Spare A380 from MEL-LHR retiming

[Isochronous]

Current A380 flight times (QF timetable for this Thurs/Fri - all times in UTC)
QF1
SYD 0550
DXB 2035
DXB 2215
LHR 0545+1

QF2
LHR 2025
DXB 0320+1
DXB 0520
SYD 0510+1

QF9
MEL 0515
DXB 1925
DXB 2110
LHR 0440

QF10
LHR 2125
DXB 0420+1
DXB 0605
MEL 0525+1

QF11
SYD 0305
LAX 1635

QF12
LAX 0505
SYD 2010

QF93
MEL 2310
LAX 1325+1

QF94
LAX 0630
MEL 2220

QF127
SYD 2345
HKG 0920+1

QF128
HKG 1205
SYD 2120

Those QF 127/128 times are wrong.

 

[Himeno]

Those QF 127/128 times are wrong.

No they're not. Times are in UTC. 17 - 8 = 9

 

[suparockin]

SYD - NRT as others have said would make a lot of sense, which means it would never happen...

 

[JohnPhelan]

Part of me wants BNE-LAX so that we see QF's flagship bird using BNE instead of/as well as EK's. Another part wants PER-DXB so that QF can show WA they haven't completely given up on them. I've always wondered why they don't sell F to Japan as I would have thought there was a market for that, so SYD-NRT is also an option.

Somehow, I reckon they'll just let it sit on the ground though... sigh!

It certainly won't be sitting on the ground - the whole reason they're rejigging the MEL-LHR timing is to free up an aircraft! They won't use it for DFW or any other daily long-haul run, because you need more than than one airframe to keep consistency. So I'd say either use it to make the 127/128 a daily A380, or perhaps a 3 times weekly service to SFO ?

 

[ermen]

I second SYD - NRT. Its also one of the routes that is profitable...

Otherwise, they should fly A380 onwards to Europe? LHR or CDG perhaps? 24 hours there and 24 hours back... So dedicate 2 x A380 for this route...

i believe QF has 5th freedom rights ex HKG to LHR too...

 

[Isochronous]

It certainly won't be sitting on the ground - the whole reason they're rejigging the MEL-LHR timing is to free up an aircraft! They won't use it for DFW or any other daily long-haul run, because you need more than than one airframe to keep consistency. So I'd say either use it to make the 127/128 a daily A380, or perhaps a 3 times weekly service to SFO ?

Would SFO 3x weekly be an acceptable frequency to make money on it though?

I second SYD - NRT. Its also one of the routes that is profitable...

Otherwise, they should fly A380 onwards to Europe? LHR or CDG perhaps? 24 hours there and 24 hours back... So dedicate 2 x A380 for this route...

i believe QF has 5th freedom rights ex HKG to LHR too...

Saturated with 5x CX, 2x BA, and 1x VS daily.

 

[dajop]

Would SFO 3x weekly be an acceptable frequency to make money on it though?
.

Isn't the trouble with SFO, the lack of partner flights feeding to/from the service? PHX would be a better option in this regard, but as about much chance of a QF A380 serving SFO or PHX as there is of one serving ADL.

 

[Mattg]

So I'd say either use it to make the 127/128 a daily A380, or perhaps a 3 times weekly service to SFO ?

What about 3x weekly SYD-YVR?

 

[Isochronous]

What about 3x weekly SYD-YVR?

That I would like. Hopefully it succeeds so much that they take delivery of the final few A380s to make it daily!

 

[markis10]

YVR, SFO, why are folks so infatuated with routes that have not worked for QF?

 

[codash1099]

YVR, SFO, why are folks so infatuated with routes that have not worked for QF?

I don't know whether they would work or not, but it seems to me that if QF simply plan on the "tried that before and it didn't work" principle, they will quickly run out of things to do. Times, economics and people change.

 

[Isochronous]

I don't know whether they would work or not, but it seems to me that if QF simply plan on the "tried that before and it didn't work" principle, they will quickly run out of things to do. Times, economics and people change.

CX is doing MAN 4x weekly and about to announce Zurich daily even though they did both previously.

 

[markis10]

CX is doing MAN 4x weekly and about to announce Zurich daily even though they did both previously.

And is the equipment they are using different to previous equipment, as in bigger capacity? The answer is no, they are using more efficient aircraft to reopen past routes, specifically the 77W to replace the A340/744s previously used. Old routes are always worth another look, just not with bigger aircraft!

 

[Mattg]

And is the equipment they are using different to previous equipment, as in bigger capacity? The answer is no, they are using more efficient aircraft to reopen past routes, specifically the 77W to replace the A340/744s previously used. Old routes are always worth another look, just not with bigger aircraft!

If the A380 is too big for SFO/YVR, they could always put the A380 on another route (e.g. BNE-LAX or DFW) in order to free up a 747 for the route.


For the record, I don't think SFO was a massive loss-maker, rather they canned the route so they could open the DFW route, which was strategically a better destination as it is AA's hub. Here's a quote from an Ausbt article from the time:

"It's pretty much just a commercial decision to provide us with better and more direct access to the American Airlines network in the US, which means Dallas/Fort Worth as their major hub airport, so it makes a lot of sense for us to fly there direct."
Woodward admitted that the popular direct Sydney-San Francisco service "has not been a failure from a route perspective, but from a strategic growth perspective for Qantas, DFW is the better plan for the future."

Qantas axes direct Sydney-San Francisco flights - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller

 

[markis10]

If the A380 is too big for SFO/YVR, they could always put the A380 on another route (e.g. BNE-LAX or DFW) in order to free up a 747 for the route.

That makes sense, agree SFO could be a go again with a 744 although UA might offer stiffer competition these days.

 

[Himeno]

QF currently has 1 spare - generally for maintenance, and another on days it isn't used for QF127/128 (There is no reason aircraft wise that 127/128 can't be A380 daily. That 11th A380 appears to be just sitting in SYD for the other 3 days/week).

If any new route is outside Asia, it won't be daily. The only stated reason QF doesn't fly to CDG is they want daily flights and the Australia-France air services agreement won't allow it. QF seems to like having daily flights where ever possible.

What is the SYD/HKG 747 doing when 127/128 is an A380?

 

[kempvet]

For the record, I don't think SFO was a massive loss-maker, rather they canned the route so they could open the DFW route, which was strategically a better destination as it is AA's hub.

This was also my thinking at the time and QF made several announcements at the time about seamlessly entering the US domestic AA network.

 

[Awesom Andy]

I guess they would make SYD-HKG a daily 388 first, but then it still leaves 5 days when the aircraft can go somewhere. I suppose it could replace a 747 to the US, but they they would still be parking it at LAX for half a day anyway.

 

[docjames]

That makes sense, agree SFO could be a go again with a 744 although UA might offer stiffer competition these days.

But presumably with less seats now that UA are going to be using a 777 instead of the 744.


SFO would have been an ideal route for the 787 (in QF colours) - amongst a number of other destinations.

Was the issue with CDG limited flights per day, or was it total seats per week which with a 744 worked out at less than daily. In which case a 787 would work nicely perhaps?

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

I join the many who have already suggested that the about-to-be-freed-up Qantas A380 should go on a new destination altogether other than LAX/HKG/DXB/LHR.

It would be great to get the A380 out to a new destination & really drive QF's Brand Awareness.

BA are being really creative IMHO with the announcement of their A380 & Dreamliner routes by choosing many destinations that are not exactly all of the key, big trunk routes for Them.

For example, BA have announced JNB as a destination for the A380 & YYC as a Route the Dreamliner will operate on. Both destinations are good routes for BA, but not exactly their key flagship routes.
In other words, BA are being bold with the destinations of their new aircraft type & at the same time gaining brand awareness in destinations that BA were previous lacklustre at achieving brand awareness.

My money is that the freed-up A380 will likely fly to a US destination, most likely LAX, but if Qantas chose to be bold & go for a new destination to put the A380 on , it will undoubtedly show that it's keen to get its mojo back.