Qantas: what to do with a spare Airbus A380..?

What about MEL-HKG?

Or BNE - HKG, in that matter... (Until 2015 anything could be done to replace the crappy A330s...)

You could also just refurbish the A330s and solve that.

The changes have not yet been announced.

Would suggest SFO flights need a smaller plane like the 787 or even a fuel efficient 777.

Not going to touch that one today :-)

Not touching it with a twelve-foot barge pole.

It is painted in correct colours. The image used in this story is from a mock-up created before the first A380's were delivered and new livery announced.

RK, There was some sarcasm in my first line.

Whilst anything is possible, I somewhat doubt QF will use this on MEL-HKG.

Because SYD-HKG return takes less than 24 hours, it can be done with only A380. 

Whereas SYD-DFW, DFW-BNE-SYD return takes more than 24 hours. Hence a couple of 380s needed. 

Pretty much what qfflyer said. But hey, if you standardise the stopover, e.g. AKL, then you can run a A380 some days and a B747 on other days. It's not like it's not already done on HKG.

I would agree with Watson,but may be run an A330 on the sector and continiue as QF107 to JFK.QF handed on a plater to NZ  this sector,the sad part is while QF said they lost money they still made more money than other loss making sectors they still currently operate.QF insiders say this was a mistake. And Simon Hickey.....shame on you ...you need premium con on all Int A330 flights or the grave is done.  

I agree. W needed on mid/long hual A330.

Yeah that works... Sydneysiders lose out as it would add an extra stop, but would be no different (possible better) for MEL/BNE passengers. They may be able to fly an EK 380 to AKL and then QF 380 to DFW.

Hutch,

Let me clarify i am not talking eliminating QF 107....far from it.I would run QF 107 744 as is now or do A380to Lax and the preposed A330 would run as in the past AKL/LAX then on to JFK. 

Sorry Robert, my comment was in response to Watson's comment regarding moving QF7 from SYD-DFW to SYD-AKL-DFW & v.v

Certainly a smaller plane to to JFK makes sense in regards to passengers. But I wonder whether QF gets much cargo out of JFK? 

Hutch,

I do not no about cargo out of JFK,but a lot goes out of LAX an to a less extent DFW  to OZ.Most gets out code shared by freight carriers under a 4 digit flight number starting with 6.While QF pumps cargo in the belly, my experience in corperate is during the Northern  hem summer schedual when fares are low and more money can be made on freight,,they will weight restrict flights.With out going into to much detail..only sell as an EG 50/75% on QF 12 or 108 and pump as much freight as poss based on the flight plan.

Any rearrangement that gets QF metal going between NZ and the US gets my vote. Air NZ has too much a free run now. If it was an A380, even at low frequency it would blow Air NZ away. AKL-DFW on an A380 would be a dream, but even AKL-LAX would do.

Unfortunately, with QF's current management state of mind, I can't see any new (or revived) routes, or anything other than more of the same reductions.

Wouldn't be surprised if they leased the spare A380 out, to be honest...

Yeah I get that HKG return is under 24hours etc and if QF was going to run daily DFW A380 flights they would need a couple of 380's. But wouldn't a single A380 be able to do 3x DFW return per week?

Nice idea. Won't happen.

SYD-PER is a nice idea. 

More realistic could be reinstating a 747 on the PER-SYD run that has been subbed out by the 380. 

I think you are correct that it will replace a current route. I still think it'll be one of the US routes with the refurb 747's redeployed to take over of the segments of the non-refurb 747's.

NRT could work, but you would need to retime service as the current 747 sits around all day doing squat all... so there would be no point reducing downtime at LHR to have downtime at NRT. But it would allow 2 x 747 retirements and I think NRT has good loads. But I would suggest QF's relationship with AA is as close as QF/JAL... not such much Cathay though (unfortunately).

It would be quite nice if QF21 turned around at NRT and QF22 operated south as a day flight.

Add codeshares to JL771/772 and that gives a day flight and a night flight in both directions (instead of 1 north and 2 south night flights and 1 north day flight)

There has to be some logical reason why the aircraft sits at NRT for 17 hours between QF21 and QF22.

Jetstar Japan has been operating since July 2012.

QF has more ties to AA then JL. There is a QF/AA Transpac JBA. QF and JL just have joint ownership in Jetstar Japan and codeshares via SIN.

I would very much like for a better partnership between JL and QF, even just codesharing on each others SYD-NRT flights, but it is doubtful the ACCC and IASC would allow it.

They wouldn't find enough crew to staff it...

Indian crew of course...

Curly - not sure if you were replying to my comment above, but I should've stated more specifically; either SYD/MEL paired with either BOM/DEL. still wouldn't drag that pie any closer to the ground...

Nope sorry, it was in regards to the story in general about how the retime will reduce the AUS - LON fleet size from 6 down to 5. To me having an odd number will mean that a flight from MEL - LON will then go back to SYD and the flight arriving from SYD will go back to MEL etc.

But yes India is a good idea however QF might consider 1.3 billion people too small of a market, haha! 

With the assumed times, based on the old QF29/30/31/32 LHR times (arrive/depart LHR around lunch), it would mean QF1 arrives early morning, departing as QF10 5-6 hours later, then QF9 lands ~1 hour after QF10 leaves before departing as QF2 late night.

ie QF1 arr ~0600
QF10 dep ~1230
QF9 arr ~1330
QF2 dep ~2230

Frankfurt! 

NRT might work if you put an A330 on midweek?

Wrong,

3 A380 gates available at one time, plus remote gates.

While the runway can handle an A380, the CBR terminal is not designed to accommodate them.

Who talked about CBR,,,,,,,i am talking BNE where the QF action is.

I agree with every word. 

The markets you refer BNE/LAX and SYD/LAX and SYD/ DFW need A380,s badly to get revenue.There is so much money to be made on these sectors and S America,Get A380,s out of Asia...I want to fly QANTAS in 3years do you.

I agree with Perth /Dubai but buddy QF can not compete and  they can not get the loads to do a  even do a 744 and forget about an A680

Considering the yield on Singapore is poor, this would not be a good idea.

SIN is a route with weak yields because the offering is so spectacularly rubbish. With only a daily service ex-MEL and ex-BNE, double-daily ex-SYD, all on A330s with old J, how the hell d'you expect QFi to compete against SQ?

It's like trying to attack a tank with a kitchen knife.

I note the product difference, but given the amount of capacity to Singapore, even with a better product it is unlikely QF could increase yields much. If your loads are low, you are going to need to price low to stimulate demand. Putting more capacity into that situation is not what I would consider a good business pratice, especially as you are essentially reliant on O&D traffic and your competitor has an enormous network it can feed and has a good product (even after QF's upgrade - except for SQ regional product).

I'm not suggesting a massive ramp-up in capacity, but besides the A330 refurbishment I advocate, I would like to see an improvement in the schedules to SIN, because frankly, the schedule at the moment is rubbish.

Not disagreeing with you there. In fact an A380 would not serve those purposes.

I'd like to see double daily flights out of the east coast and perhaps a triple from syd. Then there is Perth... but I think even the 330's at that frequency would be too many seats for QF without a better network on the other end. A late night departure from SYD to SIN would be good but we would need SWZ before that can occur I think.

But at the moment, QF could spread their flights out better.

They definitely could. MEL (QF 35) and BNE (QF 51) both need a later-morning departure, around 1030. I would like to see each get a second flight, preferably also daily; I'm leaning towards a near-midnight departure to form a red-eye outbound (forming a day flight inbound).

SYD should have a third flight. The current spread is rubbish; QF 81 is too early, and QF 5 is too late. I would shuffle it around to have departures at 1030, 1300 and 1530; forming the early overnight, late overnight and morning returns.

PER should have more than one daily flight. I would like to see one red-eye and at least one day flight each way; I'd prefer to use an A330 on the red-eyes and B737s on the day flights, but this is a tricky one from the diagram perspective.

I hope QF doesn't fly a B474-400 to SFO :-)

In all seriousness, if QF returns to SFO (and I doubt that is anytime soon) it has to be with a fuel efficient plane. Flying a 747 (as much as I like them) will not compete it against 777 or 787's

I am curious as to why it matters so much?

because it doesn't look professional

I dont think what I said was unreasonable, but it really should be shown in it's current form.

Unfortunately, I shall be the bearer of bad news.... it is unreasonable and/or irrelevant.

If the article was stating this is what the plane looks like now, then it would be misleading... but its just an piece about about A380's. The average punter on the street would struggle to tell the difference between QF's old and new livery in any case.

This is an article on a possible new A380 service on a site for business travellers. This is not a planespotter thread created to froth at the mouth over liveries. There is a time and place for that, but this isn't it.

Well "hutch" I apologize for my attention to detail

By the time they get those last 8, they'll be ready to retire the last of the 747s. The A380s will be needed for the JNB, SCL, BNE-LAX, DFW and JFK routes (assuming they are still around).