View Full Version : Jetstar to Europe & USA

23rd Aug 2005, 14:44
Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"

Qantas expands cut-price strategy
By Scott Rochfort
August 24, 2005

Qantas has embarked on a long-term plan to split the national carrier in two in an attempt to slash costs, and has announced plans to add a fifth fuel surcharge in 16 months to counter rising oil costs.

By next year Qantas's low-cost offshoot, Jetstar, plans to fly to Asia, and possibly Europe and North America.

The move comes just days after Qantas said Jetstar would some day be "just as important as the main line" airline.

It is thought Jetstar will fly to areas deemed barely profitable by Qantas and which are dominated by economy-class passengers, such as Bali, Honolulu and even Rome, a route Qantas abandoned in 2003. Qantas will stick to the main routes frequented by business-class passengers, such as Sydney to London.

Jetstar's ascendancy is seen as a key plank in Qantas's plans to cut $3 billion in costs by 2008. Jetstar's international expansion could replicate Qantas's moves domestically, where Jetstar has replaced Qantas's services to leisure destinations such as the Gold Coast and Hamilton Island.

Qantas's chief financial officer, Peter Gregg, said Jetstar was likely to fly to the smaller destinations in countries Qantas already served. He declined to say which long-haul aircraft Jetstar would use but said it could take 12 months to get regulatory approval. He did not rule out using Qantas's fleet of four A330-200s.

Qantas had to ditch its plans to fly the A330-200s into Asia two years ago. This was because the floor on the jets was too thin to install business-class SkyBeds.

Mr Gregg denied talk in aviation circles that Qantas had made a huge error in ordering the aircraft. He said Qantas had planned to use them without SkyBeds domestically, but had changed its mind after Ansett collapsed in September 2001.

He added: "There's no problem putting the SkyBed on." However, this would cost $20 million in strengthening the floors and "writing off" the interiors.

There is speculation Qantas has been keen to offload the aircraft on to its low-cost operations, given the huge cost of upgrading them.

Qantas "reluctantly" announced its fifth fuel surcharge since May last year. It also warned that further job cuts would be needed to counter the rising cost of oil, now about $US65 a barrel. It said that from September 2 domestic one-way fuel surcharges would rise from $20 to $26, the international surcharge from $60 to $75 and the trans-Tasman surcharge from $40 to $46.

Despite the airline having 90 per cent of its fuel bill hedged around $US49 a barrel until December 31, it warned its oil costs would rise by $1.25 billion this financial year. The airline has left Jetstar's one-way charge at $19, prompting speculation that its low-cost rival Virgin Blue may hold off raising its $19 levy.

Air New Zealand also announced a new fuel surcharge yesterday, including a 4.5 per cent boost to domestic fares. The surcharge means the cost of flights to and from Australia will rise by $9.15.

Qantas is expected to waste no time slashing the further $1.5 billion in costs it announced last Thursday, on top of its current $1.5 billion three-year cost-cutting program.

After announcing plans on Monday to replace 96 customer service jobs with e-ticket machines, Qantas's chief executive, Geoff Dixon, said: "As far as we're concerned we're going to keep on making changes."

He denied Qantas would wait for the Government to conclude its review of airline policy. The review could result in the lifting of the 49 per cent foreign ownership restriction on the airline.


23rd Aug 2005, 15:39
JetStar Europe :hmm:

Qantas Regional :*

23rd Aug 2005, 20:47
And we VB drivers sit at home fighting over BN-HB, how sad !

23rd Aug 2005, 21:30
What a disgusting idea! Provide a low class crappy service to as many places as possible using Jetstar. Why am I not surprised?

I wonder when the customer service number becomes a premium pay by the minute 1-900 line?

I guess the introduction of automatic check in kiosks means that anyone who needs to speak to a real human at check in will have to wait literaly hours.

And of course thanks to Qantas's monopoly of excess capacity into and out of Australia, the average Australian punter will have no choice but to fly Jetstar as every aircraft that is NOT Qantas is already full.

Great way to make money though, lower the cost and quality of the service.

QF repels me. Open the skies and get rid of this farce of an airline.

White Pointer
23rd Aug 2005, 21:38
Just because it doesn't make melbourne its base - poor sunfish.

23rd Aug 2005, 21:48
Wouldn't matter where it was from - [email protected] is [email protected] Stuck in a J* aluminium tube full of bogans for hours on end? Yuck!:E

23rd Aug 2005, 22:39
It was clear years ago that AIPA is irrelevant in QF's agenda but the sleeping majority are starting to wake up now its getting serious.

To announce such a contentious issue before the EBA is voted on indicates QF don't care which way it goes. The company wins either way.

EBA in = Mainline cheap enough to continue in the game for whatever flying the company decides to give them. (maybe).
Company works on putting the screws in even more for EBA 8.
Why not, the pilots are pussies if they accept this crap.

EBA out= Further marginalise Mainline by farming out more flying to our good cheap buddies in Jetstar. Get Oldmeadow to concentrate on a strategy to nuke the recalcitrant drivers (everyone) who had the temerity not to accept what was on offer. Make new recruits pay for endorsement, accept Z scale, cheap foreign basings, etc and etc and eat em up from below.

If you are in mainline it would pay to be a senior 400 skipper with a few years to go. Everyone else looks like having a turn in the barrel.

And don't blame the Jetstar blokes for any of this. AIPA told them to take a hike when it counted and this is the result.

Pete Conrad
23rd Aug 2005, 23:12
AIPA also told Jetconnect to take a hike!! Bonvol is spot on, if AIPA had of collectively banded all together, not saying it would be different now, but a united front is better than the situation we have now!

Sunfish, whats the difference between being stuck in a J* tube full of bogans and a Virgin 737 full of bogans?

Don't scratch your bum Sunfish, you may get a brain heamorage!

Chronic Snoozer
23rd Aug 2005, 23:31
In one they're crew, in the other they're pax? Nice to know you care about the SLF though.

23rd Aug 2005, 23:35
I have a small concern regarding the policy that Qantas has in regard to replacing check-in staff with self serv kiosks (and perhaps anyone who makes their living operating an RPT aircraft will too)

My concern with the self serv kiosk is along these lines. Anybody can purchase a domestic E-ticket to travel within Australia under an assumed name on-line. A transaction at an airport with a self-check kiosk does not require production of valid identification to obtain a bording pass, just a booking number (as opposed to having to interact with a human being in order to obtain a boarding pass).

My worry is that this new system, whilst probably very popular with the honest traveller (and no doubt the bean counters), it lays itself wide open to abuse from those with more sinister intentions. I don't think that we should rely soley on a locked cockpit door as the main line of defense here (and I don't believe that there are sky-marshalls on every flight in Australia).

Perhaps the hatchet men at Qantas should have another think before making the job of hijackers any easier that it already is?
But then, god help anyone who stands in the way of next years executive bonus or shareholder dividend.

Going Boeing
23rd Aug 2005, 23:45
bonvol & Pete

I've asked this question before and got no response.

Who from AIPA (& when) told the Jetstar (Impulse) guys to take a hike?

I know that CM addressed the IPG at their first meeting after QF's acquisition of Impulse and offered them membership of AIPA as soon as the AIPA rules were amended to permit it. AIPA also gave advice on how to set up the IPG as well as industrial relations support (from AS). I personally would like to know who changed the direction that AIPA had been taking or is this "take a hike" issue just a furphy.

Chronic Snoozer
23rd Aug 2005, 23:48

If its of any interest to you, in Europe the check-in kiosks require a valid credit card before you can check in electronically. Thats one way of checking the ID of the traveller. The kiosk will then bring up the tickets booked to that card.

Pete Conrad
24th Aug 2005, 00:16
Going Boeing...correct me if I'm wrong, re J*, was it not a mutual thing anyway? AIPA set the bar too high and JPC knew that if they distanced themselves from AIPA, then they would have a better chance at getting the flying they wanted whilst keeping mainline looking that much more expensive?

Transition Layer
24th Aug 2005, 00:35

And don't blame the Jetstar blokes for any of this

I understand where you're coming from, but at the same time I ask myself "When the hell are these guys going to grow a f*cking spine?"

Have a look at the Jetstar EBA thread and see what sort of conditions they are prostituting themselves for.

Jetstar, all day everyday, without lube!


24th Aug 2005, 01:33
Here's a good idea Geoff,
Join the rest of the world and buy 777's (or correct the massive blunder with the A332's), operate them to Rome, Honolulu, etc, replacing the 4 burner classic which needs a stopover to Rome, therefore saving fuel and crewing costs with direct and more efficient flights. Better still, current QF staff will benefit from this too raising the low staff morale.

Or you could make a workforce that are disengaged, become completely disillusioned. Jetstar is cheapening the brand that was Qantas. Maybe QF could rebrand itslef with Prince's symbol, The Airline formerly known as.......

But as long as the shareholders are happy, bugger the staff and customers.

Mr Seatback 2
24th Aug 2005, 01:38

Well said. Funny, you seem to echo the thoughts of staff also. But then, we're not smart enough to make those kind of decisions, are we...?:rolleyes:

Re: Jetstar to Europe, etc...one question remains:

Why wasn't Australian ever mentioned by Peter Gregg or the report??

Or do my suspicions answer this very question?

24th Aug 2005, 01:57
Going Boeing,

This from a 2003 post



When QF acquired Impulse I with another TC from the Pulse had a meeting with CM in his apartment next to South Bank.
We asked him if we could join AIPA.
He said "not possible at this stage"
We went to meet the AIPA pres to work with QF, not against them.

We also had a few discussions with the AFAP but to align with them was to give us no say within the QF group.

So the IPG was formed."

The point is AIPA was asleep at the wheel when an LCC was mooted. Not possible = take a hike in my book and was interpreted that way by the friends I have in Jetstar.

Remember the Botany meeting? Talk of a line in the sand and all that to secure the flying for mainline. What happened, nothing ..as usual.

There is also a post by Keg somewhere in here when he asked the Pres about the prudence of keeping the Jetstar blokes at arms length. I can't remember the exact question or reply but it was in the negative to proceed down the path of including Jetstar pilots in AIPA. No doubt someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

For Transition Layer. I dont think the Jetstar blokes can grow a backbone. They know to resist the company push is to invite oblivion. I think they figure they may not earn megadollars but at least they have a job. Not that I necessarily agree with this thinking .

24th Aug 2005, 03:13
chronic snoozer,

a valid credit card is also one of the methods used here to obtain a boarding pass from a self check-in machine. However, if you have the booking reference a card isn't needed. Then again, what stops somebody from using a dodgy or just stolen credit card?(you can book an e-ticket flight half an hour prior to depature) There still isn't any mechanism to put a name to the face of the person requesting a boarding pass.

You just can't replace human beings with technology sometimes.

Col. Walter E. Kurtz
24th Aug 2005, 03:42
I have asked this question MANY times before - and will ask it again...........

" What is AIPA and the mainline crews doing about stopping the erosion of their pay and conditions?"

24th Aug 2005, 05:28
What could they possibly do now ?

24th Aug 2005, 05:46
Col Walter E Kurtz, I belive AIPA has just invested the members funds in upgrading the 44 Gallon drum of well used vaseline for a 44 Gallon drum of silky smooth KY Jelly.

Additionally, as they are rather flush with membership funds, they have just purchased an industrial strengh set of anal widening styrups. This is to help reduce the pain.

Remember. The sun is always shining. (Albeit a tad smelly)


24th Aug 2005, 09:49

Agreed, stuck in a tube with a crowd of bogans for hours on end = not a fun trip.

But it depends on how much the punter is willing to pay.

Let's take a trip to Rome.

If you're a J-cls punter, then fine - go BA/QF to LHR & backtrack, or SQ, or EK, or myriad others. The company's probably paying both money and time anyway so you're not worried. But is there really THAT much business going on between Australia and Italy to justify several hundred premium seats each way?

But, as Ryanair and Southwest and many others are proving, the VFR (visiting friends and rellies) ie. leisure market is HUGE and they don't want to pay premium prices. I first went to Rome in my uni holidays and price was the big thing for me (think I would've flown AZ if I'd had the choice??!!) - so it comes down to a choice between being trapped for hours with a bunch of bogans (of which I was arguably one) or not going. If Grandpa Giuseppe wants to go back and see the Old Country one last time and bogan class is all he can afford, then it suits him DTTG.

The article mentions that this is being looked at for 'leisure' routes. Exactly why the A380 blurb mentions the possibility of 'one-class configurations'. Now that is scary, but it suits some markets (but the idea of 800 Kath-and-Kims all hitting some third-world customs facility at once is enough to give one hives... ). I went LHR-Antigua a few years back in a specially-configged 777: 10 abreast, pygmy pitch. No P and only 4 rows of J-cls up front (old seats). 'twas a zoo but it got the punters where they wanted to go (holiday destination) cheaply.

It may not end up being Jet* which runs such flights, but it will happen. Carriers have been looking for years at how to spread the LCC model to L/H; this is just an extension of that process.

24th Aug 2005, 10:14

charter airlines have over the years operated from the UK to Australia using 767s in full multi stop, cattle class 29 inch configuration.

People I have spoken to who have used them over the years have invariably said "never again".

Low cost/ no frills may work for short journeys but the jury is still out on longhaul ops and dixon wants to be the first to roll the dice.............

I don't think people will buy it.

rescue 1
24th Aug 2005, 10:41
Would have to agree Jettlager...The established full service carriers are doing very well at what they do.

I'm not convinced that buying breakfast and dinner not to mention water on a twelve hour flight is going to work. With DVT still ringing in the ears of Airline Execs, I think that they will need to move carefully on this phenomena.

24th Aug 2005, 10:51
Looks like SQ and CX will be getting a lot more business. Gee they even clean their aircraft. WOW! Wonder if you get water on a SIN-LHR?:yuk:


hangar 9
24th Aug 2005, 11:24
Good night Australian lest we forget

Mr Seatback 2
24th Aug 2005, 12:41
There's a lot to happen to this idea before any of us can make an educated call on what EXACTLY will happen.

For example, presuming that Jetstar do the long haul thing (using AO crews, or whatever), the flights affect both inbound and outbound passengers.

Currently, on Jetstar Asia (and other charter carriers in Europe), you can get away with 'pay as you go' food and drinks on flights around the 5 hour mark.

With the Jetstar trans tasman ops, like Jetstar asia, the seats are pre allocated, along with international-to-international interlining of bags. So already, you have 2 key differences to the domestic product.

Where to from here for JQ/AO, etc. could mean any number of things.

I would FIRMLY HOPE that, whatever the outcome on long haul services, that the AO service is seen as the 'benchmark' (ie. free food and drink) with 'value added services' (ie. DigEPlayer units, etc) at the discretion of the traveller.

I don't believe, for a minute, that JQ could get away with half of what occurs domestically on an 11 hour sector, for example. Not only would outbound travellers revolt, but you'd lose even more from inbound groups organised by tour wholesalers, who consider inflight product to be just as important as price (depending on the market of course).

We shall see what we shall see. ;)

24th Aug 2005, 15:18

I've flown SQ numerous times and don't think they're anything special, in my opinion they're over-rated.

Just my opinion anyway.


24th Aug 2005, 20:56
Jettlager, whilst you are true the European Charter Airline 767 might be a bit squeesy they did however assist in bringing the price of a flight to UK down considerably. In fact the likes of Britannia served the route for 10+ years and whilst the seat pitch may have been tight, the fares were cheap. Give and take I think you call it. If you check the web the UK Charter airlines like Britannia are back again this summer so there must be some form of business case for their return.

Don't get me wrong, there is no chance of me taking the tribe to the UK on holiday in a ballooning Jetstar A330 full of 300+ ferals when I can book with numerous full service carriers. The Airline Industry and Staff travel options help make that choice easier.

Like to see GD heading off for a business meeting in Rome in the Jetstar A330 rather than First Class on the QF1 !

24th Aug 2005, 22:04
The JQ cabin is much more comfortable than the QF economy section.
The seats are wider and the pitch is more. If I had to fly long haul in economy I would much rather be in the JQ cabin.
JQ International is all allocated seating, so the difference between QF economy and JQ Int or AO for that matter is that JQ is much more comfortable and roomy than the others, but you buy your meals.
JQ Int will be a hit with the punters because of the cost saving and the higher comfort in economy and a hit with the owners because it will make them money instead of just breaking even on the marginal routes.
Thats why JQ get the gigs and AO is not.

24th Aug 2005, 23:03
Chocks, easy solution to your problem which I am sure the Rocket Scientists at DOTARS have already come up with.............just check the flight crew even more thoroughly, maybe a full body cavity search each time you sign on :yuk:

Also, can someone help me out, I not very good at maths coz I are a pilot:

QF hedged 90% of fuel at $49US, price has only recently got as high as $65US.
Domestic surcharge of $20 is about to increase to $26, thats 30% ( i think )
10% of QF fuel gone up by 30% over how ever many months and good old GD puts ALL ticket surcharges up by 30% overnight.

Anyone else see what I am getting at :}

mid assist
24th Aug 2005, 23:43

You seemed to be very emotionally in love with JQ. I think you should read into the bigger picture. JQ just like AO is a TOOL to undercut QF mainline. AO has 2 pilot operated 767-300. They cant fly longer than about 8ish hours. So places like BOM, HNL, HKT etc doesn't fit the current model as AO needs a second officer. As for trans tasman QF mainlain is already serving it as full service carrier. JQ is a no frills alternative.

25th Aug 2005, 01:55
Mid Assist,
So whats your point ? If AO got the gig they would be getting the larger type also, but they did'nt because they are not as competative as JQ, unfortunately it will probably be the undoing for AO,
The result for the staff is probably not all that bad .
Pilots back to mainline. Cabin crew offered jobs at JQ or mainline and groundstaff could probably be absorbed into either opn.

hangar 9
25th Aug 2005, 04:34
And engineering outsourced.

You pilots cant see with your heads up your arses', the biggest saving in any airline operation is to cut back on engineering. This whole thing is about cutting the guts out of Aus. Engineering, and bring down safety standards, Risk management, catch word while aircraft are new you might be able to get away with some reduction but as they get older and fuel goes up, and CEO's move on what is left is an airline that has been stripped clean and can't recover to maintain its aging fleet.

Just ask Ansett

25th Aug 2005, 06:15
"What is past, is prologue".

I concur Hangar 9.

25th Aug 2005, 06:17
Hey Hanger,
You touched on the magic words....RISK MANAGEMENT..
Just heard it again recently from management pilot refering to fuel policy. Weighing up Risk against Cost.. I just shake my head and fall asleep.
I think the concept has been taken too far and needs to be reigned in. Iv'e seen some pilots do strange things to comply with these policies including taking less than flight plan fuel.. Yup, less than F/P.. Awesome, but true.

25th Aug 2005, 07:03
UR2 wat a lot of crap. I seem to remember that the 717 went from 104 seats in QF link config seat pitch to 125 in JQ:yuk: . You state that JQ seat pitch is more than QF and that the cabin is more comfortable. Personally I think you must be on Crystal meth if you think Jet* is better than QF. I think your comments are so outrageous your obviously joking or Jet* management.

Now the facts on pitch
QF Y- 31”
DJ Y-31”
Jet Star- 30”

You can find the info on Skytraks website

Mr Seatback 2
25th Aug 2005, 07:46
Didn't Alitalia and a few other major European carriers who flew into Australia have a 29" seat pitch?

Not arguing FOR a pitch decrease, but Jetstar definitely isn't alone in offering reduced pitch on its' flights. Just take a look at any of the major European charter carriers, whom have been operating successfully with ludicrous seat pitch and configs (2-4-2 config in a 767!)

As an aside, flew Emirates SYD-AKL a few weeks ago. 777 configuration was 3-4-3 - same as a 747, and yet the cabin not as wide!

My previous 777 flight before my EK experience was on AA from LHR-LAX. The config a year ago was 2-5-2...1 less seat across compared to EK. Sure, you had the dreaded middle seat...but nowhere near as cramped as EK!

Not only that, but AA's seat pitch was BY FAR and away better than EK's offering in Economy. Just as well it was Trans Tasman and not long haul to SIN or BKK.

NOW I see how EK report such strong profits! Furthermore, their inflight service wasn't anything special. Bear in mind that the crews on JQ are only capable of doing so much with the goods provided. Service is more than just the product!

Advertising and marketing can do WONDER's for any company!

25th Aug 2005, 11:38
BA 50,
Quite correct FOR THE 717, not the A320.

26th Aug 2005, 04:05
ur2 and BA50 -
Some facts for you both...

DJ 73Gs have 32" in front of the wings and 30" beind. 738s are 32" throughout - more than QF.

JQ has 30" in all bar three rows (14, 24 and 25) on the 717s - which are 29". The 320s are 30" in all rows except four or so rows on the RHS in front of the exits, which are 29". (This makes way for the galley bulkhead)

The 717s at QFLink were 32" in 115/117Y. For a SHORT amount of time VQF-K flew around in a 12J/90Y config sold as 102Y. Seat pitch was 37" in J and 34-35" in Y.

The seats on the 717 are .5" wider than 737s. 320s are 1" wider.

26th Aug 2005, 04:56
Dear UR2 It seems my good fellow you suffer from that unmentionable male disorder that makes you look around and compare yourself with other males and surmise that you are in fact bigger than they are, but alas it is rarely true, there is always someone bigger. Just food for thought

26th Aug 2005, 09:37

Nice shot of Magda, but they look like J-cls leather seats…


I agree with the general gist of your post, but as per Jetblues’ example: ‘… an A330 full of 300+ ferals… ‘.

That’s my point. You will fill a cheap A330 with 300+ ferals/bogans going on the Big Trip to Rome as they are happy to pay feral/bogan fares. You, me and the traveller on an account are not, so we will go on SQ, CX, EK or some other full-service carrier into the same port and get our FF points and free drinks on the way. And most of us mere mortals don’t get ID90s.

Pitch is merely a transitory issue for the feral/bogan market – which they probably wouldn’t think to ask about anyway.

Price is key for that market. A few A330s, say 4 or 5, doing twice-a-week runs into 3 or 4 non-business-travel ports, using the likes of Serco and Servisair for GH, is a workable business model. There are some issues such as crew slipping and the need to operate into full-cost airfields which need to be overcome but, fortunately or unfortunately, it will happen.


One suspects that if GD had to go to Rome (can’t think why he would), he’d 1A it on QF1 up to EGLL and meet the ex-shareholders before backtracking, or if he was in a bit of a rush, same seat on CX via Honkers. He’d need the 80” pitch for his wallet…

But, those of his family who don’t qualify for IDs might be more price-sensitive…

26th Aug 2005, 13:07
I reckon Seatback is on the money here.

I've said this a million times before, and I'll say it again... I think JQ/AO will get all the A330s and QF will order 777/787s. The only question is of merger/takeover/renaming of AO/JQ. Obviously 'Australian' makes sense internationally, but we'll just have to wait to see.

hangar 9
26th Aug 2005, 13:39
Come th emerger of jetstar Asia with Valueair the new name is going to be Orange Star, could this be because Australian is a burnt orange colour?

I wonder.

Apparently JQ was adamant that this had to be the name.

26th Aug 2005, 15:37
Taildragger67 Yeah it must be a J class seats. How else would Magda fit in a Jet* cabin?:p

I think your right about the Feral class 330’s. Most of us that have been to these ports would know how expensive places like Rome can be. So the question is; Can people, that cant really afford to fly in the first place, afford to holiday in Rome?

I have put off international trips because of cost; and for me the fare would be ID90.

Guess what im saying is that the airfare is only a small % of the cost of an international holiday. Think it would work well on crappy places likes Bali, Phuket etc, but im not convinced about the more expensive destinations (HKG, LAX, DXB, JFK, YVR, FCU etc…). How cheap can the fares be @ USD68bbl? The hedge runs out at the end of this year. You cant save that much on these sectors by charging for a meal.:ugh: Good luck!

Perhaps its all BS and a part of EBA neg?:ouch:

Mr Seatback 2
27th Aug 2005, 02:02
All true Taildragger67

"That’s my point. You will fill a cheap A330 with 300+ ferals/bogans going on the Big Trip to Rome as they are happy to pay feral/bogan fares. You, me and the traveller on an account are not, so we will go on SQ, CX, EK or some other full-service carrier into the same port and get our FF points and free drinks on the way. And most of us mere mortals don’t get ID90s.

Pitch is merely a transitory issue for the feral/bogan market – which they probably wouldn’t think to ask about anyway.

Price is key for that market. A few A330s, say 4 or 5, doing twice-a-week runs into 3 or 4 non-business-travel ports, using the likes of Serco and Servisair for GH, is a workable business model. There are some issues such as crew slipping and the need to operate into full-cost airfields which need to be overcome but, fortunately or unfortunately, it will happen."

I've just reviewed the websites for a number of low fares carriers that operate the A330 (Air Transat of Canada, LTU from Germany, and the many British charter carriers using A330's like Monarch Airlines).

All are successful, no-frills airlines offering main screen IFE, basic meals with snacks and additional drinks extra at small cost.

These airlines wouldn't be in the position they are (some with a very long, rich history) were it not for the consistent demand that exists for low cost travel.

Sure, flying 'Jetstar/Australian/whatever!' long haul over 8 hours mightn't sound appealing, but with the savings generated through reduced inflight product and IFE, and the 'cram em in' seating plans (300+ in economy alone on most of these carriers), most people won't care!


"Guess what im saying is that the airfare is only a small % of the cost of an international holiday. Think it would work well on crappy places likes Bali, Phuket etc, but im not convinced about the more expensive destinations (HKG, LAX, DXB, JFK, YVR, FCU etc…). How cheap can the fares be @ USD68bbl? The hedge runs out at the end of this year. You cant save that much on these sectors by charging for a meal. Good luck!"

From taking a look at the prices being charged on some flights (at the above airlines), quite a lot! Condor were charging $119US from Orlando to Germany non stop!

Only the Brit carriers seem to charge for inflight meals depending on the package purchased. By in large, the majority of these carriers provide 2 meals on long haul services, with extra paid for snacks and drinks as needed.

Do we have to like it? Not necessarily, but there will be plenty of people inbound and outbound that WILL pay these prices (and sacrifice a few small comforts) for the experience.

27th Aug 2005, 03:41
Ok then. Low cost UK charter carriers. How about what they pay their respective pilots! Here's a sample (2003 figures.)Top scale Capt figures. Air 2000 £88281, Britannia £ 89599, Excel $64136, Monarch £ 85476, My Travel $ 85371, Thomas Cook £88565 and for what it’s worth Virgin £90924 & BA Long Haul £120000.
For some airlines these figures represent the base and exclude allowances, comprehensive private health for you and the entire family and in some cases other things like company supplied laptopsand mobiles. Work out your own exchage rates if you wish. FO figures available for those interested. How do you reckon we are looking in Australia ?:ouch:

27th Aug 2005, 09:29
Even some company wannabes on Qroom are stating that its the economics of airline operation the will lead to J* getting the gig. In other words buy the BS management spin and do it for less. The gullible believe it often enough...

You get what you pay for but LCC carriers in europe don't need undercutting pilots to get it running, unfortunately the idiots at QF buy the crap. With an ageing population we will have a biting skills shortage meaning us in the generation to follow with skills in demand need only wait. The race to the bottom may help the company achieve a lower short term cost base...
But it simply is unsustainable. To quote a genius on Qroom is market economics..Exactly.....Demand for pilots will outstrip supply in most maturing western economies, australia included..

Vote the EBA-NO it's crap...

J* are there to spook us, but even J* will have upward cost pressures...

Before anyone asks i got me a spiffy business qual too, i read the same textbooks, Hotnhigh summed it up nicely, low cost isnt necessarily a low salaried pilot despite the poor souls at J* and some colleagues at mainline think, afterall the freaking accountants can't fly em :E

28th Aug 2005, 00:25
Did any of you actually read this article?

It has no FACT to it whatsoever. Have a re-read - it is simply an opinion of a journalist, who needs to write something in the week following QFs announcement of record profits. There is nothing factual in the article.

jet* flying to Nz, bali etc? Yep. No news there.

Elsewhere? Maybe. Many years down then track. But that would be determined by the market. Something many forget when we think in the comfort of our cosy cockpits. Which brings me to my last point:

Rather than crying foul about this, what is needed at QF(AIPA + Pilots) is a bit of clever thinking for a change, and shoring up all pilot groups under the one banner so that the company cant bid one against the other. Then we won't have the situation of career progress and future salaries being so unsettled/unknown.

28th Aug 2005, 01:20
Aah yes Qfinsider. The good old accountants.
Don't you love the tv ad for chartered accountants that says you cant launch a bloody space shuttle without them. I would never had guessed. :mad:
Shame they justify their positions by screwing everything else.

3rd Sep 2005, 01:23
Ah! mmmbop. Ya hit th nail right on the head!

Rather than crying foul about this, what is needed at QF(AIPA + Pilots) is a bit of clever thinking for a change, and shoring up all pilot groups under the one banner so that the company cant bid one against the other. Then we won't have the situation of career progress and future salaries being so unsettled/unknown.

In fact it is time for not only all QF pilots to get together but AIPA and AFAP as well. We must stop the rot!

One, well informed, proactive and sensible umbrella organisation is needed to oversee the interest of all pilots in this country.

United we stand, divided we fall!

Chimbu chuckles
6th Sep 2005, 00:58
hotnhigh have you been to Europe lately?

I would suggest to you that the only valid exchange rate to use to compare wages in the EU to wages in OZ is 1=1. A big mac costs 5 pounds in London and $5 in Brissy. Fuel is 1.30 odd pounds/liter in UK and $1.30 in Oz. It is not valid to multiply BA wages by 2.5 or 3 and say "OO look...BA pilots $350,000/yr or Ryanair pilots get $250,000/yr...we are being screwed!!!"

Mind you the several BA Captains living/based in OZ can:ooh: ...imagine their tax bill!!!!

But the other 99.9% of pilots earning Pounds and Euros also spend in Pounds and Euros....in fact when you consider the low cost of quality lifestyle in Oz, beaches, boating, camping etc, I reckon OZ airline pilots are not doing badly at all.

6th Sep 2005, 01:04
When tin was flying in UK the same could be said 1 pound bought a dollars worth of goods.
Except in them days ya couldnt get a decent feed housing/flats were bloody near impossible to get the cars were all rusty and there was no sun

I was earning nearly six times the wage of a shop assistant and living on the bones of me arse.

Madam Thatcher finally got the sun to shine .:rolleyes: