Qantas parking lot at LAX by Kim Davies
When planes are on the ground they don’t make money. Why then do numerous carriers the world over allow their precious metal to sit on remote stands gathering dust for hours at a time awaiting their return rotations? Simply put, I think nobody has bothered to challenge the status quo. Look at LAX for instance. It has a hugely impressive offering in terms of trans-Pacific flight possibilities. What’s less impressive is the aircraft utilization of some of the operators. Let’s put Qantas under the microscope for a second. On most days they offer five services into LAX:
| Flight Numbers | Origin | Arrives | Departs | Idle Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF0011/QF0012 | SYD | 9:40 | 22:30 | 12:50 |
| QF0107/QF0108 | SYD | 6:45 | 23:50 | |
| QF0015/QF0016 | BNE | 11:00 | 23:30 | 12:30 |
| QF0093/QF0094 | MEL | 7:20 | 23:20 | 16:00 |
| QF0025/QF0026 | MEL | 6:30 | 23:40 | 17:10 |
Out of the flights listed in the above table QF107 continues on from LAX to JFK. The others sit on the ground doing nothing. What’s stopping Qantas from leasing out one or more of these idle frames to their alliance partners at American Airlines to conduct hub to hub runs out of LAX? The numbers would obviously have to be studied but I would imagine that AA could sustain a 747 or A380 service between LAX and at least one of its hubs. DFW alone sees 15 direct dailies from LAX including a 767 followed in quick succession by a 757 during the morning rush. Surely that pair could be replaced with a QF 388/744 with a return flight back to LAX in time for the late night departure down under? It’s a win-win for QF and AA.
Obviously an idea like this sounds simple on paper but requires a lot more thought to implement. In the example I have given – the QF-AA tie:
- AA would need to ready a stable of pilots rated on the 744/388.
- QF would need to be satisfied that their equipment and brand was being looked after.
- “Operated by” stickers would need to be in place to appease the DOT.
- Perhaps a ghastly OneWorld livery too.
These and a whole slew of other items must be addressed but in the end I think the possibility for this to happen is there. Beyond Los Angeles, San Francisco and Vancouver have planes that sit on the ground for long periods. A similar deal could easily be struck up between say Air New Zealand and United who already fly the 744.
In my opinion if this type of short cycle leasing is ever going to happen the biggest possibility will be between the Virgin carriers. Virgin America are stable and expanding and V Australia is making inroads on the US west coast. As both airlines take additional deliveries I think V Australia’s schedule will start to look more and more like Qantas’s which will create the perfect platform for Richard “fair dinkum” Branson’s Aussie carrier to short-cycle lease 777s to Richard “born on the fourth of July’ Branson’s American carrier. Of course such an action would set the “birthers” off and likely cause a ruckus on Capitol Hill, but guess what it would be a perfectly legal arrangement.
