My fantasy QF route: mel/syd-nan-yyz. Code share with Air pacific and you'd have eastern canada tourists to fiji and australia, and a business connection to toronto/montreal. And no US stopovers... and no air canada (slimy bastards) competition! 😆
I don't disagree with much of what you say, however could QF work to become the oneworld carrier out of Singapore? CX is oneworld out of HKG and MH out of KUL. Does the Oneworld alliance want to hand all Singapore traffic to Star, or muck in and compete for business? BA only serves London, so the opportunity is there for QF to launch to other euro (and Asian?) destinations for oneworld travellers.
I also think they need to be careful with ULH direct flights, they'll be expensive to operate and may impact on LAX etc. I'd prefer to see JFK via YVR like Cathay does (maybe at a different time), it's less than 400km longer, the turnaround in YVR could be better than LAX, and I believe they can carry pax between the two (although I may be wrong there)
[/QUOTE]
The problem would be whether the Singapore Aviation Board would permit another carrier which is not majority Singapore owned to operate a lot of fifth freedom flights from Singapore. From what I understand the Open Skies treaty is between Singapore and Australia, but I am not certain about other destinations from Singapore. The Australian Government blocked the Singapore Airlines proposal to launch flights from SIN to LAX via SYD to protect QF, what's not to say the Singaporean government won't do the same? Especially if QF is looking to serve destinations from Singapore that SQ isn't currently serving.
The original 1967 AU-SG air service bilateral treaty allows Australian carriers to pick up traffic in Indonesia on the way to SIN and beyond rights to KUL and any points beyond excluding Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, The Philippines, Mainland China, USA and Canada via a Pacific routing.
I'm not sure if the update made to the treaty in 2003 changes any of that.
The same treaty lists beyond AU rights for Singapore carriers as Auckland, which has clearly changed since 1967 (with their CBR-WLG flights)
I also think they need to be careful with ULH direct flights, they'll be expensive to operate and may impact on LAX etc. I'd prefer to see JFK via YVR like Cathay does (maybe at a different time), it's less than 400km longer, the turnaround in YVR could be better than LAX, and I believe they can carry pax between the two (although I may be wrong there)
The current Canada agreement only has intermediate 5th freedom rights. HNL, NAN, PPT, SFO and "a point to be agreed". Cargo has additional rights, which include beyond rights to NYC, but they wouldn't be able to transport pax to JFK via Canada under the current agreement. (They could get NYC added as the "point to be agreed", then fly AU-JFK-Canada, but that would sort of defeat the point.)
The problem would be whether the Singapore Aviation Board would permit another carrier which is not majority Singapore owned to operate a lot of fifth freedom flights from Singapore. From what I understand the Open Skies treaty is between Singapore and Australia, but I am not certain about other destinations from Singapore. The Australian Government blocked the Singapore Airlines proposal to launch flights from SIN to LAX via SYD to protect QF, what's not to say the Singaporean government won't do the same? Especially if QF is looking to serve destinations from Singapore that SQ isn't currently serving.
The original 1967 AU-SG air service bilateral treaty allows Australian carriers to pick up traffic in Indonesia on the way to SIN and beyond rights to KUL and any points beyond excluding Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, The Philippines, Mainland China, USA and Canada via a Pacific routing.
I'm not sure if the update made to the treaty in 2003 changes any of that.
The same treaty lists beyond AU rights for Singapore carriers as Auckland, which has clearly changed since 1967 (with their CBR-WLG flights)
To the best of my knowledge (without checking the relevant approvals) I believe that QF retains 'beyond rights' from Singapore - obviously to LHR - but also to a range of European cities that it previously served, such as FRA, FCO, CDG etc. The main problem for QF here would be the QF / EK JV - hence the reason that QF is looking to serve Europe non-stop ex Australia which doesn't subvert the existing JVA..
Prior to the original 2012(?) QF / EK JV, Qantas served Europe for many years via 2 Asian hubs BKK and SIN. In fact, SYD-FRA-SYD was run daily ex SYD, but via both hubs on a 4 / 3 split across SIN & BKK. Services to FCO and CDG were, IIRC, split also. QF then decided to close the BKK-Europe hub operation which was then transferred to centralise European ops via the enlarged SIN hub, leaving BKK as an end of line operation ex Australia.
In reality, SIN being a primary Star hub .. and times having quickly changed .. I think that SQ's attention to the SIN-USA market would now be more firmly focussed on competition with UA and their non-stop B787-9 rather than the failed attempt to garner SIN-Australia-USA rights.
I also think they need to be careful with ULH direct flights, they'll be expensive to operate and may impact on LAX etc. I'd prefer to see JFK via YVR like Cathay does (maybe at a different time), it's less than 400km longer, the turnaround in YVR could be better than LAX, and I believe they can carry pax between the two (although I may be wrong there)
The current Canada agreement only has intermediate 5th freedom rights. HNL, NAN, PPT, SFO and "a point to be agreed". Cargo has additional rights, which include beyond rights to NYC, but they wouldn't be able to transport pax to JFK via Canada under the current agreement. (They could get NYC added as the "point to be agreed", then fly AU-JFK-Canada, but that would sort of defeat the point.)
Ok thanks, I couldn’t find anything about beyond rights from Canada to the USA (hence my unsureness). Could be a thing for future negotiations.
the resumption of adelaide to singapore to connect with the qf1 services to london and the qf2 in the other direction.revive the service as either a qf5/qf6 a few times a week ex sydney via adl to sin.anything has to be better than hubbing via perth or melbourne or being put on waitlist for singapore airlines.
the resumption of adelaide to singapore to connect with the qf1 services to london and the qf2 in the other direction.revive the service as either a qf5/qf6 a few times a week ex sydney via adl to sin.anything has to be better than hubbing via perth or melbourne or being put on waitlist for singapore airlines.
You mean, bringing back QF81/82 in its original guise and migrating the daily A330 nonstop to use QF5/6?
Does anyone know if Qantas is or will be monitoring these posts? Also, I believe they will have a wish list of their own, which would be based on locations where their bookings are taking the passengers. If Qantas are monitoring this post, can you please give us a clue, as we would rather you get the business rather than a foreign carrier.
I've always wondered the same thing and logic dictates that they would have to have their people looking at what's happening on forums like this.
PER to ATH would be a great direct route to have . Probably take in the region of 14 hours . From reading forums Paris , Frankfurt and even Rome in the conversation , haven't heard Athens mentioned . Great 1 stop link up for Melb Greek community.
anthony watts
anthony watts
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 29 Mar 2015
Total posts 15
My fantasy QF route: mel/syd-nan-yyz. Code share with Air pacific and you'd have eastern canada tourists to fiji and australia, and a business connection to toronto/montreal. And no US stopovers... and no air canada (slimy bastards) competition! 😆
Himeno
Himeno
Member since 12 Dec 2012
Total posts 295
I also think they need to be careful with ULH direct flights, they'll be expensive to operate and may impact on LAX etc. I'd prefer to see JFK via YVR like Cathay does (maybe at a different time), it's less than 400km longer, the turnaround in YVR could be better than LAX, and I believe they can carry pax between the two (although I may be wrong there)
The problem would be whether the Singapore Aviation Board would permit another carrier which is not majority Singapore owned to operate a lot of fifth freedom flights from Singapore. From what I understand the Open Skies treaty is between Singapore and Australia, but I am not certain about other destinations from Singapore. The Australian Government blocked the Singapore Airlines proposal to launch flights from SIN to LAX via SYD to protect QF, what's not to say the Singaporean government won't do the same? Especially if QF is looking to serve destinations from Singapore that SQ isn't currently serving.
The original 1967 AU-SG air service bilateral treaty allows Australian carriers to pick up traffic in Indonesia on the way to SIN and beyond rights to KUL and any points beyond excluding Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, The Philippines, Mainland China, USA and Canada via a Pacific routing.
I'm not sure if the update made to the treaty in 2003 changes any of that.
The same treaty lists beyond AU rights for Singapore carriers as Auckland, which has clearly changed since 1967 (with their CBR-WLG flights)
Himeno
Himeno
Member since 12 Dec 2012
Total posts 295
The current Canada agreement only has intermediate 5th freedom rights. HNL, NAN, PPT, SFO and "a point to be agreed".
Cargo has additional rights, which include beyond rights to NYC, but they wouldn't be able to transport pax to JFK via Canada under the current agreement.
(They could get NYC added as the "point to be agreed", then fly AU-JFK-Canada, but that would sort of defeat the point.)
kimshep
kimshep
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 11 Oct 2014
Total posts 412
The problem would be whether the Singapore Aviation Board would permit another carrier which is not majority Singapore owned to operate a lot of fifth freedom flights from Singapore. From what I understand the Open Skies treaty is between Singapore and Australia, but I am not certain about other destinations from Singapore. The Australian Government blocked the Singapore Airlines proposal to launch flights from SIN to LAX via SYD to protect QF, what's not to say the Singaporean government won't do the same? Especially if QF is looking to serve destinations from Singapore that SQ isn't currently serving.
The original 1967 AU-SG air service bilateral treaty allows Australian carriers to pick up traffic in Indonesia on the way to SIN and beyond rights to KUL and any points beyond excluding Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, The Philippines, Mainland China, USA and Canada via a Pacific routing.
I'm not sure if the update made to the treaty in 2003 changes any of that.
The same treaty lists beyond AU rights for Singapore carriers as Auckland, which has clearly changed since 1967 (with their CBR-WLG flights)
To the best of my knowledge (without checking the relevant approvals) I believe that QF retains 'beyond rights' from Singapore - obviously to LHR - but also to a range of European cities that it previously served, such as FRA, FCO, CDG etc. The main problem for QF here would be the QF / EK JV - hence the reason that QF is looking to serve Europe non-stop ex Australia which doesn't subvert the existing JVA..
Prior to the original 2012(?) QF / EK JV, Qantas served Europe for many years via 2 Asian hubs BKK and SIN. In fact, SYD-FRA-SYD was run daily ex SYD, but via both hubs on a 4 / 3 split across SIN & BKK. Services to FCO and CDG were, IIRC, split also. QF then decided to close the BKK-Europe hub operation which was then transferred to centralise European ops via the enlarged SIN hub, leaving BKK as an end of line operation ex Australia.
In reality, SIN being a primary Star hub .. and times having quickly changed .. I think that SQ's attention to the SIN-USA market would now be more firmly focussed on competition with UA and their non-stop B787-9 rather than the failed attempt to garner SIN-Australia-USA rights.
Stephen787
Stephen787
Member since 02 Jul 2011
Total posts 5
I’d love to see:
dm12
dm12
Member since 08 Feb 2018
Total posts 200
The current Canada agreement only has intermediate 5th freedom rights. HNL, NAN, PPT, SFO and "a point to be agreed".
Cargo has additional rights, which include beyond rights to NYC, but they wouldn't be able to transport pax to JFK via Canada under the current agreement.
(They could get NYC added as the "point to be agreed", then fly AU-JFK-Canada, but that would sort of defeat the point.)
Ok thanks, I couldn’t find anything about beyond rights from Canada to the USA (hence my unsureness). Could be a thing for future negotiations.
puppy79
puppy79
Member since 06 Dec 2017
Total posts 23
the resumption of adelaide to singapore to connect with the qf1 services to london and the qf2 in the other direction.revive the service as either a qf5/qf6 a few times a week ex sydney via adl to sin.anything has to be better than hubbing via perth or melbourne or being put on waitlist for singapore airlines.
watson374
watson374
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 17 Aug 2012
Total posts 1,285
You mean, bringing back QF81/82 in its original guise and migrating the daily A330 nonstop to use QF5/6?
AWA2602
AWA2602
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 29 Jul 2013
Total posts 24
I've always wondered the same thing and logic dictates that they would have to have their people looking at what's happening on forums like this.
gnhansen29
gnhansen29
Member since 07 Nov 2018
Total posts 2
What about Perth to Athens? How long would such a flight take?
Eagles94
Eagles94
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 02 Jul 2018
Total posts 9
PER to ATH would be a great direct route to have . Probably take in the region of 14 hours . From reading forums Paris , Frankfurt and even Rome in the conversation , haven't heard Athens mentioned . Great 1 stop link up for Melb Greek community.