Qantas Backflip?

[Buckshot]

The 737 vs A320 debate is certainly nothing new to these forums, but it seems to me that Geoff Dixon is the most confused of them all when it comes to deciding which is better.

When Qantas placed the 737-800 in to service in February last year, Geoff was quoted as saying:

"The 737 family answered all of our questions. We were attracted by its economics, the ease of integration with our existing fleet of 38 Boeing 737s, and indeed by its advanced technology. The capability of the 737-800 will increase our flexibility to improve service and frequency over a wide range of destinations."

Qantas ran a side-by-side comparison and extensive testing of the Boeing 737-800 and a United A320 demonstrator at Sydney Airport.

"This competition has been a tough evaluation by a very experienced airline," said Seddik Belyamani, executive vice president, Sales, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "You will never find a more level playing field than the tarmac at the Sydney Airport last week."

Qantas lined up the two competing aircraft, ran through all the figures, and then chose the 737 airplane, Belyamani said.

However, I notice today Geoff has the following to say of Qantas' choice of the A320 to run its JetStar operation.

"As you might expect, economics played a big role in our choice of the A320. We liked the competitive edge and its modern design and more comfortable cabin..."

Can someone explain to me the complete turn around in thought at Qantas - what has changed in just over a year to make the A320 better than it was in February '02?

[SydGirl]

Simple.

Dollars and cents.

Maybe they could squeeze more pax into an A320 than a B737 thus more seat revenue?

Or maybe the A320 was just dirt cheap and they couldn't resist?

Merry Christmas
SG
:}

[virgindriver]

Perhaps they chose the A320 so the transfer of business from the mainline 738s wasn't quite so blatant....;)

[Buster Hyman]

I guess the optimists/QF management line would be;
Jetstar is a completely new entity. The aircraft & it's performance that Jetstar requires bears no relation to the Qantas fleet.

The pessimists/employee line would be;
They got another "deal of the Century" from Airbus...It's all part of the slow erosion of QF mainline workplace agreements...They don't know what the French word for crap is...

Perhaps Boeing wouldn't trade in the 717's, perhaps they needed any cost advantage they could take over DJ & it's 737NG's...take your pick.

Besides, I think he's practising for his next career in politics...you know, the straight job swap with Anderson!:eek: :ouch:

[RTB RFN]

Correct me if I'm wrong but was it not similar people stating that one of the reasons for the ANSETT demise was illogic economy of a mixed aircraft fleet!

[Heavy Metal]

Among other considerations, management wanted to create a completely new entity, one that was not interchangeable with any other aviation business in Australia. None of current Qantas LAME's, pilots, support staff, etc are rated on the A320, and the future low paid new employees will not easily be able to take their new found skills elsewhere, unless they want to leave Australia.

[TIMMEEEE]

I remember Geoff Dixon at the meeting with the AIPA pilot members talking about numerous aircraft types.

His take on the subject was that Ansett did not do it with anything in plan and no real thought.

In Qantas's case the aircraft chosen were the most cost effective for the routes, cheapest to operate and best deals obtained in procurement.

All three of the above did not relate to AN.

Besides, Mr Airbus must have a very raw backside after signing the deal for A320's with Jet Star!

[spook]

..fortunately, not as raw as Mr.Boeing when the 738 deal was done!

[Wonderworld]

The full quote is:

"As you might expect, economics played a big role in our choice of the Airbus A320 family for JetStar," said Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon.

"But we also liked the competitive edge and its modern design and more comfortable cabin will give us in the low-cost arena

Looking at the full quote I think he is talking from the LCC perspective in that the A320 has the more comfortabel cabin in the LCC configuration.

[spagiola]

Are you seriously looking at the verbiage in a press release for an accurate assessment of competing aircraft? Have you ever seen a press release about a new aircraft order that didn't claim the aircraft being ordered was the absolute bestest thing ever made?

[luna landing]

Heavy Metal - you got it right.

It's all about unions, and awards, and "a clean slate". To be a true LCC everything has to be considered a 'new start' with which to negotiate/screw the best/cheapest rate possible.

Air travel is about moving people from one place to another now - not about luxury and lifestyle anymore. The pilots will always be paid well compared to others in the industry, but a flight attendant will lose the 'glamor' they have been accustomed to and become a part of the safety of the aircraft rather than the 'service'. No longer will they just lock off a toilet on a long haul because it is dirty and it's not their job to clean it' attitude. I think being a flight attendant has already 'lost' that edge.

QF will become a 'small' elite "well respected/safe airline" for people who are willing to pay, and all the 'package deals/backpacker/mums and dads' will be on LCC's.

Unlike other things, air travel didn't get cheaper with time. It kind of got 'bogged down' and instead of everyone flying every where, every day - after 100 years of flight, there are still so many people who have never flown. A lot of time it boils down to cost.

Much as I dislike the man, Branson saw this before a lot of others.

This industry was stagnant.

[FlexibleResponse]

Could it have anything to do with the current availability of unemployed A320 crew vs unemployed B737 crew?

If he had bought B737s he would be in direct competition for qualified crews with VS and their pay is supposed to be better?

[permFO]

Branson didn't see this coming he just jumped on the band wagon set up by Herb Kelleher and Southwest. Lets not forget that Virgin Express was not always successful and Virgin Atlantic had to be bailed out. Once by Branson selling Virgin Records then by selling 49% to SIA.

[Orville]

PERFORMA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Branson didn't see this coming he just jumped on the band wagon set up by Herb Kelleher and Southwest. Lets not forget that Virgin Express was not always successful and Virgin Atlantic had to be bailed out. Once by Branson selling Virgin Records then by selling 49% to SIA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What about the poor mums and dads who have invested money in Virgin, how secure are their shares now?

Hasn't he already bailed out himself

[vortsa]

This doesn't surprise me the writing is on the wall,

@Pilots drinking on duty and having to be removed from the aircraft by the authorities

@Flight attendents threatening strike action

@Engineers looking at Jet Star for alternative employment

@And I think you are write Orville --- branson getting out early.

[Suffering Sucataash]

Vortsa,

I think I missed something,

@Pilots drinking on duty and having to be removed from the aircraft by the authorities

When? - Never heard of this in OZ.

[Buster Hyman]

Careful chaps! The DJ Appreciation society will find out that you've been bagging Sir Dick!:hmm:

[CaptCloudbuster]

Luna Landing you are just plain wrong regarding your assertion that Flight hasn't become cheaper over the last 100 years.

"Unlike other things, air travel didn't get cheaper with time. It kind of got 'bogged down"

Air travel has never been cheaper.

I can't quote exact figures but my guess a trip SYD - LON would have been over 1 years average wage whereas now 3 weeks or so:p

[vortsa]

Suffering Sucataash


I don't recall writing that it was in Aus. My references was directed towards the Airline and its affiliates.

If you diversify your business and continue to play off from the core business name then some of the mud must stick.

Note Qantas has taken a different path they are naming their new airlines by a different name. Could this be that they know that further down the "cost cutting mile" anything that may warrant bad publicity, then the market would hold back on any association to Qantas.

I recall when Ansett New Zealand had a bad accident many years ago the first thing done was to paint out the Ansett tail Logo.

Get the point now!! ( read on)

Detained pilot on alcohol charge


A Virgin Atlantic pilot detained by police in Washington has been charged with attempting to operate an aircraft while under the influence of alcohol, an airline spokesman said.

Captain Richard Harwell, 55, who is American but based in the UK, had been due to take 383 passengers on a Virgin Atlantic flight from Washington to Heathrow airport in London when he was arrested.

The spokesman said Captain Harwell had been with the airline 14 years and had an "unblemished record".

"Everyone at Virgin Atlantic is shocked and surprised," the spokesman said. "This is unprecedented -- it's the first time it has happened in the 20 years we've been operating and is totally out of character for Captain Harwell, who is an extremely experienced and popular pilot.

"We are at a loss to explain what has happened."

Captain Harwell, who has been stood down from duty, was still in custody and the issue of bail would be established later, the spokesman added.

The airline has started an internal inquiry into the incident.

"We will be talking to him and the authorities over the coming weeks to find out what has happened," the spokesman said.

Sunday night's VS22 flight had to be delayed after the pilot was arrested and the stranded travellers were put up in hotels until a new crew could be found.

They were expected to leave Washington at 6.15pm local time (2215 AEDT), arriving at Heathrow early on Monday, 23 hours late.

Captain Harwell lives in the UK with his family.

The pilot was detained by Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority Police Department shortly before his flight after security screeners detected alcohol on his breath.

He was escorted off the plane by airport police, who were alerted by the Transportation Safety Administration, which suspected he was under the influence of alcohol.

The spokesman said all the stranded passengers had been offered a free return flight and appreciated the airline's actions to help them, despite being frustrated at the delay.

"We were open and candid with them and immediately said why the plane was not able to fly," he said.

The spokesman added: "Our policy of no tolerance to alcohol in the workplace is well established and well understood, and well understood by Captain Harwell.

Fourteen British Airways staff were suspended and two were subsequently dismissed after a Channel 4 Dispatches program carried out an undercover investigation three years ago which showed crews drinking, only hours before flights.

Last month, two British Airways pilots arrested after allegedly being over the company's alcohol limit resigned.

BA rules state air personnel should only drink alcohol in moderation in the 24 hours before going on duty and should have none in the final eight hours.

The Railways and Transport Safety Act passed earlier this year set an alcohol limit for air crews at 20mg in 100ml of blood -- 25 per cent of the drink drive limit.

A date is still to be set for when the limit will be introduced.

[Buster Hyman]

I recall when Ansett New Zealand had a bad accident many years ago the first thing done was to paint out the Ansett tail Logo.
I think that's SOP for all airlines in that unfortunate situation.

Re the different branding, there's also an each way bet if the subsiduary must be sold at a later stage. Unique identity that isn't muddied if sold off.

[Kaptin M]

I recall when Ansett New Zealand had a bad accident many years ago the first thing done was to paint out the Ansett tail Logo. You're quite correct, Buster, it's SOPs worldwide, and not just the tail logo, but ALL logos and company names, and usually the rego as well.

Note Qantas has taken a different path they are naming their new airlines by a different name. Could this be that they know that further down the "cost cutting mile" anything that may warrant bad publicity, then the market would hold back on any association to Qantas. Could it also be that QF Frequent Flyer points (which must now be in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars) are unusable on these other brand airlines, and QANTAS are further limiting their liability. And that as the ACTU/TWU have agreements in place with QANTAS wrt labour hire and conditions, there will be NO such agreements between the new brands and the ACTU/TWU.
Is it sheerly co-incidence that Chris Corrigan became part owner of VB a couple of years into its operation?

[bitter balance]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt Kaptin M, I don't recall you straying into kooky conspiracy theory territory before so I'll assume you are not now. You are not actually suggesting that Corrigan and Dixon are actually colluding to get rid of the ACTU/TWU are you? Not when its obvious the ACTU/TWU are doing a great job of getting rid of themselves. And another thing, how dare you start a conspiracy theory without including John Andersen and Max Moore-Wilton, Pete Conrad will be most upset ;)

[Buster Hyman]

I doubt that they are "openly" colluding, but lets face it, neither of them would lose sleep if the ACTU lost it's power base in the industry!

Then again, they have opened a joint engineering venture! Didn't see that during the old duopoly.

I think John Andersons job at QF is already allocated...GM of FF! If he couldn't see where Ansett was going when ANZ showed him the figures, imagine how many FF points he'll "lose" for QF!:hmm:

[Kaptin M]

Corrigan and Dixon working together - that's an interesting one, bb. In fact, I was aiming a little higher at a common denominator that would have included Dixon, Sir Dickie, and Corrigan....a close ally of George Dubya (friend of Big Business in the US).....initials P.M., or J.H.