The SCL and JNB routes are operated by 747-400s with 58 J beds.
QF said they plan on using the 787-9 to replace 747s whilst also upgauging frequencies in order to keep capacity rather constant. SCL and JNB are only operated on I think four days of the week. SCL and JNB are very "long, thin" routes and they're operated by old and inefficient planes too big for those routes. It makes complete logical sense for QF to put the 787-9 on those routes.
However, given the configuration stated by the OP? A shift to daily services would arguably result in an oversupply of premium seats (and perhaps an undersupply of economy seats) to these markets, if we presume the ratios of the 747 are appropriate.
QF aren't ordering enough 787 to replace their 747 fleet. They may order more, but what we know now is that they have not. So for the immediate future the 787 will not replace every 747 flight.
JNB is 6 x weekly and until recently daily (1 day dropped to free plane for SFO). SCL is 4 wkly and gets increased seasonally. Long routes, yes... but pedominately monopoly routes too.
It makes logical sense for QF to put 787s on routes that will return the best yield.
JNB has supported a daily B747 rotation for quite some time and I believe that J class is well patronised. SCL is growing rather quickly and seems to be constrained by lack of frames.
A little early to predict loads on SYD-SFO given that it is a recently re-introduced route. Initial reports are that loads are good - but when QF previously served SFO, it was only 5 x week if I recall correctly.
However the daily BNE-LAX is certainly right-sized for the route. It also takes some (SYD) overflow to LAX - and this is the B747-400 that continues LAX-JFK-LAX. I would doubt that there would be much chance of change on this route from a B747-400 for the next couple of years, at least.
It is also why I suspect that DFW might be the initial B787-9 destination de-jour. If QF were to remove the A380-800 from DFW, it would allow them to substitute 2 x daily B787-9's; thus freeing up the A380 for other parts of the network ie HKG. That in turn would free up the current HKG B747.
Additionally, a suggested BNE-DFW-BNE could be used to open up a completely new route (ex QLD).
Its also presient to remember that BNE is growing rapidly in terms of pax numbers and is neck and neck with MEL.
DFW makes sense as a destination for QF but would they want to take the A380 off it? The A380 is load restricted and that obviously means its not the perfect plane, but wouldn't QF want to maintain First Class service to DFW? Longer routes generally have higher premium demand than shorter routes after all.
Of course there probably is premium demand to HKG, and CX has dedicated First Class ground service accessible by Oneworld flyers so flying the A380 there can make sense. But even Cathay doesn't offer First on that route... if it isn't viable for them, would QF be different?
What about Sydney-Haneda though? Longer than Hong Kong by two hours, and flies into an allied airline's hub with First ground service. And Haneda slots are rare so I think QF would want their flagship product on that route. JAL offer First from Haneda to Sydney (I think) so there's probably a market for it too.
Regarding SFO, they originally served it 5 times a week... but in a jet that carried 365 people. That would be more capacity than a daily 787-9 would provide, so of loads are good QF will probably keep the 747 going to SFO. Now QF are aiming to serve SFO six times a week, so capacity-wise I don't think QF would be interested in downgauging.
Looking at QF's A330-300, it would appear feasible to fit it 42J and 28Y+, if Y is reduced from 269 to 165. The 787-9 is not much shorter than an A330-300. That would be 8 across in Y. There may even some additional space needed for crew rest if the 787-9 is for long routes (or is this below ?)
I can see QF keeping 9 747s IF they can use them profitable after the 787s arrive, freeing up the new aircraft for new routes.
The article Cristopher refers to also mentions that new routes MEL-DFW and PER-LHR are amongst the creditable rumours.
hutch
hutch
Member since 07 Oct 2012
Total posts 771
Cozysuite... show me one piece of evidence that QF is considering it, then we'll discuss it.
hutch
hutch
Member since 07 Oct 2012
Total posts 771
How many current J seats on the 747's that fly to SCL and JNB? How do we know QF will swap those routes for a 787-9?
StudiodeKadent
StudiodeKadent
Member since 20 May 2015
Total posts 109
The SCL and JNB routes are operated by 747-400s with 58 J beds.
QF said they plan on using the 787-9 to replace 747s whilst also upgauging frequencies in order to keep capacity rather constant. SCL and JNB are only operated on I think four days of the week. SCL and JNB are very "long, thin" routes and they're operated by old and inefficient planes too big for those routes. It makes complete logical sense for QF to put the 787-9 on those routes.
However, given the configuration stated by the OP? A shift to daily services would arguably result in an oversupply of premium seats (and perhaps an undersupply of economy seats) to these markets, if we presume the ratios of the 747 are appropriate.
hutch
hutch
Member since 07 Oct 2012
Total posts 771
QF aren't ordering enough 787 to replace their 747 fleet. They may order more, but what we know now is that they have not. So for the immediate future the 787 will not replace every 747 flight.
JNB is 6 x weekly and until recently daily (1 day dropped to free plane for SFO). SCL is 4 wkly and gets increased seasonally. Long routes, yes... but pedominately monopoly routes too.
It makes logical sense for QF to put 787s on routes that will return the best yield.
kimshep
kimshep
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 11 Oct 2014
Total posts 412
JNB has supported a daily B747 rotation for quite some time and I believe that J class is well patronised. SCL is growing rather quickly and seems to be constrained by lack of frames.
A little early to predict loads on SYD-SFO given that it is a recently re-introduced route. Initial reports are that loads are good - but when QF previously served SFO, it was only 5 x week if I recall correctly.
However the daily BNE-LAX is certainly right-sized for the route. It also takes some (SYD) overflow to LAX - and this is the B747-400 that continues LAX-JFK-LAX. I would doubt that there would be much chance of change on this route from a B747-400 for the next couple of years, at least.
It is also why I suspect that DFW might be the initial B787-9 destination de-jour. If QF were to remove the A380-800 from DFW, it would allow them to substitute 2 x daily B787-9's; thus freeing up the A380 for other parts of the network ie HKG. That in turn would free up the current HKG B747.
Additionally, a suggested BNE-DFW-BNE could be used to open up a completely new route (ex QLD).
Its also presient to remember that BNE is growing rapidly in terms of pax numbers and is neck and neck with MEL.
StudiodeKadent
StudiodeKadent
Member since 20 May 2015
Total posts 109
DFW makes sense as a destination for QF but would they want to take the A380 off it? The A380 is load restricted and that obviously means its not the perfect plane, but wouldn't QF want to maintain First Class service to DFW? Longer routes generally have higher premium demand than shorter routes after all.
Of course there probably is premium demand to HKG, and CX has dedicated First Class ground service accessible by Oneworld flyers so flying the A380 there can make sense. But even Cathay doesn't offer First on that route... if it isn't viable for them, would QF be different?
What about Sydney-Haneda though? Longer than Hong Kong by two hours, and flies into an allied airline's hub with First ground service. And Haneda slots are rare so I think QF would want their flagship product on that route. JAL offer First from Haneda to Sydney (I think) so there's probably a market for it too.
Regarding SFO, they originally served it 5 times a week... but in a jet that carried 365 people. That would be more capacity than a daily 787-9 would provide, so of loads are good QF will probably keep the 747 going to SFO. Now QF are aiming to serve SFO six times a week, so capacity-wise I don't think QF would be interested in downgauging.
GregXL
GregXL
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 26 May 2014
Total posts 320
Looking at QF's A330-300, it would appear feasible to fit it 42J and 28Y+, if Y is reduced from 269 to 165. The 787-9 is not much shorter than an A330-300. That would be 8 across in Y. There may even some additional space needed for crew rest if the 787-9 is for long routes (or is this below ?)
I can see QF keeping 9 747s IF they can use them profitable after the 787s arrive, freeing up the new aircraft for new routes.
The article Cristopher refers to also mentions that new routes MEL-DFW and PER-LHR are amongst the creditable rumours.
GregXL
GregXL
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 26 May 2014
Total posts 320
CX A330-300: 39J, 28Y+,175Y. Not too different to the suggested QF 787-9.