Think Qantas should be focusing on their current offering as the service and meals being offered in economy is very sub par to what its competitors offer
Before I flew on QF9, I was indifferent to ULH routes, especially considering that Alan Joyce always said that fares would be 30% more. Even then, considering the saving was only a few hours in some cases, so it didn't entirely enthuse me. But after flying QF9 and really wishing we could get out of the aircraft several hours before we landed, I'm even less keen on any of the Project Sunrise flights. A few years ago, I read about development of hypersonic aircraft where you could fly Sydney to London in 5 hours. I'd be more interested in that type of flight than spending almost an entire day in a plane.
Cape Town, Johannesburg Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paolo, Buenos Ayres all have potential as souther hemisphere destinations for Qantas. Which will be worthwhile?
At the moment the non stop routes to London fly from Perth. If you going from Sydney it's better to go via Singapore. It takes 5 hours to fly to Perth so to do 5 hours then have to change planes then fly for 16 or 17 hours there's no real savings. At least going via Singapore you stay on the same plane.
A recent launch to Dallas-Fort Worth? Do you actually research your content before recording? Qantas has been flying to Dallas-Fort Worth from Sydney for a long time and introduced Melbourne Dallas-Fort Worth post covid.
Qantas needs to purchase used A350 900s like Malaysia airlines did and more wide body aircraft to start their international network then slowly replace them with the new aircraft as they arrive
How about offering an international service out of Adelaide for starters? No direct international flights to anywhere yet Singapore and Qatar are filling A350’s and 777’s… and increasing frequencies… Wtf? They are a disgrace.
Perth to Amsterdam please. Amsterdam is a more exciting cultural destination than Frankfurt. Although Amsterdam does not host the European Central Bank, it is a financial centre in its own right with back of house financial clearing houses and derivatives trading. It also hosts the European Medicines Agency, the equivalent to US FDA and Australia's TGA, with a big biomedical pharmaceutical and life sciences companies. companies operating.
@@ScrappySuper91 no to replace the 747 the 777x is a great fit and to eventually retire the a380 and the a330 the a350 comes in and the 787 helps round it out
@@AdamHewitson B777x does not fit in QF's current strategy. QF's aim is to connect point to point and have long range aircraft to do that. QF ordered B747s and A380s because at their respective times they were the most fuel efficient aircraft that can do long distance. Problem is that they need full loads to be economically viable so QF focused these routes through Sydney/Melb and to an extent Brisbane to other big hub cities. A380 is even limited because you need them to be at least 80% full on long range routes to make money, which limits QF's ability to use them to only a few cities through their Sydney and Melbourne hubs. Now B787 and A350s which can fly long distance more economically means that QF can offer point to point routes, which means they have less people needing to go through their hubs. Which means A380s and 747s are even less economic and can only do very little routes. Why did you think they didn't order more A380s and had reduced them down to 10 planes, and only fly them through sydney? Where does B777X fit in all this? It carries less people than the A380s and even more importantly has less range, so compared to the economics of A350s it comes up second best. Pretty much all the airlines which have ordered B777X operate hub model so they can justify larger loads. QF can't. Hence B777X makes no sense economically. A350 is a much larger aircraft than A330 and serves a different purpose. QF is using combo of A321neos, B787s to replace majority of A330 routes, and A350 for longish routes with sufficient demand. Also if QF management (who are actual experts in aircraft fleet planning and management unlike TH-cam armchair CEOs) had 10 years knowledge of B777X and didn't order it then you should realise that there are probably a few good reasons why they didn't.
@@AdamHewitson B777x does not fit in QF's current strategy. QF's aim is to connect point to point and have long range aircraft to do that. QF ordered B747s and A380s because at their respective times they were the most fuel efficient aircraft that can do long distance. Problem is that they need full loads to be economically viable so QF focused these routes through Sydney/Melb and to an extent Brisbane to other big hub cities. A380 is even limited because you need them to be at least 80% full on long range routes to make money, which limits QF's ability to use them to only a few cities through their Sydney and Melbourne hubs.
Right now without the a350 Qantas can’t do much as I see it
I like the butter landing on the A330 at the end.
Think Qantas should be focusing on their current offering as the service and meals being offered in economy is very sub par to what its competitors offer
Definitely Chicago it's almost impossible to get there from anywhere in this country currently. such a long journey i would happily fly direct
Thanks for this Dj!!
Exciting and all...Sydney to London...however most people won't be able to afford it given QF's pricing. So good luck to them.
Perth direct to London were full , so definitely a market for direct.
Before I flew on QF9, I was indifferent to ULH routes, especially considering that Alan Joyce always said that fares would be 30% more. Even then, considering the saving was only a few hours in some cases, so it didn't entirely enthuse me. But after flying QF9 and really wishing we could get out of the aircraft several hours before we landed, I'm even less keen on any of the Project Sunrise flights.
A few years ago, I read about development of hypersonic aircraft where you could fly Sydney to London in 5 hours. I'd be more interested in that type of flight than spending almost an entire day in a plane.
Hypersonic is simply not feasible , there isn't 1 country that allows flights over land above Mach 1.
@@fafonso558 what they were proposing would travel up to the edge of space
Cape Town, Johannesburg Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paolo, Buenos Ayres all have potential as souther hemisphere destinations for Qantas. Which will be worthwhile?
At the moment the non stop routes to London fly from Perth. If you going from Sydney it's better to go via Singapore. It takes 5 hours to fly to Perth so to do 5 hours then have to change planes then fly for 16 or 17 hours there's no real savings. At least going via Singapore you stay on the same plane.
Love u Qantas,American,Turkies Airlines,Etihad,Emirates,Royal Brunei,Jetstar always number one.
Why speak of flying Sydney to RIO, when the major Brazilian hub is Guarulhos, in São Paulo?
A recent launch to Dallas-Fort Worth? Do you actually research your content before recording? Qantas has been flying to Dallas-Fort Worth from Sydney for a long time and introduced Melbourne Dallas-Fort Worth post covid.
I suspect it's written by AI
Qantas recently started MEL-dfw
one mistake bro it's not that deep
They need to fly to Athens, Greece
Man VH-VZX is weird with the MAX style winglets
And high air fares as qantas removed Rex and bonzo from flying in one year!
Qantas needs to purchase used A350 900s like Malaysia airlines did and more wide body aircraft to start their international network then slowly replace them with the new aircraft as they arrive
They should fit out the new planes with premium economy flying economy is out of date. Flown Perth/London Business class no comparison to Economy.
Except in price.
I agree with Adam they the 777x to replace their 747 far as passenger capacity and 787s for other destinations
How about offering an international service out of Adelaide for starters? No direct international flights to anywhere yet Singapore and Qatar are filling A350’s and 777’s… and increasing frequencies… Wtf? They are a disgrace.
I would like to see Qantas fly to Frankfurt or Chicago.
With the A330 to Frankfurt so Swiss001 can see it butter!
Chicago was support to from Brisbane but thanks to pandemic it didn’t started :(
Thanks DJ. I would like to see Qantas fly between Melbourne and Mumbai & Bangalore in India.
Sydney-Miami-Sydney direct.
Perth to Amsterdam please. Amsterdam is a more exciting cultural destination than Frankfurt. Although Amsterdam does not host the European Central Bank, it is a financial centre in its own right with back of house financial clearing houses and derivatives trading. It also hosts the European Medicines Agency, the equivalent to US FDA and Australia's TGA, with a big biomedical pharmaceutical and life sciences companies. companies operating.
Why not a direct flight to a central location between Santiago and Los Angeles, like Colombia, Ecuador, or Panama?
I’ll never fly it again
Qantas need the 777x to expand there fleet and destinations same with more 787s
Boieng is useless
no they don't. A350 is their new flagship
@@ScrappySuper91 no to replace the 747 the 777x is a great fit and to eventually retire the a380 and the a330 the a350 comes in and the 787 helps round it out
@@AdamHewitson B777x does not fit in QF's current strategy.
QF's aim is to connect point to point and have long range aircraft to do that. QF ordered B747s and A380s because at their respective times they were the most fuel efficient aircraft that can do long distance. Problem is that they need full loads to be economically viable so QF focused these routes through Sydney/Melb and to an extent Brisbane to other big hub cities. A380 is even limited because you need them to be at least 80% full on long range routes to make money, which limits QF's ability to use them to only a few cities through their Sydney and Melbourne hubs.
Now B787 and A350s which can fly long distance more economically means that QF can offer point to point routes, which means they have less people needing to go through their hubs. Which means A380s and 747s are even less economic and can only do very little routes. Why did you think they didn't order more A380s and had reduced them down to 10 planes, and only fly them through sydney?
Where does B777X fit in all this? It carries less people than the A380s and even more importantly has less range, so compared to the economics of A350s it comes up second best. Pretty much all the airlines which have ordered B777X operate hub model so they can justify larger loads. QF can't. Hence B777X makes no sense economically.
A350 is a much larger aircraft than A330 and serves a different purpose. QF is using combo of A321neos, B787s to replace majority of A330 routes, and A350 for longish routes with sufficient demand.
Also if QF management (who are actual experts in aircraft fleet planning and management unlike TH-cam armchair CEOs) had 10 years knowledge of B777X and didn't order it then you should realise that there are probably a few good reasons why they didn't.
@@AdamHewitson B777x does not fit in QF's current strategy.
QF's aim is to connect point to point and have long range aircraft to do that. QF ordered B747s and A380s because at their respective times they were the most fuel efficient aircraft that can do long distance. Problem is that they need full loads to be economically viable so QF focused these routes through Sydney/Melb and to an extent Brisbane to other big hub cities. A380 is even limited because you need them to be at least 80% full on long range routes to make money, which limits QF's ability to use them to only a few cities through their Sydney and Melbourne hubs.
If they really cared, they would've chose the A220😅
They have.