Why Qantas doesn't fly an a330 from Hong Kong/ Singapore to Paris and other European destinations

I have previously stated that Qantas underuses its a330 on its international networks. As there are no 787s at the moment to fly to European destinations and the issues surrounding terminal allocation in Perth, I wonder why Qantas hasn't decided to fly a330s though Singapore and Hong Kong to European destinations such as Paris, Frankfurt or Rome. As there are daily flights from Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane to Hong Kong on the A330, You would think that Qantas could continue this aircraft onto European destinations. As well as this aircraft is capable of flying this distance, the smaller loads would be more economically more viable. Aswell as Qantas business, frequent flyers and Qantas Club members having access to the superb Qantas Hong Kong Lounge.

Does A330 has the range to Paris, Frankfurt or Rome from Hong Kong/Singapore?

It's easy to state things, but putting that from thought on the internet to an actual airline route turning a profit, ain't the same thing.

1. Rome? I'd be shocked if Qantas ever flies to Rome again. By all accounts, they don't consider Italy to offer appropriate yield.

2. For Qantas to fly to Paris or Frankfurt with an A330 from Hong Kong, it would need to cancel another service to free up a plane. In terms of corporate dollars, I assume QF thinks Asia is more important than CDG/FRA

3. The Hong Kong - Europe leg would compete against many other services - what's the competitive edge against other one-stop options?

4. It would require additional crew costs at Hong Kong over and above the direct competition.

5. Hong Kong is slot restrained. If Qantas obtained extra slots, why not use it on your core market, Australia.

6. The dispute with Perth Airport is in relation to JNB as it is not a new route for the airport. There is nothing to indicate that PER would not allow QF to use their terminal for CDG or FRA flights.

7. Can the A330 actually fly the route?

According to the Qantas website, the A330-200 has a range of 8,500km and the A330-300 a range of 7,000km (both fully loaded).

For example, if the Melbourne QF29 service connected onto Paris from Hong Kong. As this aircraft seats around 270 passengers, the load is signifcantly smaller to such loads of an A380 or 747. Along with having a smaller passenger load, this aircraft would need less Cabin crew, reducing the amount of crew being based in Paris. Along with the issue of range. The average distance from Hong Kong to Paris is 9900km. The range of the A330 is 13,450km.

People are now preferring non stop over one or multi stops. As Has been stated, there are a number of reasons flying SIN or HKG to European ports can’t be done.

QF have operated A330-200 aircraft on Auckland to LA, which is further then Hong Kong - Paris. It could be done but plenty of reasons given above why QF could make better margins on other routes.

Love the arm chair CEOs. This is as fun as reading comments on politician's Facebook posts.

Of course an A330 can fly the route - they have. The range at maximum structural payload as quoted on the Qantas flight is not the actual range of the aircraft. Most aircraft at long ranges are used on routes where passenger and fuel payload weights are most efficient.

Hong Kong is currently the hub for partner OneWorld airline Cathay Pacific and if passengers have to have a stop anyway, why upset your partner when you can work out a codeshare deal with them?

1. Qantas just does not have enough aircraft to fly where we the paying PAX would like them to.