Would you pay a price premium for non-stop SYD-LHR flight?

[Kiwi Flyer]

The other issue is that currently NZ's new premium economy is too small, so very difficult to upgrade into (or award or paid discounted fare) in any case.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

Is it just me or are a number of FFPs going too far with upgrade costs? In some cases upgrades costing more than full award in the higher cabin, in others very nearly the amount for full award.

I would have thought the economics would be better encouraging FFers to pay some cash and points/miles to upgrade than redeeming business/first award with no cash. But then maybe thats no longer the case anyway due to all the so called "taxes".

 

[NM]

Is it just me or are a number of FFPs going too far with upgrade costs? In some cases upgrades costing more than full award in the higher cabin, in others very nearly the amount for full award.

I have not seen it as much as a full award, or indeed more, but I take your word that the situation exists in some programs. But generally in the QF program, and especially for long flights, its generally better value for a full award flight in business class.

I think this is where the full Y->J upgrade for international flights is a useless item since its very rare for anyone to purchase a full Y fare for international flights. So to me its just a place filler in the tables to make it look like a good value award, and so they can charge a lot more for a discount Y to J upgrade.

Of course this is the exact opposite of many USA-based programs where they offer free upgrades (and in some cases unlimited numbers of them) to their elite FF members. But we know about the financial state of airlines that have that policy :roll: .

I would have thought the economics would be better encouraging FFers to pay some cash and points/miles to upgrade than redeeming business/first award with no cash. But then maybe thats no longer the case anyway due to all the so called "taxes".

This often comes down to availability. There may be no award availability in business class at the time you need to book the flights. So the only option is to get an award in economy and have no option to upgrade, or to purchase an upgradeable economy fare and take your chances with the upgrade waitlist.

 

[NM]

Is it just me or are a number of FFPs going too far with upgrade costs? In some cases upgrades costing more than full award in the higher cabin, in others very nearly the amount for full award.

I have not seen it as much as a full award, or indeed more, but I take your word that the situation exists in some programs. But generally in the QF program, and especially for long flights, its generally better value for a full award flight in business class.

I think this is where the full Y->J upgrade for international flights is a useless item since its very rare for anyone to purchase a full Y fare for international flights. So to me its just a place filler in the tables to make it look like a good value award, and so they can charge a lot more for a discount Y to J upgrade.

Of course this is the exact opposite of many USA-based programs where they offer free upgrades (and in some cases unlimited numbers of them) to their elite FF members. But we know about the financial state of airlines that have that policy :roll: .

I would have thought the economics would be better encouraging FFers to pay some cash and points/miles to upgrade than redeeming business/first award with no cash. But then maybe thats no longer the case anyway due to all the so called "taxes".

This often comes down to availability. There may be no award availability in business class at the time you need to book the flights. So the only option is to get an award in economy and have no option to upgrade, or to purchase an upgradeable economy fare and take your chances with the upgrade waitlist.

 

[icarus]

i.e. can see oneself being seduced by a violent Stephen Seagal while DVT engages my limbs as more likely than not noticing a rusty spoon being stuck up my nether regions.

I'm really hoping that here's a missing word in this sentence, and that the word is "movie".

 

[Dave Noble]

I think this is where the full Y->J upgrade for international flights is a useless item since its very rare for anyone to purchase a full Y fare for international flights. So to me its just a place filler in the tables to make it look like a good value award, and so they can charge a lot more for a discount Y to J upgrade.

I think that you may not be considering all routes. On some routes it isn't that much more expensive. On LHR-SIN for example, the lowest published R/T fare in R (RFPXGB) is AUD1384 whilst the Y fare (YFRT) is AUD1886

Dave

 

[NM]

I think that you may not be considering all routes. On some routes it isn't that much more expensive. On LHR-SIN for example, the lowest published R/T fare in R (RFPXGB) is AUD1384 whilst the Y fare (YFRT) is AUD1886

Dave

That may be the case, but since the fare rules for B and Y are almost identical, the only reason for purchasing Y is if there is nothing but Y available and that means a last minute purchase on an almost full flight.

It would be interesting to know the proportion of full Y fares actually sold on QF international flights. I expect it is a lot less than the proportion of domestic fares that earn full economy SCs, and even less than the full Y sales on domestic sectors.

Just out of interest, what is the B fare for the same route? I would like to see B fares also considered full fare for SC earning (and possibly upgrade costs) on international flights. I recognise that it may not make sense to include H and K in the mix for international.

 

[Dave Noble]

Just out of interest, what is the B fare for the same route? I would like to see B fares also considered full fare for SC earning (and possibly upgrade costs) on international flights. I recognise that it may not make sense to include H and K in the mix for international.

Excluding taxes, the published return economy fares for 1/11/05 are

RFPXGB 1384
MFPXGB 1458
HFPXGB 1534
BFPXGB 1636
YFRT 1886

and the one way fares

YFOW 1037
BLAP 1115
Y2V3 1386

all excluding tax and in AUD

Only a $250 difference between B and Y

and even more importantly, my posting grade has changed again

Dave

 

[NM]

and even more importantly, my posting grade has changed again

Dave

Congratulations .... we'll make a freak out of you yet!

 

[oz_mark]

and even more importantly, my posting grade has changed again

Certainly screaming up the charts

 

[Dave Noble]

Congratulations .... we'll make a freak out of you yet!

Hmmm...is this a good thing?

Dave

 

[BlacKnox]

Qantas plans a trans-world hop

By Steve Creedy
18-10-2005
From: The Australian
http://finance.news.com.au/story/0,10166,16950165-462,00.html
 

"QANTAS is evaluating a non-stop, all business-class service between Sydney and London as part of the multi-billion-dollar aircraft order due to be considered by its board in December. One the new service, which would use Boeing 777-200LR ultra-long range aircraft, Qantas (qan.ASX:Quote,News) would charge a premium to slice several hours off one-stop flight times.

It is understood the flying kangaroo is looking at the 777-200LR, which would have far fewer passengers in an all-business configuration, with a lighter interior and possibly additional fuel capacity to allow it to cope with headwinds on the marathon Sydney-London leg.

But the airline would only proceed with the proposal if it believed it could guarantee the leg from Sydney would not require a stopover.

A 777-200LR in a standard configuration can fly from London to Sydney, but not the other way because of headwinds.

Officials believe there is a market for an all-business service but are wary about upsetting well-heeled customers by being unable to deliver on promised non-stop flights.

Other potential destinations for an ultra-long range service include New York and the major hub of alliance partner American Airlines at Dallas-Fort Worth.

Boeing and Airbus are both bidding for the Qantas contract of about 75 aircraft and Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon hopes to take a proposal to the airline's December board meeting.

The all-business proposal comes as Qantas has reduced the number of seats in the airline's three-class double-decker A380s from 501 to 474. The move brings the Qantas passenger count into line with Singapore Airlines.

Qantas is expected to further outline its plans for the superjumbo when the giant plane visits Australia next month to take part in Qantas's 85th birthday celebrations.

The plane will visit Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney as part of a tour that also includes Frankfurt, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and Dubai. The airline is also considering the new generation of more efficient Airbus A350 or Boeing 787 aircraft for the mooted expansion of Jetstar on international routes.

Mr Dixon told a New York investors' conference recently that Qantas and Jetstar were working on a proposal for a two-class international carrier based in Australia and serving point-to-point holiday routes not catered for by the mainline carrier.

The A350 and 787 both promise significant fuel savings compared with current jets of a similar size. Fiji's Air Pacific - part-owned by Qantas - is also looking at the A350 or the 787."

 

[NM]

The all-business proposal comes as Qantas has reduced the number of seats in the airline's three-class double-decker A380s from 501 to 474. The move brings the Qantas passenger count into line with Singapore Airlines.

I wonder how the economics of operating an A380 with 474 passengers compares with a 747-300 with 450 passengers.

Obviously this does not consider the premium fares paid for the F cabin, but the 747-300 is Qantas' highest capacity aircraft right now with 52J and 398 Y seats. So a 474 seat A380 is not much of a capacity improvement. But it is a good boost over the 343 passengers on a 747-400ER 3-class config.

 

[serfty]

... I wonder how the economics of operating an A380 with 474 passengers compares with a 747-300 with 450 passengers.
...

If nothing else, there should be more deck space for PAX; maybe an extra few cm's pitch and width in whY.

 

[NM]

If nothing else, there should be more deck space for PAX; maybe an extra few cm's pitch and width in whY.

No doubt that it will be better for the passenger. But will it be more economical to operate with that number of paying passengers? how long until we see them reconfigured to 555 seats per Airbus' suggestion for a 3-class operation?

Remember that all the numbers put forward by Airbus about how it is more economical to operate than a 747-400 are based on the 555 seating config.

 

[Skyring]

I suspect that there isn't any hard data on these ultra long range flights yet and that there will be a fair bit of experimentation before things settle down.

I am reminded of the existing LAX-SYD and LAX-MEL sectors, where fuel and weight are big issues, especially on the MEL run, where I am told that they are fairly stringent on baggage weights. Take-off times are important, and the afternoon flights out of LAX don't operate during the northern summer, presumably because the birds can't get off the ground safely with the fuel and pax for the flight.

It may well be that it is not physically possible to reliably carry 500+ pax nonstop SYD-LHR on the A380. I remember that the sector has been flown nonstop LHR-SYD in a 747, but the aircraft was very lightly loaded, was towed to the end of the runway, and received priority clearance all the way. For routine operations I suspect that no aircraft is going to be able to go all the way with a full load of a "normal" mix of F J and Y.

We will probably see more (or all) premium class seats on these non-stop flights for two reasons. Firstly, the weight and safety issues noted above. Secondly the factors already noted in the discussion - Y class passengers are going to find it extremely uncomfortable to sit in a standard economy seat for around 20 hours. DVT issues aside. :cry:

Those who say that Qantas will pack in as many seats as possible are not living in the real world. We're not going to see 800 Y seats on a Sydney-London shuttle, even if it IS possible to squeeze that many seats in.

For a faster trip with more room, there is going to be a premium charged over existing fares. There will also be the initial "cachet" of an exciting new aircraft, presumably with more modern entertainment and service facilities.

But, as I say, there can't be much in the way of hard data yet, and we're going to have to wait until much further into the test program before Qantas is able to make firm decisions.

And even then, a big difference in the price of fuel could skew things one way or another!

My gut feeling as an economy passenger is that unless I had a bloody good reason for shaving a few hours off the flight, I would opt for a break in the middle. Even if it's only an hour strolling around the antiseptic halls of Changi. But if I was flying Business or First, then yeah, I'd go for the quicker trip.

 

[NM]

It may well be that it is not physically possible to reliably carry 500+ pax nonstop SYD-LHR on the A380.

[snip]

Those who say that Qantas will pack in as many seats as possible are not living in the real world. We're not going to see 800 Y seats on a Sydney-London shuttle, even if it IS possible to squeeze that many seats in.

Nobody has ever claimed the A380 will operate SYD-LHR non-stop. Its the Boeing 777-200LR that has the capability to operate LHR-SYD non-stop and a potential variant, sometimes unofficially referenced as a 777-200ULR (with lighter interior and extra hold fuel tanks), that Boeing has suggested could operate SYD-LHR non-stop.

The A380 will always require a stop in Asia between Australia and London. And I do believe the current QF figure of 474 seats on their A380 will grow back to their original plan of 501 seats and then even more as time goes by, just like the piano bar or first class lounge on the upper deck of the 747 gave way to more passenger seats.

I don't believe we will ever see Qantas operating 800 seat configurations (and that is only on a yet-to-be-designed potential stretched version of the A380). This is primarily due to their ability to earn more revenue by selling a mix of class options and the A380 is only ever going to operate on the routes that will continue to have string demand for premium cabins.

 

[Skyring]

Thanks for that. I saw stories about London-Sydney non-stop earlier: http://www.smh.com.au/news/National...r-monster-plane/2005/01/15/1105582768116.html for instance.

And I've seen the "Boeing-boosters" in newsgroups and elsewhere claiming that airlines will naturally cram as many seats in as possible.

But after a bit more googling it seems that superjumbo superflights are superdreams for the moment!

Pete, ever dreaming

 

[Miekk]

Depends how much spare funds I had at the time.
Generally I'd go for about 20%.

 

[spiggy_topes]

How about something like this config mix:

12 x First Class in 3 rows of 1x2x1
56 x Skybeds in 8 rows of 2x3x2
120 x PE in 15 rows of 2x4x2 (per BA WT+) @ 38" pitch

QF standard Y seating is 3x4x3 @ 31" in 747, so assume 3x3x3 @ 31" would be an equiv 777 Y config such as BA use.

I know the SQ A345's are only 2 class (64 Raffles + 117 PE)

Not sure just how that would fit with the extra galley space needed for extra catering for the longer flight etc???

Compare with BA's 4-class 777's at 14F, 48J, 40WT+, 127WT.

For what it's worth: I stop off in HK at a friend's club a few times a year and chat to the Cathay pilots who are often found in the bar.

Cathay have a non-stop service HK-JFK, but they have to monitor weight very strictly (fewer passengers, light seats, etc).

I strongly suspect a non-stop SYD-LHR service would only work with specially configured aircraft - perhaps all J like the Silverjet services operating from the UK to the US.

Personally I'd certainly pay extra for the non-stop premium, but only in J or F. In economy you wouldn't turn down the chance to stretch your legs.

I'm thinking of my last flight back from LAX to SYD. The eastern seaboard here was fogged in and my flight had to turn round and put down in Noumea for an hour - but nobody was allowed off. Overall the flight was about 17 hours. I was in F (which was OK, the crew were great) but it must have been hell down the back of the plane.