Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Business

Beyond the expected

Qatar Airways to service CBR from 2017-18

By Charlotte Harper 29 November 2016 37

Qatar Airways

Qatar Airways will join Singapore Airlines in offering international flights to and from Canberra from 2017-18.

The 19-year-old Doha-based airline issued a statement today announcing that Canberra will be one of 15 new gateways it will service from 2017-18. It already connects more than 150 destinations on six continents, including Sydney and Adelaide, which it added earlier this year.

Details about when the Canberra services will commence have yet to be released.

Will you use the planned Qatar Airways service to Canberra?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Qatar Airways is the national carrier of the State of Qatar, and, like Qantas, is a member of the Oneworld Alliance. Singapore Airlines is a Star Alliance airline.

According to the Qatar Airways statement, it is one of the fastest growing airlines operating one of the youngest fleets in the world. The airline has a fleet of 191 aircraft.

Other cities added to the list of coming Qatar destinations today are Dublin, Las Vegas, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago, Medan (Indonesia) and Tabuk and Yanbu (Saudi Arabia). Previously announced additions are Auckland, Sarajevo (Bosnia), Skopje (Macedonia), Libreville (Gabon), Nice (France), Chiang Mai (Thailand) and Douala (Cameroon).

Qatar Airways Group Chief Executive His Excellency Mr Akbar Al Baker said Qatar Airways offers the world the best network, the best on board experience and the best connecting experience at Hamad International Airport.

“We operate the world’s youngest fleet, averaging just five years old, and we fly the most technologically advanced aircraft that provide our passengers with an award-winning experience while also ensuring the most efficient and environmentally friendly operations,” he said.

“With today’s network announcement, we will be able to connect more people to more places than any other Gulf airline, and we will ensure our passengers will delight in the journey.”

A multiple award-winning airline, Qatar Airways was awarded World’s Best Business Class; Best Business Class Airline Lounge and Best Airline Staff Service in the Middle East at the prestigious 2016 World Airline Awards managed by international air transport rating organisation Skytrax.

Qatar Airways was the first Gulf carrier to join global airline alliance, oneworld, enabling its passengers to benefit from more than 1,000 airports in more than 150 countries, with 14,250 daily departures.

Oryx One, Qatar Airways’ inflight entertainment system offers passengers up to 3,000 entertainment options from the latest blockbuster movies, TV box sets, music, games and much more. Passengers flying on Qatar Airways flights served by its B787, A350, A380, A319 as well as select A320 and A330 aircraft have access to on-board Wi-Fi and GSM service.

Qatar Airways is a major sponsor of global sporting events, including the strategic team sponsorships of FC Barcelona and Al-Ahli Saudi Arabia FC.

Qatar Airways has opened 12 new destinations in 2016 year-to-date, with two more cities set to join the network in December. The new cities added this year are Atlanta, Boston and Los Angeles in the United States; Birmingham, U.K.; Helsinki, Finland; Pisa, the fourth destination in Italy; Yerevan, Armenia; Marrakech, the second destination in Morocco; Ras Al Khaimah, UAE; Windhoek, Namibia; and Sydney and Adelaide in Australia. Qatar Airways will begin service to Krabi, its third destination in Thailand, on 6 December and service returns to the Seychelles on 12 December.

Qatar Airways has received a number of accolades this year, including Skytrax’s Best Staff Service in the Middle East, World’s Best Business Class 2016 and Best Business Class Airline Lounge as well as Best Business Class from Business Traveller Awards. Last month Qatar Airways was awarded three prestigious honours at the 2016 Travel Weekly Magellan Awards held in New York: Gold, the highest honour, was awarded to Qatar Airways for its International Business Class experience on the A350 aircraft, and Silver was awarded for its International Economy Class as well as for its ‘Going Places Together’ brand campaign.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
37 Responses to
Qatar Airways to service CBR from 2017-18
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Charlotte Harper 9:33 am 09 Dec 16

K320Scania said :

dungfungus said :

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

The ACT Government don’t really want to admit that no one actually wants to come to Canberra, so it’s not surprising that they’re trying to convince themselves that people are taking a holiday here. Canberra is not tourist friendly in terms of getting around – there’s not even a public transport service to the airport which is one of the biggest problems. I think that improving little things to Canberra will make it more attractive to tourists. If you look at Sydney, the airport is right in the centre of the city (although I’m not saying that’s a good thing) and people can have easy access to and from the airport. It’s easy to get around the city independently, whether that’s walking, cycling or taking public transport, which is fundamental if you want to attract tourists.
If you look at most major cities and their airports, you’ll see that it’s easy to get around and they’ve got a basic public transport system to get to the airport.
In Canberra, I think you’re going to find people want to get out of here as soon as possible, whether that’s to Wellington or Sydney, and no one really wants to come back to this ‘vibrant’ and ‘globally connected’ city. (Our Canberra is really helpful when it comes to adjectives.)
The sooner we accept the fact the Canberra isn’t tourist friendly at the moment, the sooner we can get a move on and start changing things here that will make Canberra more attractive and a destination for tourists.

I have to disagree with you on a couple of counts here. Firstly, I know tourists love to come here because friends from interstate are always visiting us while they’re here for sporting events/activities, Floriade, Multicultural Festival, exhibitions at the national institutions etc. Secondly, Sydney Airport is not right in the city. It’s 10km or so out, which in Sydney traffic can take an hour. The train is the quickest way to get to the CBD and costs $20, but in my experience it’s a grimy local train which is a huge contrast to special airport trains elsewhere in the world. I hope we end up with a tram from the airport to the city and parliamentary triangle. Meanwhile, it’s easy to drive and park there, take a cab, an Uber or get dropped off. I haven’t tried the Airport Express bus, has anyone else? It looks to run reasonably regularly:
https://www.canberraairport.com.au/travellers/parking-transport/buses-and-coaches-2/
Canberra is one of the easiest cities to get around by bike, the new city loop bus is very handy, there are tourist buses for getting around the national institutions. The roads can be confusing, but our Google Maps friends are very helpful on that front.

K320Scania 8:38 pm 07 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

The ACT Government don’t really want to admit that no one actually wants to come to Canberra, so it’s not surprising that they’re trying to convince themselves that people are taking a holiday here. Canberra is not tourist friendly in terms of getting around – there’s not even a public transport service to the airport which is one of the biggest problems. I think that improving little things to Canberra will make it more attractive to tourists. If you look at Sydney, the airport is right in the centre of the city (although I’m not saying that’s a good thing) and people can have easy access to and from the airport. It’s easy to get around the city independently, whether that’s walking, cycling or taking public transport, which is fundamental if you want to attract tourists.
If you look at most major cities and their airports, you’ll see that it’s easy to get around and they’ve got a basic public transport system to get to the airport.
In Canberra, I think you’re going to find people want to get out of here as soon as possible, whether that’s to Wellington or Sydney, and no one really wants to come back to this ‘vibrant’ and ‘globally connected’ city. (Our Canberra is really helpful when it comes to adjectives.)
The sooner we accept the fact the Canberra isn’t tourist friendly at the moment, the sooner we can get a move on and start changing things here that will make Canberra more attractive and a destination for tourists.

JC 5:16 pm 07 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

I’ve been away for a work trip and operating off my iPhone. Now I am home I’ve had a look at the actual stats in Excel and it seems the Canberra times doesn’t know what it is talking about. What a surprise.

The figure of 94 is actually the average number of people who flew in September (on those 6 flights) specifically BETWEEN Wellington to Canberra. The number Canberra to Wellington was 115 passengers on average.

But these stats are actually the number of passengers carried between the two city pairs, eg where they started and ended their journey. It is not the number of people on board. Mostly they (Canberra Crimes) would be right in assuming you divide seat numbers by passengers to get the load factor, but as these flights also carry passengers end to end from Wellington to Singapore and vice versa these passengers presence is actually not noted in these stats.

So in that context these figures are actually very reasonable.

FYI Passenger numbers from Singapore to Canberra were 142 passengers on average and Canberra to Singapore an impressive 181 passengers.

So add in say another 80 passengers doing NZ to Singapore and you have an 65-75% load factor on flights between Canberra and NZ (which is about what I would have expected) and 80-100% load factor Canberra to Singapore. (which is more than I would have expected). Even dropping the end to end passengers to 60, the figures are still very reasonable.

I think you understand it better than most and if you are right the service seems to be pulling the right numbers.

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

Yeah it is a bit odd, though maybe they haven’t got the airtime to do so. The Crimes can be like that sometimes. And those stats are very much gathered from incoming passenger cards, so I am 100% sure they are not counting SIN-NZ passengers.

The raw files can be found in the link below, and it is table 5 that has the details. Line 52 is SIN-CBR and 53 CBR-SIN. Column G is outbound and H inbound.

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_airline_activity_1609_T.xlsx

I am not skilled in analysing spreadsheets but I am sure what you say is correct.

Surely the government/airport (the “international” flight project was a JV, right?) would have the exact figures so why aren’t they releasing them?

In the latest “Our Canberra” propoganda flyer which I received this morning, the Chief Minister is cheering on the fact that Canberra became a “globally connected city” when this Singapore Airline service started.

So, how successful has it been, how much is it going to cost us, where are you Brendan Smyth?

It is probably commercial in-confidence. The only reason those stats can be used to see how many are flying Singapore airlines is because they are (clearly) the only airline flying that route.

dungfungus 10:23 am 07 Dec 16

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

I’ve been away for a work trip and operating off my iPhone. Now I am home I’ve had a look at the actual stats in Excel and it seems the Canberra times doesn’t know what it is talking about. What a surprise.

The figure of 94 is actually the average number of people who flew in September (on those 6 flights) specifically BETWEEN Wellington to Canberra. The number Canberra to Wellington was 115 passengers on average.

But these stats are actually the number of passengers carried between the two city pairs, eg where they started and ended their journey. It is not the number of people on board. Mostly they (Canberra Crimes) would be right in assuming you divide seat numbers by passengers to get the load factor, but as these flights also carry passengers end to end from Wellington to Singapore and vice versa these passengers presence is actually not noted in these stats.

So in that context these figures are actually very reasonable.

FYI Passenger numbers from Singapore to Canberra were 142 passengers on average and Canberra to Singapore an impressive 181 passengers.

So add in say another 80 passengers doing NZ to Singapore and you have an 65-75% load factor on flights between Canberra and NZ (which is about what I would have expected) and 80-100% load factor Canberra to Singapore. (which is more than I would have expected). Even dropping the end to end passengers to 60, the figures are still very reasonable.

I think you understand it better than most and if you are right the service seems to be pulling the right numbers.

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

Yeah it is a bit odd, though maybe they haven’t got the airtime to do so. The Crimes can be like that sometimes. And those stats are very much gathered from incoming passenger cards, so I am 100% sure they are not counting SIN-NZ passengers.

The raw files can be found in the link below, and it is table 5 that has the details. Line 52 is SIN-CBR and 53 CBR-SIN. Column G is outbound and H inbound.

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_airline_activity_1609_T.xlsx

I am not skilled in analysing spreadsheets but I am sure what you say is correct.

Surely the government/airport (the “international” flight project was a JV, right?) would have the exact figures so why aren’t they releasing them?

In the latest “Our Canberra” propoganda flyer which I received this morning, the Chief Minister is cheering on the fact that Canberra became a “globally connected city” when this Singapore Airline service started.

So, how successful has it been, how much is it going to cost us, where are you Brendan Smyth?

JC 3:32 pm 06 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

I’ve been away for a work trip and operating off my iPhone. Now I am home I’ve had a look at the actual stats in Excel and it seems the Canberra times doesn’t know what it is talking about. What a surprise.

The figure of 94 is actually the average number of people who flew in September (on those 6 flights) specifically BETWEEN Wellington to Canberra. The number Canberra to Wellington was 115 passengers on average.

But these stats are actually the number of passengers carried between the two city pairs, eg where they started and ended their journey. It is not the number of people on board. Mostly they (Canberra Crimes) would be right in assuming you divide seat numbers by passengers to get the load factor, but as these flights also carry passengers end to end from Wellington to Singapore and vice versa these passengers presence is actually not noted in these stats.

So in that context these figures are actually very reasonable.

FYI Passenger numbers from Singapore to Canberra were 142 passengers on average and Canberra to Singapore an impressive 181 passengers.

So add in say another 80 passengers doing NZ to Singapore and you have an 65-75% load factor on flights between Canberra and NZ (which is about what I would have expected) and 80-100% load factor Canberra to Singapore. (which is more than I would have expected). Even dropping the end to end passengers to 60, the figures are still very reasonable.

I think you understand it better than most and if you are right the service seems to be pulling the right numbers.

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

Yeah it is a bit odd, though maybe they haven’t got the airtime to do so. The Crimes can be like that sometimes. And those stats are very much gathered from incoming passenger cards, so I am 100% sure they are not counting SIN-NZ passengers.

The raw files can be found in the link below, and it is table 5 that has the details. Line 52 is SIN-CBR and 53 CBR-SIN. Column G is outbound and H inbound.

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_airline_activity_1609_T.xlsx

dungfungus 11:17 am 06 Dec 16

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

I’ve been away for a work trip and operating off my iPhone. Now I am home I’ve had a look at the actual stats in Excel and it seems the Canberra times doesn’t know what it is talking about. What a surprise.

The figure of 94 is actually the average number of people who flew in September (on those 6 flights) specifically BETWEEN Wellington to Canberra. The number Canberra to Wellington was 115 passengers on average.

But these stats are actually the number of passengers carried between the two city pairs, eg where they started and ended their journey. It is not the number of people on board. Mostly they (Canberra Crimes) would be right in assuming you divide seat numbers by passengers to get the load factor, but as these flights also carry passengers end to end from Wellington to Singapore and vice versa these passengers presence is actually not noted in these stats.

So in that context these figures are actually very reasonable.

FYI Passenger numbers from Singapore to Canberra were 142 passengers on average and Canberra to Singapore an impressive 181 passengers.

So add in say another 80 passengers doing NZ to Singapore and you have an 65-75% load factor on flights between Canberra and NZ (which is about what I would have expected) and 80-100% load factor Canberra to Singapore. (which is more than I would have expected). Even dropping the end to end passengers to 60, the figures are still very reasonable.

I think you understand it better than most and if you are right the service seems to be pulling the right numbers.

What worries me however is that no one from the airline industry or our government (where are you Brendan International?) appears to be defending the negative media report and talking the venture up.

JC 1:12 am 06 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

I’ve been away for a work trip and operating off my iPhone. Now I am home I’ve had a look at the actual stats in Excel and it seems the Canberra times doesn’t know what it is talking about. What a surprise.

The figure of 94 is actually the average number of people who flew in September (on those 6 flights) specifically BETWEEN Wellington to Canberra. The number Canberra to Wellington was 115 passengers on average.

But these stats are actually the number of passengers carried between the two city pairs, eg where they started and ended their journey. It is not the number of people on board. Mostly they (Canberra Crimes) would be right in assuming you divide seat numbers by passengers to get the load factor, but as these flights also carry passengers end to end from Wellington to Singapore and vice versa these passengers presence is actually not noted in these stats.

So in that context these figures are actually very reasonable.

FYI Passenger numbers from Singapore to Canberra were 142 passengers on average and Canberra to Singapore an impressive 181 passengers.

So add in say another 80 passengers doing NZ to Singapore and you have an 65-75% load factor on flights between Canberra and NZ (which is about what I would have expected) and 80-100% load factor Canberra to Singapore. (which is more than I would have expected). Even dropping the end to end passengers to 60, the figures are still very reasonable.

Madam Cholet 4:45 pm 05 Dec 16

JC said :

Madam Cholet said :

The interesting thing about this is that the government was totally caught out. If airlines can basically arbitrarily start adding Canberra to their list of destinations, what’s the point of the government spending so much money on wooing these airlines?

Not quite sure your point. The federal government enters into bilateral agreements with countries about the cities and number of flights airlines can fly to. In the case of the UAE their airlines can have unlimited seats and flights to second tier Australian cities. Qatar it seems is just choosing to exercise these rights to fly to Canberra.

As I said before, Qatar is one airline that I am not impressed about entering the market. Not because of their product but because of the city state the airline represents. No way I will support a regime, if I have the choice that treats migrant workers so poorly including its airline workers.

My point was about the ACT government having no idea an international airline was about to add Canberra as a destination. They were very much caught on the hop given the fanfare we saw with the rather under utilised Singapore airlines route recently added. The people at Canberra airport must have known and just kept it to themselves. So much for the new tourism position in Brendan Smyth. If they just add destinations as they feel fit, what’s the point of him being paid so much to do that job? I know he does other things to improve our ‘brand’, but this seemed like a rather big miss indeed.

bruce_lord 2:07 pm 05 Dec 16

JC said :

bruce_lord said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

I don’t know where you get your information from that Singapore Airlines will be happy to wear a financial loss if it means keeping another airline off the route.

I worked with a former financial analyst for the airline and he told me they measure and monitor absolutely everything related to revenue and costs. He also said that Singapore closed some US routes just because fuel got too expensive and it slightly tipped the equation.

Ps with Singapore and the US the route they closed was a direct route using the A340-500 which was a niche aircraft especially being fitted out in an all business class configuration. And yes fuel was a major factor.

Interestingly they have returned this year, this time with A350 in 3 class config. Main difference is 2 engine efficiency on the A350.

If planes remain only half full between here, Singapore and Wellington I reckon Singapore airlines might look into one engine planes to save money.

I do really hope they stick with it and Canberra jumps on board. If they provide cheap flights in line with Sydney to Wellington special deals then NZ here I come.

JC 10:15 pm 03 Dec 16

bruce_lord said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

I don’t know where you get your information from that Singapore Airlines will be happy to wear a financial loss if it means keeping another airline off the route.

I worked with a former financial analyst for the airline and he told me they measure and monitor absolutely everything related to revenue and costs. He also said that Singapore closed some US routes just because fuel got too expensive and it slightly tipped the equation.

Ps with Singapore and the US the route they closed was a direct route using the A340-500 which was a niche aircraft especially being fitted out in an all business class configuration. And yes fuel was a major factor.

Interestingly they have returned this year, this time with A350 in 3 class config. Main difference is 2 engine efficiency on the A350.

JC 7:36 pm 03 Dec 16

bruce_lord said :

bruce_lord said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

I don’t know where you get your information from that Singapore Airlines will be happy to wear a financial loss if it means keeping another airline off the route.

I worked with a former financial analyst for the airline and he told me they measure and monitor absolutely everything related to revenue and costs. He also said that Singapore closed some US routes just because fuel got too expensive and it slightly tipped the equation.

Apologies just re read your comment and see you mentioned Qatar not Singapore. But is still similar.

No Qatar is not similar. CEO Akbar Al Baker wants QR to be the number 1 of the ME3 and will do it at any cost.

bruce_lord 2:45 pm 03 Dec 16

bruce_lord said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

I don’t know where you get your information from that Singapore Airlines will be happy to wear a financial loss if it means keeping another airline off the route.

I worked with a former financial analyst for the airline and he told me they measure and monitor absolutely everything related to revenue and costs. He also said that Singapore closed some US routes just because fuel got too expensive and it slightly tipped the equation.

Apologies just re read your comment and see you mentioned Qatar not Singapore. But is still similar.

bruce_lord 2:44 pm 03 Dec 16

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

I don’t know where you get your information from that Singapore Airlines will be happy to wear a financial loss if it means keeping another airline off the route.

I worked with a former financial analyst for the airline and he told me they measure and monitor absolutely everything related to revenue and costs. He also said that Singapore closed some US routes just because fuel got too expensive and it slightly tipped the equation.

dungfungus 11:03 am 03 Dec 16

JC said :

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

“They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.”

Then they sound like they will be the perfect business partner for our current government and their MOU partners.

JC 1:07 am 03 Dec 16

Masquara said :

JC said :

Masquara said :

Charlotte Harper I’m afraid this reads like a PR capsule. Any words/thoughts on the fact that they are going to fly out of Canberra only because we have no curfew? (Stated during an interview on 666). Doesn’t worry me particularly at the moment, but are there Canberrans and Queanbeyanites who would be affected by flight noise in the middle of the night?

In fairness Qatar have not made any detail known hence why there is no great detail in this and other articles on Qatars plans. So until they are any comment about curfews etc is just fighting shadows.

Head to some aviation websites if you want some more informed discussion and theories about what they could be planning.

The Qatar Air rep who was interviewed mentioned the lack of a curfew as THE reason for flying out of Canberra, actually.

Qatar rep or Stephen Byron from the airport? Everything I’ve seen in the aviation media suggests no specific details what so ever though there are quotes from Byron saying he expects the flights to be late to take advantage of the curfew free status. Which IMO is more the airport blowing smoke up themselves rather than any facts.

Anyway for what it is worth a flight leaving cbr at 11pm would get to Doha around 5am so yeah would expect it to be leaving midnightish. And inbound to get in around 10pm means leaving Doha around midnight also.

But lack of curfew the reason for the flights? Nah? Lack of rights to elsewhere for sure.

JC 12:58 am 03 Dec 16

dungfungus said :

No doubt JC will have a more in-depth analysis but I doubt if Qatar will extend their services to Canberra after this report:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-02/low-numbers-on-singapore-airlines-wellington-to-canberra-leg/8088398

Dungers the stats were for the first few weeks. Wouldn’t be reading too much into it. Needs time. Also no word if the flights were loosing money which is more important than seats filled.

Also different market to Qatar. They are an aggressive airline with deep pockets and would happily loose money on a route if it kept someone else out.

Masquara 8:33 pm 02 Dec 16

JC said :

Masquara said :

Charlotte Harper I’m afraid this reads like a PR capsule. Any words/thoughts on the fact that they are going to fly out of Canberra only because we have no curfew? (Stated during an interview on 666). Doesn’t worry me particularly at the moment, but are there Canberrans and Queanbeyanites who would be affected by flight noise in the middle of the night?

In fairness Qatar have not made any detail known hence why there is no great detail in this and other articles on Qatars plans. So until they are any comment about curfews etc is just fighting shadows.

Head to some aviation websites if you want some more informed discussion and theories about what they could be planning.

The Qatar Air rep who was interviewed mentioned the lack of a curfew as THE reason for flying out of Canberra, actually.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site