At the moment there are no sked 747-300s into LAX. But rare substitutions (such as an QF or FJ mechanical) do occur. Grant McKenzie wrote: > FJ would fly from NAN to LAX. Can't remember if QF use 300s to LAX from > MEL and SYD at the moment (I'll check on Monday) but we also fly > BNE-AKL-LAX probably with a 300. > > Grant > SYD > QF > > At 05:58 PM 07/08/03 -0700, you wrote: > >QF 743's have been here a few times this year..in svc for QF and FJ (Air > >Pacific) usually VH-EBX > > > >thedarkstar2 wrote: > > > > > Dont know if this helps but I was definatly on a QF 743 SYD-LAX non stop in > > > 1996 and 1997. > > > > > > Dave > > > MEL > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Grant McKenzie" <gjmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:17 PM > > > Subject: Re: SP vs. 400 > > > > > > > I don't think they ever did this due to payload restrictions. With a > > > > reasonable pax load the 200s and 300s always needed a stop in HNL. It > > > > wasn't until the 400 was released that anybody could fly the Pacific > > > non-stop. > > > > > > > > As an aside, I know the SP flew SYD-HNL-YVR but I don't recall them > > flying > > > > to LAX. Could be wrong, though. > > > > > > > > Grant > > > > SYD > > > > QF > > > > > > > > > > > > At 04:39 PM 05/08/03 -0400, you wrote: > > > > >In a message dated 8/5/2003 1:30:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > > RWM@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > >writes: > > > > > > > > > ><< Don't think so, but Qantas would now. It made JFK-NRT, for sure, > > > > > but that's over 1000 miles shorter. >> > > > > > > > > > >Over 1000 miles shorter, with nice winds coming back to JFK > > > > > > > > > >Well, Grant, since you are the main regular Aussie, did QF ever fly a > > > 742B or > > > > >a 743 nonstop LAX-SYD or LAX-MEL? Or did they only do it with the SPs > > > until > > > > >the 744s came. Also, did the SPs have weight restrictions, or could > > they > > > be > > > > >loaded to the hilt? > > > >