Calm down about the Qantas Boeing 787 Dreamliner!

By btaus | Sep 10, 2017, 08:17 PM
Qantas Dreamliner is way too overhyped. There's huge competition in SYD/MEL-LHR routes, and only two redeeming qualities of Qantas Dreamliner is stopover in PER rather than third countries (and not much people can deal with $8000+ price tag and 17.5 hour flight time) and new Qantas lounge in LHR and PER.

Qantas Dreamliner Downsides:
1. Price comparison (MEL-LHR, business*):
Qantas Dreamliner: $8883 (most expensive)
Emirates A380: $7764
Malaysia A330/A350: $7528
Singapore A380/A350: $7286
Etihad Dreamliner/A380/777: $7024
Cathay Pacific A350/777: $6648
Qatar A380/777 Qsuites: $6282
Royal Brunei Dreamliner: $4775
China Southern A330/Dreamliner: $3175 (least expensive)
No one is willing to pay for (close to first class) price tag unless is corporate funded, and reward seat and points upgrade availability is literally zero.
2. Not the industry leading hard products. Qatar, Emirates and Cathay have way better hard products, whether is reverse herringbone seat, Qsuite or inflight bar.
3. Not the industry leading soft products. In this case, Qatar, Singapore and Cathay have better soft products.
4. Flight time and safety. Others maxed out their flight time at 14 hours. Qantas goes for 17.5 hours, and even continue same plane to LAX after 24-hour journey from London or continue to London after 15.5 hours journey from LAX. In this case, safety is definitely a (minor) concern.

As I said, calm down about Qantas Dreamliner.
No member give thanks

By moa999 | Sep 10, 2017, 10:01 PM
Feel free to fly with China Southern then
Last edited by moa999 at Sep 10, 2017, 10.02 PM.
No member give thanks

By Bennett_s | Sep 10, 2017, 10:49 PM
Woah ...hate Qantas much? I'm quite sure most people know how to look up airfare prices. They are free to fly whoever they like. If qantas is offering an Australian alternative then people have that choice also. What a reaction...
No member give thanks

By Mjkcan | Sep 11, 2017, 08:23 AM
I think it's more of a "why is qantas hyping up a plane that's been in service for nearly a decade?"

This plane is neither new or revolutionary... and qantas already owns a bunch via Jetstar - so what's the big deal?
No member give thanks

By mspcooper | Sep 11, 2017, 11:00 AM
Very few airlines in the world have strong loyalty. Qantas has great loyalty and they deserve every bit of it. If they can operate a service and make it a success, how does it matter what they charge for it. They are not for everyone. I love qantas, but i would'nt fly the PER-LHR for many reasons, one being the cost. However, i admire the people who do. I personally do not understand how you could compare Chinese carrier (service) to Qantas. They are miles apart. 
No member give thanks

By Mjudd | Sep 11, 2017, 11:21 AM
Thanks for concern as to Qantas' safety. However I think they probably already have this base covered
No member give thanks

By Sonnenberg | Sep 11, 2017, 12:10 PM
It makes perfect sense for qantas to charge as much as it possibly can. If people want to pay a premium, let them! 
No member give thanks

By andredfb | Sep 11, 2017, 05:39 PM
How is routing LAX-MEL-PER-LHR a safety concern? All airlines try to maximise the time their aircraft spend in the air. In fact long haul flying results in fewer cycles on the airframe and is less taxing than short haul flying (on the aircraft). In long haul flying the aircraft experiences fewer pressurisation cycles, less time with the engines at full power, less takeoffs and landings and more flying in cruise condition. All of which reduce stress on the aircraft.
Last edited by andredfb at Sep 11, 2017, 05.51 PM.
Member who gave thanks

qickdraw

By btaus | Sep 11, 2017, 06:06 PM
How is routing LAX-MEL-PER-LHR a safety concern? All airlines try to maximise the time their aircraft spend in the air. In fact long haul flying results in fewer cycles on the airframe and is less taxing than short haul flying (on the aircraft). In long haul flying the aircraft experiences fewer pressurisation cycles, less time with the engines at full power, less takeoffs and landings and more flying in cruise condition. All of which reduce stress on the aircraft.
Last edited by andredfb at Sep 11, 2017, 05.51 PM.
Qantas actually run their plane on LAX-MEL-PER-LHR and return (80+ hours) and they've outsourced most of its longhaul widebody maintenance work to HKG and XMN (those facilities is owned by Cathay Pacific - Hey!). In this case, safety is a definitely a minor concern.
No member give thanks

By andredfb | Sep 11, 2017, 07:37 PM

How is routing LAX-MEL-PER-LHR a safety concern? All airlines try to maximise the time their aircraft spend in the air. In fact long haul flying results in fewer cycles on the airframe and is less taxing than short haul flying (on the aircraft). In long haul flying the aircraft experiences fewer pressurisation cycles, less time with the engines at full power, less takeoffs and landings and more flying in cruise condition. All of which reduce stress on the aircraft.

Last edited by andredfb at Sep 11, 2017, 05.51 PM.

Qantas actually run their plane on LAX-MEL-PER-LHR and return (80+ hours) and they've outsourced most of its longhaul widebody maintenance work to HKG and XMN (those facilities is owned by Cathay Pacific - Hey!). In this case, safety is a definitely a minor concern.


I'm not sure what your point is? There are substantial breaks in the route at MEL and LAX for line maintenance. I don't see how operating LAX-MEL-PER-LHR is any different (safety wise) to the way QF currently uses their A380's. For example MEL-DXB-LHR-DXB-SYD, which is similar flying time.

Maintenance wise, you can bet that QF will use the existing line maintenance facility at MEL and LAX. There has been no announcement about heavy maintenance that I can find. Also their A380 fleet heavy maintenance is done by Lufthansa Technik and the A330's are done in Brisbane. The only wide body maintained in HKG is the 747. I'm not saying the hype around the 787 is justified, but seriously there aren't any safety concerns.

Last edited by andredfb at Sep 11, 2017, 08.51 PM.
No member give thanks

By victort | Sep 12, 2017, 02:39 PM
No it's not new and yes many other airlines have already been flying the 787-9 long before QF - however you have to bear in mind this is an AU based website where you're going to get a lot more focus on QF and their products. I do agree with you on many points - but can see why it could be construed as "overhyped" based on this website's patronage.
No member give thanks

By moa999 | Sep 12, 2017, 03:02 PM
I think it's more of a "why is qantas hyping up a plane that's been in service for nearly a decade?"... so what's the big deal?
Because airlines so rarely add a new type that it's a good way to get free publicity.
QF did the same thing 10yrs ago with A380, and before that with 747 Longreach.
Other airlines do the same in their home markets.
No member give thanks

By kimshep | Sep 13, 2017, 10:54 AM


@moa999

Have you ever flown CZ Business Class internationally? I personally have .. and you might be very, very surprised.

Needless to say that at approximately 65% less than the quoted QF fare, the CZ option represents a highly considerable saving - compared to QF - for what is a very good product. It also explains the reason that Chinese carriers are aggressively targeting QF's overpriced Business market.

If QF can offer Red -eDeals in Y on SYD/MEL-DXB-LHR at $1411 (current low season), it is somewhat stretching the point to offer J on the same route at $8.8K+ when leading carriers (EK, SQ, CX, QR) are all $1,100 - $2,600 cheaper in J. The QF B787-9 might be 'revolutionary' in their parlance (believe me, it's not) but to surcharge it at this level due to being a new route is somewhat beyond belief. The market will make it's overall decision based primarily on 'comfort' (B787-9 vs A380/B777) and tolerable route hours. Add 'price'. The odds might not be in QF's long-term favour IMHO.

Last edited by kimshep at Sep 13, 2017, 10.55 AM.
No member give thanks

By Nick Sydney 2 | Sep 13, 2017, 07:20 PM
17.5 hours flight time is right up there but only a bit longer than my regular DFW to SYD run. As for QF safety and so on... Let's leave it there.
No member give thanks

By Lurch | Sep 13, 2017, 11:38 PM
Sorry dont fly enough to quote correct abbreviations but I booked ANZ Perth - Los Angeles return for 5K, Qantas wanted in the vicinity of 9K last time I looked.
Family trip Perth to London, Zurich to Perth, Wife & kids in PE and I in Business on Singapore Air for just 15K, no others come close, least of all Qantas
We are tall people and are happy to pay a higher fare for more room,service is secondary and meals/comfort after that with cost being a factor in the equation also.
I would love to be able to stick with Qantas but the difference is service & price isnt justifiable on these occasions to me




Member who gave thanks

Steven Beale

By Packetman21 | Sep 15, 2017, 10:20 AM
You are on an australian travel website, mate. Expect hype and excitement for our carriers getting new types of aircraft etc. 
No member give thanks

×
×

Forgot Password

If you’ve forgotten your password, simply enter your email address below, then click 'Submit'. We’ll send you an email to re-activate your account and enter a new password.

×