Originally Posted by
Deano969
Totally get "across the Virgin group"
But just how much is shared
VA won't even fly a 737 in Tiger colours for a couple of months and VA are running a couple of 320s in WA
Separate admin, crew and attendants but I get that there would be savings for ground staff and maintenance
Likely more to do with finding homes for all the shiny new 737s they have committed to
VA seem to have no issue with going out and ordering new planes every few years and flogging of 5-6 year old frames in a buyers market
Maybe this is why QF is doing so much better with a fleet age of nearly 11 years versus VA at less than 7 years and less than 2 years away from a single isle fleet replacement
Why they don't buy their frames at the end of lease and run them up to 10-15 years old is just ludicrous
REX and Alliance both have fleets of over 20 year old frames and with the exception of the occasional prop falling off, they are both making better profits than VA
Alliance picked up their F70s and F100s for under $1 million each...or the 30 or so that they bought would still be less than 1 of VAs new 737s
Yes they drink more, but still....
The answer is because VA are not a 'real' airline, they have very little expertise with anything, constantly demonstrate through the actions of their management that they have no idea about the industry or any wider knowledge beyond recognizing that an aeroplane has wings and engines. For example, who but WHO buys 777s and opts out the large rear Cargo Door so that no pallets can be loaded in the rear... a long range aircraft that can only accommodate pallets in the forward compartment(s). This is stupidity on a gross scale and it was done to 'save money'. Well, good, because no one is going to want to 'waste' money buying those aircraft second hand. Ansett did the same thing by buying 767s (the initial batch) without the wide cargo door at the front - none was available for the rear - so those aircraft couldn't be used economically or easily turned around compared to QF because every damn freight shipment had to be broken up across DPEs instead of put on a pallet so took longer to load and unload. AN did the same thing by opting to pay to remove the in hold systems on their A320s to save money on GSE, but ended up paying out probably 10 x that in WorkCover costs due to injuries manually loading such a large aircraft compared to the 737s, etc. VA also has magic-carpet in some of its 737s but only at one end so when they took the Foxtel Antennas off, it affected the ability to trim (it had to) because of the weight imbalance. I mean, what's the point of doing it at just one end??? QF don't do these things. All their 737s have magic carpet, all their aircraft are configured the same in terms of equipment, etc. from the 767s when they were flying (except for the BA ones) through to the A330s, etc. QF don't do stupid things like buying an aeroplane and removing stuff that makes it less saleable and they also - as you suggest - keep their aircraft until optimum financial benefit can be had from them. When you have experienced people in an airline - even one that has been gutted somewhat - that have in built corporate knowledge of basics like this, these sort of stupid mistakes don't happen.