V Australia: PER-LON and SYD-NYC nonstop?

[Steve Jones]

And from a reputable source, confirming rumours that have been floating around for some time...

PER-LON is an interesting scenario. Given the added fuel required, there will need to be a significant yield premium on the flight (for example, Thai couldn't make its nonstop flights to the US pay, despite having high loads). However, given world turmoil, many people might be attracted by the lack of a need to stop overseas on the way to the UK, even if it is still a one-stop option from the Australian East Coast (eg: SYD-PER-LON).

16-hour flights to London loom

GEOFFREY THOMAS AVIATION WRITER, The West Australian

November 6, 2009, 2:25 am

V Australia, the international arm of Virgin Blue, is understood to be about to announce a new 16-hour, non-stop Perth to London service in 2011 that will be the world's second longest air route and will shave up to five hours off today's journey.

Chief executive Brett Godfrey is in final negotiations with Boeing for up to 70 aircraft that will include six of those with the world's longest range, the 300-seat Boeing 777-200LR, which can fly to virtually anywhere in the world non-stop.

The airline will also open a route linking Sydney and New York non-stop.

In February, when the airline's first 361-seat Boeing 777-300ER was delivered for the Sydney to Los Angeles route, Mr Godfrey and Sir Richard Branson, the airline's main shareholder, discussed making Perth a hub for routes to Britain and South Africa.

Sir Richard first raised his vision of London to Perth non-stop flights with _The West Australian _in late 2003 but aircraft availability and capability were obstacles.

Boeing's 777-200LR, which entered service in 2005, set the non-stop record for a commercial jet aircraft when it flew 21,600km east from Hong Kong to London over the US in November, 2005, in 22 hours and 42 minutes.

Virgin Atlantic had planned London to Perth non-stop flights with 270-seat 787-9s from 2014 but that plane is more than two years late.

Depressed aircraft prices are giving Virgin Blue a chance to fast track expansion plans.

A Virgin Blue spokesperson would only confirm that it had executives in the US looking to replace many of its 737s from 2011 and that now was a good time to shop for aircraft.

"We're often talking with Boeing and any aircraft manufacturer would certainly take that opportunity to make further presentations and typically that includes hypothetical modelling of aircraft options," the spokesperson said.

"We always keep an open mind as to opportunities and changing market conditions. Network planning and fleet strategy is part of that."

Virgin is also expected to launch a Sydney-Perth- Johannesburg route late next year.

[Gareth Forwood]

Very exciting news if this is true. I can see how SYD-JFK direct would be popular, especially with the internal connections offered by Virgin America. However, I can't see the Perth option having a huge demand, except for those in Perth. It really doesn't bother me where I stop along the way (and I don't think many others care either), so I can't really see many people choosing the Perth stop for that reason. Perhaps I underestimate the demand for Perth residents going to Europe direct...

[Jeff Gilbert]

There are alot of British expats in Perth so it might do well from there if it happens

[chrisb]

so I can't really see many people choosing the Perth stop for that reason. Perhaps I underestimate the demand for Perth residents going to Europe direct...

if i had to choose a transit in Perth with the associated terminal transfer and death-by-boredom at PER International or a transit in Singapore, I think I'll pick Singapore.

[Gerald A]

V Australia eyeing more 777s for JFK, LHR service
Friday November 6, 2009
V Australia, the international arm of Virgin Blue, is understood to be close to announcing an order for 777-200LRs for new nonstop Sydney-New York JFK and Perth-London Heathrow service beginning in 2011.

CEO Brett Godfrey is in the final stages of negotiations with Boeing for an order of up to 70 aircraft that will include six 300-seat 777-200LRs, 737-800s and 737-900ERs for fleet replacement and expansion



http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=18418

[Arthur T]

For PER - LON, think VS can be able to transfer 1 LHR slot to VA for such a service? But just wonder whether the parent company of Virgin Atlantic, Singapore Airlines will allow to do so, as it will make Singapore Airlines to lose 1 slot @ LHR as well.

However, provided they are going to operate Boeing 777-200LR aircraft, why not simply launch a direct route from Eastern or Central Australia instead? It will be able to beat all other Kangaroo operators, also I can see passengers will be easier to change flights from the East Coast to London.

Suggested Australian Ports for Direct B77L London service:
AYQ/CBR/SYD/MEL

But I can see if VA can do SYD - JFK and PER - LHR non-stop, then Qantas will be in huge threat because they don't have such a long range aircraft to operate non-stop services between these ports, they will be the biggest loser of the route. Think time has come for Qantas to consider purchasing A340-500 HGW and A380-800ER to compete with Virgin Australia.

Furthermore, just wondering as Virgin Blue is a budget airline and yet in terms of value of money, market for DJ is limited as it is real fare (including luggage, food and entertainment on board) is much more expensive than Qantas; that the group will buy those new B738 & B739 to Virgin Australia to phase out Virgin Blue and compete and grab domestic market share effectively.

Finally, no Boeing 737-700ER nor Embarer 190AR in the upcoming order? A bit disappointed. Think B737ER and E190AR can do much better for Pacific Blue to operate long haul services (For eg. OOL-HKG, DRW-SIN, DRW-HKG, DRW-BKK, SYD-SIN, SYD-HKG, MEL-TSA etc) to beat other airlines which are operating for its low cost.

[Ash W]

For PER - LON, think VS can be able to transfer 1 LHR slot to VA for such a service? But just wonder whether the parent company of Virgin Atlantic, Singapore Airlines will allow to do so, as it will make Singapore Airlines to lose 1 slot @ LHR as well..

There are other airports in London apart from Heathrow. Gatwick comes to mind as one such example. Despite being a bit of a crap hole of an airport (well actually all London airports/terminals are crap holes, except aybe T5 at Heathrow) it would make an ideal place to service and offer a major point of difference over it's competitors who mostly fly to LHR.

[Gareth Forwood]

I recall reading somewhere that the 77L could make it SYD-LHR but not LHR-SYD because of the prevailing winds (might be the other way around), ruling out direct flights from the east coast.

[Ash W]

If you look at a map you will see that Perth is on the west coast, so that point is rather moot in the context of PER-LON flights.

[Gareth Forwood]

I was actually referring to Arthur's post posing east coast options:

Suggested Australian Ports for Direct B77L London service:
AYQ/CBR/SYD/MEL

I am thankfully reasonably knowledgable in Australian geography...

[James P]

What are the health implications for pax, sitting in their confined spaces for 16 hours? Surely a recipe for DVTs? There's no way I would want to be flying for 16 hours straight! Despite the extra time it took, I liked the days when there was a refueling stop in Singapore and another in Bahrain when flying to Europe.
What about similar OHSW for pilot/co pilot and cabin staff? Wouldn't they run out of hours at 16 hours non-stop?
What other issues does a 16 hour flight raise?
What do those who work in the industry think?

[Ash W]

What about similar OHSW for pilot/co pilot and cabin staff? Wouldn't they run out of hours at 16 hours non-stop?

That have two sets of crew on these ultra long haul flights to get around this issue. The downside is it makes it more expensive.

Cost is the major reason you don't see ultra long haul flights. The aircraft that would operate these flights are generally smaller, so less passengers and to pay the additional costs you need to have a large and full premium (business/first) class cabins.

[Mike W]

Very exciting news if this is true.

I agree. What a refreshing change from all the doom and gloom going on the in the industry at the moment.

^ As for the two crew issue, I think they use two sets on all long haul flights anyway so no news there.

[Philip Argy]

SYD-JFK would be very attractive, as would non-stop to a number of European cities, such as Frankfurt. Whilst Changi is OK (or will be when the current renovations are completed), the lounge is getting pretty tired now and the stopovers getting shorter. The prospect of shaving five hours off a trip to Europe is also attractive. On my recent trip to Geneva the transit through Heathrow was an unwelcome burden, even though I chose that routing (rather than going via Frankfurt) to maximise my A380 flight time.

What is the longest viable range for a fully laden A380 right now and what are some cities that could take us to out of SYD?

[Michael Mak]

Suggested Australian Ports for Direct B77L London service:
AYQ/CBR/SYD/MEL

AYQ = Ayers Rock Airport? :eek:

[Arthur T]

Re Michael: AYQ = Uluru

A few advantages for that:

1. Airport is small enough that passengers can pass through custom in a more relaxed but quick, efficient manner (think maybe better than those @ SYD) that transfer time can be as comparable as changing flights at Singapore, Hong Kong etc but they eventually can save lots of time passing customs.

2. Advantage for Virgin Blue to launch Central Australia services to beat Tiger and Qantas

3. Uluru is located in the middle of the Island, hence flight times to any other ports in the coast will be comparable with direct from Singapore without significant detour

4. Marketing purposes: How good that will be if passengers can fly to the symbol of Australia directly from Europe?

[Mike W]

They don't operate 2 sets of crews on long haul services. They rotate rest between the crew.

My bad then. What is the fight timeframe then when two crews must be used? ...or so far it isn't unless you're flying from Perth to London... or Singapore to New York?

[Daniel F]

1. Airport is small enough that passengers can pass through custom in a more relaxed but quick, efficient manner (think maybe better than those @ SYD) that transfer time can be as comparable as changing flights at Singapore, Hong Kong etc but they eventually can save lots of time passing customs.


Just because the airport is small, doesn't mean that passengers can pass through customs any quicker. The number of customs officers is proportional to the number of passengers going through the airport. Do you think they're going to put as many customs officers out at AYQ as they do at SYD?


2. Advantage for Virgin Blue to launch Central Australia services to beat Tiger and Qantas


So from operating no flights to AYQ they suddenly need to start operating from most capital cities to services the V Australia flights?


3. Uluru is located in the middle of the Island, hence flight times to any other ports in the coast will be comparable with direct from Singapore without significant detour


It means flight times to any other port is a good 3 to 4 hours! And any delays to the incoming V Australia flight means you have to hold all the DJ services to meet those passengers... or put them up in very expensive hotels in AYQ! If anyone wants to see a monopoly at work, there's no better place to see it than at AYQ.


4. Marketing purposes: How good that will be if passengers can fly to the symbol of Australia directly from Europe?

Uluru is the symbol of Australia? No disrepect to Uluru, but I think that won't be the first in the list of spots to visit for first-time visitors to Australia.

[D Chan]

AYQ = Ayers Rock Airport? :eek:

and to think an airline can fill any aircraft with over 100 pax, all of whom after spending 17 hours in the air to arrive straight into the middle of the desert in the middle of nowhere.. there's zero logic in doing that. It might work in a game but not in real life.

Couple of points / observations & thoughts:
- VA is engaging in tactics to deliberately target the Qantas Group (e.g. first with LAX, then with Joburg, Fiji, Phuket) - what is more interesting is they are discussing this idea with the media so early. Typically bold of them to raise a proposal which is subject to: 'regulatory approval, aircraft orders and availability, slots etc.'
- Non-stop service (both directions) will not be economically viable in at least another 10 yrs time. What I mean is that within the next 10 yrs with the technology that is available to airlines, to fly such a route they will charge a premium for the service and only the rich will be able to afford to fly non-stop
- As we have seen before with the SQ A345 they may be configed with first and business product only. I highly doubt it will have an economy cabin
- In 15-20 years time airlines will be able to fly direct to Europe from Australia
- Timing - by 2011 the world economy should hopefully have recovered from the downturn and there may be enough business traffic to sustain the route, esp given the mining/resource boom in WA.
- what does LON-PER mean for people living in the east coast? are there any real advantages of stopping / transferring at PER instead of SIN, BKK, HKG etc.? Probably little to none?
- Here is the reality with these ultra-long haul flights - we're burning more fuel just to carry enough fuel to enable the aircraft to fly non-stop.

[Ash W]

SYD-JFK would be very attractive, as would non-stop to a number of European cities, such as Frankfurt.
...
What is the longest viable range for a fully laden A380 right now and what are some cities that could take us to out of SYD?

Non stop to European cities would work with smaller aircraft, provided the passengers are willing to pay the higher costs of direct flights with said smaller aircraft. As for the range of an A380, think it is maybe irrelevant as the A380 is a hub to hub aircraft and all major hub points outside of Australia are currently achievable.

[Bob C]

I don't think the A380 has the range to do SYD-JFK non-stop.

[Arthur T]

Re D Chan:

1. If VA is deliberately targeting Qantas Group and that they are not hiding those attacks but announce to the media, I found Qantas Group is getting somewhat stupid in their response. V Australia is a Full Service Carrier and yet JetStar is a budget airline. JetStar's Star Class don't even have Flat Bed Business where V Australia have, and I highly doubt whether Qantas' strategy works by deploying more Jetstar service to compete with V Australia, with their Fiji and Phuket, and also increasing worry about JQ's high yield Japan service.

2.After GFC 2008, Premium travel had been hit hard. I really doubt whether any all Business/all First service will be able to continue to operate viably with an aircraft bigger than Boeing 737 or Airbus A320.

3. With the demand between London and Sydney, I can see a direct service with economy and business and first is viable, but may just yield low profit because more fuel consumption (even an additional tank required) and costs of labour. However, for V Australia a new carrier, what they should do now is to grab as many passengers as possible, so even they can only be break-even on those routes, at the end they can still get some benefits from their increased domestic service. People will take DJ instead of QF/TT/JQ/ZL domestically after their VA flight because of direct transfer or even frequent flyer points.

4. LHR - PER is not really attractive to East Coast passengers at all I believe, but it is simply VA want to start some direct flights from Australia back to the UK for marketing purposes maybe?
The real advantage for that could be prevent additional border crossing, although you don't need to enter the country in any of SIN, KUL, BKK, HKG but in case you cannot get into an immediate flight you can simply stay in somewhere you familiar (at least PER is in Australia) so that you don't need to worry about getting into trouble in another country of transit.

However, through this discussion in this thread, I would like to drop some notes to Qantas:

a. As A$ soar and we are recording a record number of Australians going overseas where the foreign visitors remain relatively constant, this year will be extremely critical for Qantas to fix their problem with International service.

b. If Qantas is not going to speed up their A380 and B737 delivery, both domestic and long haul international service will just going to be eaten even more by V Australia. If Qantas wants to survive, please speed out A380 delivery and dump all 747 into the rubbish bin as much as possible next year.

c. V Australia's B777 will continue to provide a better cabin experience and more long range, high quality service out of Australia in our near future. If Qantas is still waiting for their Boeing 787s without adding any contingent orders to cover the delay, then I would advise Qantas to shut down their International operations now to prevent any further losses.

d. Qantas should consider order more A330s and even A340s for the short term (Perhaps just lease some?) for itself rather than to Jetstar - I highly doubt the strategy of using Jetstar for V Australia in Asian/Pacific routes. V Australia is a premium carrier where Jetstar is a carrier with no free service. As what the fares V Australia can offer to Nadi and Phuket, taking Jetstar is simply a stupid idea as no one will like to pay the same price for no service on Jetstar where they can get much more free services on V Australia.

e. Qantas Mainline should immediately refurnish all A330 cabins to be identical as what is in the new Airbus A380. I think the new cabin will be able to make Qantas more comparable with V Australia.

f. Qantas should consider deploying more mainline service instead of Jetstar to Asia as well as consider use of A332 to launch more ports. Otherwise as V Australia jump in Qantas will just losing more customers.

g. Qantas must immediately include JetStar into OneWorld and to provide enhanced frequent flyer points accural programme for OneWorld members. Also Jetstar Asia and Jetstar Pacific should join OneWorld as well and to code-share all JQ, 3K & BL services with Cathay Pacific, Dragonair, British Airways and Japan Airlines also its parent Qantas. Co-sharing such will eventually lower the price from Asia to some relatively remote ports in Australia eg. ADL, PPP, DRW, HBA etc. Also more connections that passengers won't fly Qantas to Sydney then change Virgin Blue to Adelaide.

h. Qantas should consider selling its Dash and Boeing 717 and replace them with E-Jets. Most commutors prefer jet rather than tubroprop. This will enable Qantas to grasp more passengers from DJ for regional routes.

[Ash W]

Arthur, with the exception of LAX flights V Aust is not targeting Qantas in any way shape or form. They seem to be doing their own thing, which is good for them and good for the industry as a whole.

I don't think Qantas has any need to worry about V-Aust at present or into the future. Qantas will always be bigger and whilst they will compete in some markets head to head there will be others where Qantas won't care. The situation is currently a bit like the situation that exists with Virgin Atlantic and B.

As for most of your comments they are fanciful at best and plain daft at the worst.

"Qantas" is the Qantas brand premium carrier. Jetstar is the low cost carrier. I personally beleive Qantas is being smart in introducing Jetstar services on longer and longer flights, especially to holiday destinations and secondary European ports. These services are ideal for Jetstar but too costly for Qantas.

[Tim C]

However, I can't see the Perth option having a huge demand, except for those in Perth. It really doesn't bother me where I stop along the way (and I don't think many others care either), so I can't really see many people choosing the Perth stop for that reason. Perhaps I underestimate the demand for Perth residents going to Europe direct...

I think this would sell very well. Currently there is 5-6 PER-SIN flights a day on 3 different airlines, 2 daily PER-DXB flights, 2-3 PER-KL flights a day on 2 different airlines and CX, QF services PER-HKG, PER-NRT etc. A fair chunk of those pax would be connecting to Europe.

It is 5.5 hours to SIN and then 13 to heathrow. So a 16 hour direct flight would sell very very well imo it is a shorter journey which is a big plus. Will be interesting to see what happens if it happens.

Cheers

[Gerald A]

I would use the SYD-JFK if it happens. It would be a route that would take me straight to my destination in the UK with 1 stop.

[Bob C]

I don't think the B777-300 has the range for SYD-JFK non stop whereas the B777-200LR would according to the brochure.

SQ used A345s on the world's longest non stop flight from SIN to JFK (15,349 kms over the North Pole) so perhaps A345s may also be an option for anyone considering SYD-JFK which is nearly 700kms longer at 16,013 kms.

Too long for me !

[Anthony T]

Brett is popping into TLS on his way home from a airplane buying trip.

You never know what he might pick up at the airport there. :D

[Marty H]

He may just be teasing them by standing at the door waving a Boeing flag:)

[Mick F]

I would advise Qantas to shut down their International operations now to prevent any further losses

LMAO!!! LMAO!!!

Ohhhhh dear, :). Sorry buddy, I just can't stop laughing at your whole post.

Very fanciful indeed.

Mick

[Andrew P]

it was 11.14pm post, maybe Mr J Walker helped with the contents

[Philip Argy]

I also think most of Arthur's post was a bit fanciful, but this sentence has now twice been misquoted:

If Qantas is still waiting for their Boeing 787s without adding any contingent orders to cover the delay, then I would advise Qantas to shut down their International operations now to prevent any further losses.


Most people on this board know the difference between an "If .. then" construct and an unconditional statement. It may not make a huge difference but in the interests of fairness ...

[Ash W]

True Phillip, the if makes a difference, but in any case Arthur hasn't been keeping up, because if he had been he would know the A330's that Qantas and Jetstar have been receiving in the past 18 months or so are their contingency plans for the delay in 787 deliveries.

[Stephen Harris]

From the Airbus website,

How far and where can I fly with this aircraft?
The A380 is designed for long-haul travel and can fly up to 15,000km /8,000 nm non-stop. It will mostly fly on those routes which see the heaviest concentration of large aircraft flights today. Currently 60 major airports around the world are ready for the A380 or preparing to receive it.

[Jarden S]

I think this would sell very well. Currently there is 5-6 PER-SIN flights a day on 3 different airlines, 2 daily PER-DXB flights, 2-3 PER-KL flights a day on 2 different airlines and CX, QF services PER-HKG, PER-NRT etc. A fair chunk of those pax would be connecting to Europe.

It is 5.5 hours to SIN and then 13 to heathrow. So a 16 hour direct flight would sell very very well imo it is a shorter journey which is a big plus. Will be interesting to see what happens if it happens.

Cheers

I agree there is big enough market now in Perth pop 1.6 million to sustain a daily PER-LHR non stop service and even people in Adelaide could choose to connect to the service opening up another 1.1 million potential customers. So V Australia should be able to fill a 305 seat 772LR and claw some Business off the incumbents SQ, TG, MH,and EK. I don't think it will attract many east coast customers. I think its long overdue for a PER-LHR nonstop just no one has been brave enough or had the right aircraft to do the route. Boeing claims the 777LR range of 16 417km more than enough to do the flight in both directions.