this. Maybe Scoot has CNS in their sights?

But i did notice in the quote and in the linked article much discussion of "Direct" flights. In airline speak, direct doesn't necessarily mean "non-stop" it just means a single flight number (usually a single aircraft). Until about 12-18 months ago there were "direct" services to Singapore from CNS via DRW on Jetstar. Same plane, same flight number, but stop in Darwin. Wonder if the flights will be direct and non-stop or direct with a stop?

 

[docjames]

Nonstop or via DRW? (Edit: dajop beat me to it, including Scoot ponderings).

Wonder how/if this relates to the replacement of QF SYD-CNS-SYD flights (timed for connections perhaps?).

 

[markis10]

It's only fantastic if you will fly JQ, though. Perhaps the tourism is one thing for the el cheapo travel....

Besides, 'direct' doesn't mean non-stop; it could be JQ doing CNS-DRW-SIN on one flight number (big deal...)

I suppose in raw terms from the government's point of view, a connection is a connection is a connection.

Considering JQ already offer CNS SIN via DRW on one flight number I think it does mean non stop

http://www.flightradar24.com/2012-06-16/21:04/JST58

 

[Fruitcake]

It's only fantastic if you will fly JQ, though. Perhaps the tourism is one thing for the el cheapo travel....

Besides, 'direct' doesn't mean non-stop; it could be JQ doing CNS-DRW-SIN on one flight number (big deal...)

I suppose in raw terms from the government's point of view, a connection is a connection is a connection.

I realised in aviation parlance that direct <> non-stop, although in the context of the popular press it usually does. I also doubt that the government would go to the effort of setting up negotations and then leaking a story about a flight number being changed. The Newman government isn't yet as desperate for good press as the previous government was.

There's certainly plenty of people who won't touch JQ (and I'm one of them, domestically - have never had to the make the choice for international flying yet) - but regardless of whether you or I will or won't, they still manage to bring in a few flights from Japan most days so someone must be willing to. FNQ tourism operators at the moment don't really have the luxury of trying to target specific types of pax so anyone is better than no-one.

 

[eastwest101]

I spotted this on the AAP wires - I'd normally look for something more prestigious than ninemsn to link to but it's the only web-accessible story I can see at present:

Fantastic news for FNQ, especially on the heels of CZ apparently heading in CNS later this year:

Obviously not confirmed yet - but if it happens it is an interesting response to CZ China Southern entering the CNS market. Trying to guess what the product would be - maybe JQ or 3K A320 aircraft - if so could be a bit yuck being that long in an A320 with 30" seat pitch.

Would also be an obvious fit with a possible increase in JQ presence in CNS and less QFd - although they may just gradually decrease QFd (QFi already gone from CNS) and increase JQ/3K services.

 

[dajop]

Considering JQ already offer CNS SIN via DRW on one flight number I think it does mean non stop

Flightradar24.com - Live Flight Tracker!

This is odd. Look at JQ timetable, or EF they only sell JQ62 SIN-DRW connecting to JQ58 DRW-CNS. Whilst Changi airport website shows JQ62 all the way through to CNS (but JQ or EF don't) and flightradar shows the flight as JQ58 all the way from SIN!

 

[Fruitcake]

This is odd. Look at JQ timetable, or EF they only sell JQ62 SIN-DRW connecting to JQ58 DRW-CNS. Whilst Changi airport website shows JQ62 all the way through to CNS (but JQ or EF don't) and flightradar shows the flight as JQ58 all the way from SIN!

I noticed that too - before I posted I wanted to check if the existing service was connecting or direct - and I found it to be "connecting" when I did a dummy booking. Yet some other references showed the current setup as one flight number. Hence why I decided this announcement must be about a non-stop service.

Unless they are willing to limit loads, I think it would have to be with the A330 - apparently London-Tehran (2749 miles) is one of the longest scheduled A320 routes operated, CNS-SIN would be 13% longer (3112 miles). Although I think QF used a 737-800 on CNS-SIN non-stop occasionally - must have been load limited though.

 

[eastwest101]

Unless they are willing to limit loads, I think it would have to be with the A330 - apparently London-Tehran (2749 miles) is one of the longest scheduled A320 routes operated, CNS-SIN would be 13% longer (3112 miles). Although I think QF used a 737-800 on CNS-SIN non-stop occasionally - must have been load limited though.

Logistically I can see your point here - its a bit of a stretch for an A320. But do JQ/3K have the spare capacity and A330's (presumably SG based) in their fleet to be expanding?

 

[Fruitcake]

Logistically I can see your point here - its a bit of a stretch for an A320. But do JQ/3K have the spare capacity and A330's (presumably SG based) in their fleet to be expanding?

Good thought - unless there's some sort of "disturbance in the force" around the JQ 787 / JQ A330 / QF A330 / QF 787 shuffle you're probably right.

After all I think most of DJ's DPS flights are load limited and they seem to manage to make money, maybe JQ can generate enough yield to make a load-limited CNS-SIN work.

 

[smit0847]

Logistically I can see your point here - its a bit of a stretch for an A320. But do JQ/3K have the spare capacity and A330's (presumably SG based) in their fleet to be expanding?

If DJ can do PER-HKT and PER-BNE with a 737, why is CNS-SIN a stretch for an A320?

 

[anat0l]

If DJ can do PER-HKT and PER-BNE with a 737, why is CNS-SIN a stretch for an A320?

CNS-SIN is 200 mi GCM greater than PER-HKT (and PER-BNE doesn't even come close to these)... but that doesn't take into account any other factors like head/tail winds.

 

[Fruitcake]

If DJ can do PER-HKT and PER-BNE with a 737, why is CNS-SIN a stretch for an A320?

Good point. PER-BNE is far shorter, so that's not the most relevant comparison, but for PER-HKT - the range is indeed extremely similar - CNS-SIN is only 120 miles further than PER-HKT.

Great Circle Mapper

However, I'll hazard a guess that prevailing winds are a much bigger challenge for CNS-SIN than PER-HKT. So useful load might be restricted even further. And the 737-800 is better at longer ranges than A320.

 

[markis10]

Good point. PER-BNE is far shorter, so that's not the most relevant comparison, but for PER-HKT - the range is indeed extremely similar - CNS-SIN is only 120 miles further than PER-HKT.

Great Circle Mapper

However, I'll hazard a guess that prevailing winds are a much bigger challenge for CNS-SIN than PER-HKT. So useful load might be restricted even further. And the 737-800 is better at longer ranges than A320.

The 738 cannot compete with an A321 which will do 3200nm full load (more pax) which is the likely scenario in this case.

 

[Fruitcake]

The 738 cannot compete with an A321 which will do 3200nm full load (more pax) which is the likely scenario in this case.

I had naively assumed the A321 would have less range than the A320. Having looked up the specs, I agree, the A321 would do the job. Hardly a fun trip sitting in an A321 for that long but you get what you pay for with JQ.

 

[markis10]

I had naively assumed the A321 would have less range than the A320. Having looked up the specs, I agree, the A321 would do the job. Hardly a fun trip sitting in an A321 for that long but you get what you pay for with JQ.

Could be exactly what the route needs, 20 percent more capacity than an A320 with a direct flight but less than a twin aisle which has proven hard to turn a profit in the past. Sure, not fun, but who said flying JQ was fun, unless you have been greased up in a F lounge prior.

 

[k_sheep]

I think it's good news if it actually happens with reasonable timings (no stupid o'clock departures please!). Sure beats going via SYD from BNE.

 

[kevrosmith]

MU also getting in on the act as reported by The Australian yesterday.

The Australian - China airline eyes Cairns flights

 

[Standby]

MU also getting in on the act as reported by The Australian yesterday.

The Australian - China airline eyes Cairns flights

I saw that JQs 3k SINAKL was being replaced with JQ AU based aircraft which throws up another option for the SIN based aircraft
JetStar Replaces JetStar Asia on Singapore – Auckland Flight from July 2012 | Airline Route