(Very) Short Haul 747-400

I never doubted your info, Paul. However, when you say that Jeanske was incorrect with his info, he was technically correct. Originally, the -400D’s did not have winglets, which is the point he was trying to make, I believe. So in saying that, he is correct. However, when they are/were converted to -400 Standard, winglets are added.

Greekdude1,

that was my point – the ANA 400D’s will probably all get converted to standard 400s when the number of cycles get significantly higher than other airframes of similar ages.

It was definately JA8957 (13/9/94) that I flew on as I keep a record of all my flights and have certainly seen it at LHR since.

You forgot about Lan Chilie and instead of starting a hole new thread does anybody know when Swiss are joining.

If it was the same aircraft, Paul, it might have originally been a -400D but later converted to -400 Standard. To my knowlege, some of ANA’s Domestics had undergone this conversion, therefore it is possible you saw it at Heathrow after the conversion was done, but flew on it in Japan while it was still in Domestic configuration.

Jeanske,

not sure if you are correct regarding the Japanese 747-400D.
I have flown on one in Japan (JA8957 no winglets) but have seen it at Heathrow with winglets etc. I thought that to prevent the airframes getting to high (in terms of cycles) rather than hours flown some/all would be ‘converted’ to normal 400’s and put on long haul routes with some of the standard 400s being put on domestic routes. JAL or ANA could find a situation with several aircraft of the same age but some having a far greater number of cycles but fewer hours than others and it makes sense to correct any imbalance.

QF is part of OneWorld along with British Airways, American Airlines, Aer Lingus & Cathay Pacific. I’m sure there’s a few more if I’ve missed any someone add them.

Originally posted by greekdude1
Is that NZ-QF deal ever going to happen? I hope not.

I would assume that as NZ is part of the Star Alliance and QF is not; UA will exercise it’s LAX – AKL – MEL rights if that deal goes through and NZ is dropped — Just a thought.

Shamrock: The ‘domestic’ uplift in SYD was only 4 and an engineer – Two were staff.

Aer Lingus used to fly the 747-100 between Dublin and Shannon but only because they had to.This us bi lateral thing is starting to annoy quite few people over here.Imagine here in Ireland we have Air Canada,Continental,Delta and US airways flying domestic flights all with 767 and Aer Lingus With A330s and Id bet alot more people travel between Melbourne and Sydney than Dublin and Shannon.Did you notice how many other people only flew the domestic leg?

Originally posted by Tim Green
The old Ansett code-share has long been rumored to have been taken up by Virgin Blue.

Yeah, so I heard about 2 years ago. United even lists them as a code-share partner in their in-flight magazine, ‘Hemispheres.’ If you try to make an online booking on UAL.com, however, no flight of VirginBlue ever comes up as an option. Furthermore, I flew VirginBlue a few years back and asked one of the employees about the code-share, and they knew nothing.

Originally posted by Tim Green
The MEL shuttle must be a real loss maker for them particularly since they stopped operating MEL AKL LAX.

Yeah, in fact I flew to MEL on that routing as well, and there seemed to be more people on the AKL-MEL leg. Do you know if they had International rights to carry pax originating in AKL to MEL for that flight? In theory, they would be competing with NZ, but they used to overlap on the LAX-AKL and LAX-SYD runs, as well. Once UA cancelled the LAX-MEL flight, they had no choice but to move the MEL continuation from MEL to SYD. Theoretically, they should just funnel all pax going to MEL on NZ via AKL.

Originally posted by Tim Green
(A sad part of this deal is the the Australian based UAL employees have been banned from using their buddy-passes between SYD & MEL unless part of an International leg as QANTAS complained that it was ‘stealing’ potential revenue from them! How petty is that? It does seem typical of QANTAS’ attitude from what I can see.)

That’s vintage QF/Oneworld type tactics. Is that NZ-QF deal ever going to happen? I hope not.

747-400Domistics don’t have any winglets. They also have a lower maximum take off weight. I believe about only 25 were built, flying with Japanese airlines. They are not for sale anymore. They were designed especially for Japan, they are rarely seen out of there. I don’t know their range, but I think it’s something like 4000 km. The aircraft already has outstanding performance because of the low load, that’s why winglets are not necessairy.

AO – The Aircraft are not special purpose, just a continuation of the 14+ hour leg down from the West Coast.

GD – You are correct: UA have no domestic rights as such and the only Pax uplifts are as part of International through tickets. The old Ansett code-share has long been rumored to have been taken up by Virgin Blue. The MEL shuttle must be a real loss maker for them particularly since they stopped operating MEL AKL LAX.

Nice ride though!

(A sad part of this deal is the the Australian based UAL employees have been banned from using their buddy-passes between SYD & MEL unless part of an International leg as QANTAS complained that it was ‘stealing’ potential revenue from them! How petty is that? It does seem typical of QANTAS’ attitude from what I can see.)

UA don’t operate any -400D’s. One of the 2 trans-pac flights UA operates daily to SYD (one from LAX and one from SFO) gathers a few pax from each flight and continues on to MEL, and back to SYD again. Pretty non-efficient, if you ask me, but that’s what happens when one of your partners goes under. I flew on that same flight a few years back, Tim. I flew from MEL to SYD and we didn’t use much runway at all. We were up and away, pronto. Only 50 or so of us on that flight.

they are called ‘domestics’ arent they