#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As for the rest of your post, don't you think the airlines know what they are doing? As Andrew has been attempting to point out to you they, the airlines have ALL the facts and figures and have chosen to deploy their limited assets where they beleive they will get the best returns. Without any in depth knowledge of those figures and for every other route whining is pointless. Edited - Mod |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Well, the reason that I am whining is that in 2006 this happened (from The Mercury Newspaper):
Quote:
Now in 2009, we have this from September: http://www.themercury.com.au/article...81_travel.html December pax have traditionally been 10-15% higher than September pax. With no increase in services compared with September this year (JQ took some off for Nov which they will put back on for Dec), I can forsee it happening for the 4th time in 4 years, which I find unacceptable! |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Sure demand may be higher, but you are not getting the point that the airline has to consider demand on ALL routes and allocate their resources to suit.
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Cbr-drw-cbr
With respect to CBR-DRW-CBR flights an employee publication implies they will connect to CBR-MEL services. I won't quote it as it is poorly worded.
Perhaps this is the poor man's version of the direct MEL-DRW QF services I was pondering? Would be a clever idea to have MEL-DRW customers connect through CBR to relieve ADL, SYD and BNE services and also boost CBR-DRW loads. I cannot imagine 3 -800s could be filled solely on O&D customers. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Well, there are existing MEL-CBR (QF804) and CBR-MEL (QF483) that would connect quite nicely with the CBR-DRW and DRW-CBR respectively. So does the article imply that the same aircraft will operate MEL-CBR-DRW-CBR-MEL, or simply that there will be suitable connecting flights. I would prefer to see HBA-CBR-DRW-CBR-HBA myself, but I guess that won't be happening!
Lastly, there have been good comments regarding aircraft capacity allocation when this thread took a side turn for a bit , but no-one has posted a single advantage for QF not loading in the connecting schedule for these new CBR-DRW flights. They obviously know where it will come from, so is there a single advantage for holding back the schedule? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
QF804 is a 767, so that is not the aircraft that will continue to Darwin unless they down grade to a 737-800 and cancel the return QF811 flight to Melbourne 3 days a week. I don't see that happening as clearly it is a busy flight, hence the need for a 767.
One flight that does stand out is QF706 from Adelaide. It arrives about the right time to be able to continue to Darwin and I cannot see where that a/c goes after it arrives in Canberra. So maybe it is a possibility. It is a -400 though. And for the return as you pointed out QF483 seems logical but again it is a -400. So I guess some time soon we will see some new flights, or some changes to existing flights to accomodate this new flight to Darwin. Why it hasn't been done now is anyones guess. Time will tell. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
To Quote
The Boeing 737-800 services will operate Monday, Wednesday and Friday, also connecting Canberra customers to evening Melbourne services.
Take from that what you will. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Just did a dummy booking for MEL-DRW-MEL in Feb and the connection via Canberra is showing in both directions. One of the CBR-MEL evening connections, QF483 is showing as a 737-800, while In January it is shown as a 737-400. It would be fair to say that QF845 and QF483 are operated by the same aircraft.
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
From New worldwide airline routes at centre for pacific aviation, it has got 3 new 737-800 flights from MEL-CBR starting feb10. So these may be the ones that carry onto Darwin
|
|
|