Why does the QF1/2 A380 sit in LHR all day?

[Quickstatus]

Emirates decided to take off after 2300.

Yes, Here but no answer to your question.
I know charges were laid but unknown outcome. Maybe it was settled out of court?

 

[Bundy Bear]

With West Sydney airport starting from 2026 could this be a back up if late for curfew.

Business passengers probably happier to take to take the late night flight ex London.

 

[AustraliaPoochie]

They probably gave that particular EK flight a leeway, but will charge for landing within the curfew.
Yes, I know its 11pm cut off, but there are a bit of leeway, emergency etc, or already taxi(ing) planes.
There has been days when that QR ADL - AKL used to fly past my place at 23.25, sometimes the go out over gulf, but sometimes they fly over the city of Adelaide out over Modbury before a steep turn, they also do it to DOH now.
Edit:
From the Infrastructure Aust govt website:
if a plane is taxi(ing) past 23.00, it can still take off.

Take-offs After Curfew​

If an aircraft is granted permission to commence its taxi (meaning the aircraft can move under its own power) to the runway by Air Traffic Control prior to 11.00pm, it is allowed to take-off after 11.00pm without requiring permission from the department. This can occur when an aircraft is ready to depart close to the curfew but is required to wait for arriving aircraft coming in to land. Aircraft granted pre-curfew taxi clearance usually depart up to 11.30pm depending on air traffic and weather conditions close to the beginning of the curfew period

 

[QFflyermelbourne]

There's no way they will sell a premium direct flight with a departure of 0600 from London. Who is going to want to get up at 3am and have to get to Heathrow before public transport even begins? They will also want to pick up connections from other parts of UK/EU so I Would suspect they may hold the aircraft on the ground for an evening departure back too. Will be interesting to see.

 

[mviy]

With West Sydney airport starting from 2026 could this be a back up if late for curfew.

Business passengers probably happier to take to take the late night flight ex London.

That would also depend on whether the new airport has wide and long enough runways for the aircraft.

By 2026 QF would be hoping to have started Project Sunrise. Though it is possible that they might continue SYD-SIN-LHR once direct non-stop SYD-LHR starts if there is sufficient demand for both.

 

[jpp42]

That would also depend on whether the new airport has wide and long enough runways for the aircraft.

No mystery here, the initial runway at Western Sydney Airport (with its still-missing IATA airport code), will be 3,700m (12,000 ft) long, Code F standards, suitable for any commercial aircraft up to A380/B747-8. In fact, media releases are touting it as "Australia's Best Runway" as besides the capability to handle any aircraft it will also have "Category III(B)" ILS, probably actually classification III/E/4, meaning auto-land capabilities in very low visibility conditions. This is a better rating than Sydney Airport, so Western Sydney would also be useful as a possible diversion point in case of thick fog.

However, the EIS section 5.3.2 says, "Although Code F has been adopted as the critical design aircraft, it is expected that only a small number of Code F aircraft are likely to use the proposed airport, equating to about 0.5 per cent of movements for Stage 1 operations and up to one per cent of the expected fleet mix in the long term."

So I agree that Western Sydney could be used as a diversion location in event of unexpected late arrival or fog conditions, as passengers could be bussed back to SYD which would be preferable to diverting to another city entirely. Perhaps this is where the 0.5% of movements comes from. Premium services will always be scheduled into SYD, for the foreseeable future, Western Sydney will only attract low-cost and short-haul international services, not premium long haul.

 

[Scarlett]

Instead of sitting at LHR all day, get those aircraft moving on a tag flight QF. To DUB, EDI, BER or CPH.

You know you want to!

 

[mviy]

Instead of sitting at LHR all day, get those aircraft moving on a tag flight QF. To DUB, EDI, BER or CPH.

You know you want to!

The problem is they may only be able to take passengers flying to/from Australia on QF on those flights if allowed to do them, whereas they would want to fill the plane.

 

[Scarlett]

The problem is they may only be able to take passengers flying to/from Australia on QF on those flights if allowed to do them, whereas they would want to fill the plane.

True, but should be no problem for the world class bu!!$h*t team at QF. (mini-first…)
Get fifth freedom lobbying! Stat!
EDI will is part of the UK (for now) so should be easy.
The CEO can go talk in DUB.
Give Princess Mary’s family a free flight from Tassie to CPH to grease those wheels.
And as for BER, do I have to think of everything?

TIC

(the fact that QF could never price a tag flight to compete with U2, FR, LH, or even BA should not be entered into during whimsical thought)

 

[exLXCXFF]

But how do you crew that, especially pilots? They current ops ex-LHR is probably optimised for “minimal” crew rest. Such a leg might actually become quite costly.

 

[docjames]

True, but should be no problem for the world class bu!!$h*t team at QF. (mini-first…)
Get fifth freedom lobbying! Stat!
EDI will is part of the UK (for now) so should be easy.
The CEO can go talk in DUB.
Give Princess Mary’s family a free flight from Tassie to CPH to grease those wheels.
And as for BER, do I have to think of everything?

TIC

(the fact that QF could never price a tag flight to compete with U2, FR, LH, or even BA should not be entered into during whimsical thought)

There used to be a tag to MAN (to avoid the LHR ground fees presumably).

Presumably all incurred costs to operate eventually exceeded revenue plus ground costs saved.

 

[NM]

There used to be a tag to MAN (to avoid the LHR ground fees presumably).

Presumably all incurred costs to operate eventually exceeded revenue plus ground costs saved.

I believe that at some time the domestic UK flight was operated to keep a QF-owned LHR slot pair active. If left unused for a period time, slots would be forfeited and the cost to regain them could be massive. It was cheaper to use the slots in that manner than to lose them and buy new ones later if/when needed for long-haul operations. Those flights were operated by a mix of aircraft types. I seems to recall QF may have leased a small aircraft type to operate locally at one time so they didn't need to operate the local flights with B744 aircraft.

I can't see how they could possibly receive enough revenue from an A380 UK tag operation to offset the cost of an idle aircraft. Just the risk of paying out passenger compensation for delays if their aircraft was delayed/unavailable would make it nonviable.

 

[jpp42]

I believe that at some time the domestic UK flight was operated to keep a QF-owned LHR slot pair active. If left unused for a period time, slots would be forfeited and the cost to regain them could be massive. It was cheaper to use the slots in that manner than to lose them and buy new ones later if/when needed for long-haul operations.

I think I read somewhere that QF still owns four daily slots, but as they only operate two of them, the others are leased out. I wonder if the rules were different in the past in terms of leasing the slots?

 

[NM]

I think I read somewhere that QF still owns four daily slots, but as they only operate two of them, the others are leased out. I wonder if the rules were different in the past in terms of leasing the slots?

I expect the "value" of slots changed significantly over recent times, and so likely the rules relating to use-or-lose them.

 

[RichardMEL]

Operate a tag flight on an A380 to MAN or DUB or whatever? with what traffic rights? demand ex-AU wouldn't be enough to pay the fuel bill I imagine. That's no offence intended to Manchester or Dublin, but just that the A380 is a huge aircraft. Plus they can more cheaply codeshare on multiple BA narrowbody flights in those markets anyway.

Plus don't forget they do do some maintenance in LHR - A checks and the like. Certainly an opportunity to get minor issues hopefully sorted out.

 

[chiken_nugets]

No mystery here, the initial runway at Western Sydney Airport (with its still-missing IATA airport code), will be 3,700m (12,000 ft) long, Code F standards, suitable for any commercial aircraft up to A380/B747-8. In fact, media releases are touting it as "Australia's Best Runway" as besides the capability to handle any aircraft it will also have "Category III(B)" ILS, probably actually classification III/E/4, meaning auto-land capabilities in very low visibility conditions. This is a better rating than Sydney Airport, so Western Sydney would also be useful as a possible diversion point in case of thick fog.

However, the EIS section 5.3.2 says, "Although Code F has been adopted as the critical design aircraft, it is expected that only a small number of Code F aircraft are likely to use the proposed airport, equating to about 0.5 per cent of movements for Stage 1 operations and up to one per cent of the expected fleet mix in the long term."

So I agree that Western Sydney could be used as a diversion location in event of unexpected late arrival or fog conditions, as passengers could be bussed back to SYD which would be preferable to diverting to another city entirely. Perhaps this is where the 0.5% of movements comes from. Premium services will always be scheduled into SYD, for the foreseeable future, Western Sydney will only attract low-cost and short-haul international services, not premium long haul.

Define short haul. I think we'll see low cost medium/long haul flying out of western sydney for sure. Tokyo, Singapore, Bangkok.

 

[jpp42]

Define short haul. I think we'll see low cost medium/long haul flying out of western sydney for sure. Tokyo, Singapore, Bangkok.

Yes that's what I meant, sorry for being unclear. Low cost international airlines to to those kinds of destinations across Asia, and potentially all airlines for trans-Tasman and Bali.

 

[BD1959]

I think I read somewhere that QF still owns four daily slots, but as they only operate two of them, the others are leased out. I wonder if the rules were different in the past in terms of leasing the slots?

IIRC At one stage - when QF dropped QF29/30 extending HKG/LHR? - QF leased the slots to BA. Of course this was back when they played nicely together and BA owned 25% of QF anyway.

Regards,

BD

 

[Rangalad]

I believe that at some time the domestic UK flight was operated to keep a QF-owned LHR slot pair active. If left unused for a period time, slots would be forfeited and the cost to regain them could be massive. It was cheaper to use the slots in that manner than to lose them and buy new ones later if/when needed for long-haul operations. Those flights were operated by a mix of aircraft types. I seems to recall QF may have leased a small aircraft type to operate locally at one time so they didn't need to operate the local flights with B744 aircraft.

I can't see how they could possibly receive enough revenue from an A380 UK tag operation to offset the cost of an idle aircraft. Just the risk of paying out passenger compensation for delays if their aircraft was delayed/unavailable would make it nonviable.

IIRC Aircraft used - BAE 146

 

[RichardMEL]

4 slots is 2 pairs (landing and takeoff) - ie a slot is required for either a landing, or a takeoff. So if QF hold 4 slots, they're currently using them for the daily QF1/2 and 9/10.

So that would also be an issue in terms of any tag flights - they wouldn't have any slots to use for the extra flight.

(which begs the question - what will happen with project sunrise? will it simply replace QF1/2? one presumes so)