PDA

View Full Version : Jetstar 787's


Pages : 1 [2]

Jacana
5th Nov 2013, 22:35
Wow your awesome. Hope you had a great time researching me and my posts. I hope you actually learned something ;)

Flyboat North
5th Nov 2013, 23:16
Where are the FOs for 787 coming from ?

How long would one have to be in company to successfully bid for 787 or for that matter 330 fo (guess that is a hypothetical now

Mstr Caution
5th Nov 2013, 23:39
Jacana.

Seeing you might be in the know.

Is the Melbourne - Jakarta JQ leg a new leisure route to go up against an Air Asia X who obtained an AOC with the associated lower cost base in Indonesia.

Or is it because JQ just receives new aircraft then throws a dart at a map to pick a new destination.

Besides. I thought Alan Joyce said the aircraft would be servicing the HNL and Japan international routes first.

pull-up-terrain
6th Nov 2013, 01:46
It's absolutely priceless reading some of the comments on the Qantas Facebook page with the amount of people questioning "why jetstar getting the 787 first?"

UnderneathTheRadar
6th Nov 2013, 02:04
With thanks to Mstr Caution but Jacana - seriously:

- JQ new route to Jakarta suddenly appears?
- pilots being trained in Melbourne?

Jetstar website still says MEL-OOL and MEL-CNS from 13th November then Bali from 18th December.

Potsie Weber
6th Nov 2013, 03:54
There is a 787 Sim going in at the QF Sim building in Essendon. Is it operational yet?

who_cares
6th Nov 2013, 08:44
The sim wasn't serviceable a few days ago

The Green Goblin
6th Nov 2013, 08:59
Guys with a 2010 start date are getting FO slots on wide bodies now.

That will slow down though as expansion slows and recruitment dies off. I'd expect it'll be 5 years for guys with 2011 start dates.

It's got to be better though than 17 years right now in the sistership.

Paragraph377
6th Nov 2013, 22:32
Fort Fumble has formally approved the addition of the 787 on to the JQ AOC;

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - CASA approval for Jetstar 787 flights (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_101759)

Ken Borough
6th Nov 2013, 22:59
CASA approval of JQ 787 flights

And how much assistance was provided by the army of experts at Mascot? Would JQ have the capability to achieve this without assistance?

Toruk Macto
6th Nov 2013, 23:26
Exciting times . Good luck !

Lookleft
7th Nov 2013, 03:11
army of experts at Mascot


What army is that Ken? All the flight ops 787 team at Jetstar are from within Jetstar.

Ken Borough
7th Nov 2013, 03:35
Lookleft

That's good to hear provided you're correct. The 'army if experts' to which I referred is that body of professional people that keeps Qantas ticking, day in, day out through thick and thin.. :ok:

myshoutcaptain
7th Nov 2013, 04:48
Perhaps they'll assist QF if/when they option to 789? ... :D:ok:

Ollie Onion
7th Nov 2013, 05:04
I heard when I was around head office recently that the plan now is to run the 787-800 for 2 years and then swap them out for 900's to enable expansion into Europe. So maybe Qantas may get some used 800's in two or three years time once they have had the crap flown out of them.

kellykelpie
7th Nov 2013, 05:22
Maybe you'll need a job with the Mothership in two or three years when you've had the crap flown out of you...

Cunning_Stunt
7th Nov 2013, 05:59
Ollie, anyone with half a brain should have already figured out that the utterly risible plan of RedQ into Europe from the leprechaun was just that. Risible. Therefore the next " brilliant " plan is to send Jetstar into Europe with 787 a/c. They just had to wait until the 787 was actually here and start sending back the Stolen Generation 330 a/c to QF. Keep starving QF Inter of funds, reduce their footprint into Europe to bugger all. Focus utterly and completely on the promotion of Jetstar. Trouble is, it is up against some very canny National carriers in SE Asia who are expanding their own interests. The utterly frustrating thing about all of this is that not a soul will admit that JQ international is, and will for the foreseeable future only survive because of the wilful blindness and financial gymnastics of Management

Bootstrap1
7th Nov 2013, 06:11
Just remember,

Australians love FLYING JETSTAR!!!!

At least that is what Alan keeps telling us, and if you keep telling yourself this for long enough you will believe it yourself.

Its not that we want to fly them but you have taken away our choice. There is a difference.

Fatguyinalittlecoat
7th Nov 2013, 08:22
Ollie

Are you suggesting that Jetstar are so bad that they can rubbish an Airplane in as little as 2-3 years?

Your hubris is noted.

V-Jet
7th Nov 2013, 15:26
This isnt a 'lets insult Jetstar staff' argument. Please dont take it as such.

In a profitability sense yes FLGILC that is absolutely the case.

The basic issue I think is this. The goal of any LCC is to work out how to charge more than the next guy to survive. Qantas had/s a brand they could harge te earth for.

In sensible hands the 787 would have been a gold mine. Jetstar in a business sense will waste the opportunity to provide better product than the next guy. Qantas could have easily charged a $500 (say) premium for a 787 seat. Jetstar models require them to sell for $500 less on a product that CAN only differentiate itself in the marketplace on price - ergo: 99% of pax wont give a toss if they are on a 737-100 or a 787-800.

I dont think anyone has anything against Jetstar staff - far from it. This discussion is about managerial insanity on a very base level.

The Emperor has no clothes.

Ollie Onion
7th Nov 2013, 21:53
No wasn't meant to be a bashing comment, just saying that Jetstar had big plans for the 787. However talking to people in the office these plans have been shelved due to the 'numbers' not working. It was just the first time I had heard someone say that when the 'group' gets the 900 it would be used to swap out the 800's to enable these expansion plans to go ahead. Up until now the company line has always been that the 900's would be for Qantas mainline.

I don't think that Jetstar will trash the new aircraft in 3 years, I think that our passengers might! They are of a certain class!!

moa999
7th Nov 2013, 22:51
Anyone who thinks Qantas can charge a $500 premium, particularly in Y, has rocks in their head.

Reality is air travel is a commodity - the differences between carriers are tiny.
In my mind the amount a full service carrier can charge extra is very small.

IFE - Most LCCs charge $15 for a portable unit
Food - Again worth $20 at most
Alcohol - For the vast majority $10-20, more for a few
Leg room/ Elbow room - Maybe $50 (same as exit row fees). Admittedly most full service carriers are squeezing here as well (eg Emirates 777)
Lounge access (if elite and have access) - Up to $50
Schedule - Some premium on domestic, less for international
Crew - On some QF flights an advantage, on others a disadvantage

So there is little difference in Revenue - and all of the above revenue items have associated Costs - it comes down to how well an airline manages other costs.

This is where Qantas will continue to struggle, particularly against the Asian airlines... And in costs I particularly include Pilot and FA costs, maintenance costs, landing and parking costs at home airport, depreciation on aircraft
Jetstar has a slightly better chance at competing but even it will struggle.

---

Bootstrap,
Australian's don't love flying Jetstar.
They do however love the cheapest price so they can spend more on their Bintang beer and singlets.

mohikan
8th Nov 2013, 00:45
Moa999

A very significant component of the management and administrative overhead of JQ is paid for by the 'Qantas Group'.

Aircraft and spares purchasing, aeronautical charges and regulatory affairs and product development to name just three areas.

Additionally, Qantas mainlines management overhead in this area is now the highest in the world. Massively overstaffed, and each staff member earning salaries that are in the multiples of contemporaries in Australia and the rest of the world.

Some of the flight operations salaries are absolutely outrageous - close to a million per year for former CP ' The Fat Controller' and nearly 800K for 'the Rutting Chimp / Hailstone'

Agree with some of your points on operational costs, but cost issues are not just confined to this area also.

V-Jet
8th Nov 2013, 01:03
$500 was plucked out of the air. Point is Qf can charge more than Jet*. And that is surely the point of any business. Nice new business class in a 78 - surely not a hard proposition to market...

Makes me sick - especially AVV. My commiserations to all. Picked up a number of jets out of there, never had a problem.

hotnhigh
8th Nov 2013, 01:08
AIPA's comparative figures for virgin and qantas 737 operation showed the following..

Staff per airframe (Aug 2012)
Qantas 155

Virgin 70

Difference: + 121.4%
WTF!!! There is the problem right there.
And its got nothing to do with cabin crew, engineers or pilots.

It would be interesting to benchmark qantas international versus not only jetstar but other airlines around the world.

At least Joyce has taken steps to rectify the balance by sacking engineers. And established 3 tiers to the pilot management structure, which is exactly what the organisation needs. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

ramius315
8th Nov 2013, 04:37
It's got to be better though than 17 years right now in the sistership.

'Sistership.' There's and interesting choice of term.

How about 'canabilized and soon to be murdered mothership' for more accuracy? :ugh:

waren9
8th Nov 2013, 05:04
Staff per airframe (Aug 2012)
Qantas 155

Virgin 70

i dont find those numbers relevant unless its shown they account for contractors performing the functions of some of those 155.

is it apples with apples?

-438
8th Nov 2013, 21:57
Waren, the figures don't surprise me at all. The amount of middle managers in Qantas needs to be seen to be believed.
Also many QF mainline staff, paid by mainline are supporting Jetstar, Qlink, EFA, Network Businesses etc, such as treasury, legal, government, media and corporate relations, advertising etc.
Funnily the media never seem to question the amount of staff in Qantas HQ when they talk about cost cutting measures. It's always those overpaid pilots or engineers.

The Green Goblin
8th Nov 2013, 23:56
I chose sistership deliberately.

Jetstar will be bigger than Qantas. It's only a matter of how soon.

ramius315
9th Nov 2013, 03:09
Many a child outgrows/outperforms their parent - they still remain parent/child.

Qantas will always be the mothership. The management destroyed, cannibalised and murdered mothership, but still the mothership.

Your adjective is illogical.

busdriver007
9th Nov 2013, 03:36
The only winners will be Virgin and Emirates.......:rolleyes:

Mstr Caution
9th Nov 2013, 04:01
Jetstar may be bigger than Qantas one day.

Then again, maybe Qantas won't own JQ one day.

Everything Qantas management has done displays Jetstar to be the Ammaaaazing business it is.

Sell JQ to let's say an Asian Bank, another airline? Then see how it performs outside the umbrella of the Qantas group.

What The
9th Nov 2013, 04:07
They could never produce a prospectus that wouldn't find them going to jail at a later date.

Flowerpot Man
9th Nov 2013, 09:29
That's good to hear provided you're correct. The 'army if experts' to which I referred is that body of professional people that keeps Qantas ticking, day in, day out through thick and thin..

He is correct.

IsDon
10th Nov 2013, 07:31
Just how many CEOs are we up to now? I've lost count.

And how many Chief Pilots are we up to now?

There's your problem.

Multiples of CEOs and Chief pilots more than is required and a huge layer of yes men, greasy pole climbers and sycophants telling the bloated upper management what a great job they're doing, while further insulating the coal face from those that are driving investment and policy.

Meanwhile you have a compliance industry hanging off the airline like a leach making millions out of their respective empires. Safety and Security being the main culprits. Not saying there isn't a place for both, but if I see another sign painted on a car park, or video telling me how to cross a road I'm going to choke someone. This is the reason it is so expensive to run a business in this country. Just how much does Qantas pay per annum to these parasites when our international competitors don't have to?

I don't know how much longer this can last. Even if the whole board and management were given their marching orders tomorrow, and a board and management with airline experience were parachuted in, I don't think it's possible to recover from here. We're beyond critical mass.

Start looking for jobs elsewhere.

V-Jet
10th Nov 2013, 08:37
100%.

A business that has totally lost any attachment to what it was set up to do.

A catastrophic failure of key components has occurred.

The change has been from 'provide what our customers want to the best of our ability' to 'provide what gives management the best financial reward possible'.

It is abhorrent.

V-Jet
10th Nov 2013, 08:48
Isdon,
I don't know what your background is but that is one of the most succinct summaries of the litany of failures that Qantas management (loose term) has foisted upon a very, very loyal workforce, that I have read.

And I totally agree. Get out now while you can still cut a reasonable deal for yourself. After the collapse (and whether it is total or not matters little) we will be a dime a dozen in the marketplace.

I am disgusted and appalled, but you speak the truth.

Tidbinbilla
10th Nov 2013, 10:47
Let's get back on toipc, and that is Jetstar 787's. :)

IsDon
10th Nov 2013, 12:34
Sorry Tid.

You're right of course.

Forgive me a spray as a soon to be demoted F/O with 30 years flying experience.

Back on topic.

V-Jet
10th Nov 2013, 19:17
Ok tidbin, get your point. BUT....

Jetstar IS the thread drift - the 787's are nothing to do with it!!

Oh the irony:(

goodonyamate
11th Nov 2013, 10:26
OOL - NRT - can't do it with full load :}

no worries, chunk up the donks!!!

oops…pylons not rated.

no worries, chunk up the pylons!!

oops…4 year lead in time. can be retrofitted after then.

anyone else, you'd be shocked. But the morons who run QF/JQ…its just comical.

Not to worry, someone will have received a nice bonus for all these amaaaaaaaaaaaazing decisions.:D

Keg
11th Nov 2013, 20:08
I keep hearing those rumours but no one in any position of authority ever comes attached to them.

717tech
9th Jan 2014, 03:12
Anyone know why VH-VKB has been banished to the naughty corner (Taxiway G) in Cairns for the last week?
Looks like it only flew ML-CNS and has been parked ever since.

FYSTI
9th Jan 2014, 07:15
Its an operational spare, just in case.

Ken Borough
9th Jan 2014, 07:33
Its an operational spare

Yair. Right. Especially when the other 787 operates, for the time being, solely between Melbourne and Denpasar. Makes a mockery of their spin, don't it?

booglaboy
9th Jan 2014, 07:54
Someone say 'heavy landing'?

tmpffisch
9th Jan 2014, 09:07
It's undergoing its CASA check? Cheaper to park it up there than elsewhere.

chockchucker
9th Jan 2014, 09:11
Why Cairns when Jetstar has their very own wide body hangar in Melbourne ( nice when you can get big brother to gift you such infrastructure rather than pay for and build your own!) that often sits empty during the day with all the hangar lights blazing?

Good job somebody else is paying the bills! :ugh:

blow.n.gasket
9th Jan 2014, 10:29
So the "blue shirt boys landed heavy did they"?
The future of the Qantas Group no doubt!
How many man hours involved with ultra sonic inspection after such, on a carbon fibre structure?????
God help us!!!

spelling_nazi
9th Jan 2014, 23:30
That last post was comedy surely?

porch monkey
10th Jan 2014, 01:52
"It's called being smart with MUM'S money"...... There, I fixed it for ya.

neville_nobody
10th Jan 2014, 01:53
That last post was comedy surely?

Narr just another Jetstar Cadet with no idea.

chockchucker
10th Jan 2014, 03:59
Black prince, like hell it was freely available! It was a very actively used wide body (767 & A330) hangar until Qantas management decided to gift it to the orange cancer.

Any assertion to the contrary is a display of complete ignorance.

Angle of Attack
10th Jan 2014, 04:41
Its very smart to park multiple jets in various parts of the world and not use them?

Maxmotor
10th Jan 2014, 04:53
Management were so generous they even had contractors swarm the hangar to carry out repairs to the aircon and heating which has not worked for years.

waren9
10th Jan 2014, 20:24
cairns post article (http://www.cairnspost.com.au/business/jetstar-dreamliner-parked-at-cairns-airport-as-it-undergoes-certification/story-fnjpusdv-1226794622728) from jan 4

for what its worth

Ken Borough
10th Jan 2014, 22:07
Isn't the type added to a carrier's AOC. Does the spin-doctor know what he's talking about. Like,JETSTAR taking delivery of its first 787-900? Is he dreaming? And why did this particular aircraft sit on the ground in Melbourne from 13Dec until it appeared in Cairns on New Year's Eve? Pre-service mods? As a LCC, shouldn't JETSTAR accept delivery and fly revenue services ASAP thereafter?

AnQrKa
10th Jan 2014, 22:18
"nice when you can get big brother to gift you such infrastructure rather than pay for and build your own!"

As apposed to the QF hangers in SYD paid for by ME, the tax payer.

Can you please sell them and give me my money back then build your own.

Australopithecus
10th Jan 2014, 22:22
Sometimes there might be a short delay in fitting customer equipment to a new airliner, although any plane should be essentially ready to go from the factory. A month on the ground at probably a million dollars in lease or money costs should never be part of the calculus for anything but the first hull.

Route proving*, staff familiarization, CASA last minute stuff all takes time, but all of that should have been satisfied with the first plane. An aircraft untouched on an apron obviously is contributing nothing to those activities either.

I did hear that the second and third aircraft were going to be stored for awhile owing to lack of sufficient crew, but I find that hard to credit. (Except of course when I consider the context)

*route proving: why? What is learned ferrying aircraft all over routes already well lubricated by previous similar types?

Australopithecus
10th Jan 2014, 22:25
What part of the government sell-off eludes you? Money was returned to the treasury which was money you didn't have to pay in additional tax. (In theory)

TBM-Legend
11th Jan 2014, 00:47
No wonder everything costs twice as much as it should in this country...

We, the lemmings, sit idly by and let it happen..:sad:

scrubba
11th Jan 2014, 09:31
Australopithecus,

*route proving: why? What is learned ferrying aircraft all over routes already well lubricated by previous similar types?

I guess the answer to that would be easily established by identifying the formal route proving reports that have made nil comment (which if planned and executed properly should be the outcome) versus those that have identified real issues. Having flown a few and had to cover our tracks because documentation, ground handling, airport liaison, etc wasn't completed or up to scratch, I'd say they serve a purpose as a huge financial incentive not to accept 'near enough is good enough'.

Of course, if the FOI on board has no idea (which anecdotally seems to be on the increase), then it is less defensible as a concept.

Transition Layer
11th Jan 2014, 11:48
JETSTAR'S second 787 Dreamliner has touched down in Cairns to be based at the airport for the next few weeks as it undergoes certification.


What a load of tripe!

This was unscheduled...I smell a RAT

Sonny Hammond
11th Jan 2014, 12:20
Short of qualified crew you say? A middle eastern airline can fix that with a plethora of CASA licensed, B787 endorsed pilots.

Problem solved, get that plane flying!

SOPS
11th Jan 2014, 12:21
The spin is flying thick and fast, something is not right. You do not leave a 787 sitting on the tarmac for days or weeks on end!

What this country badly need is a few journos who don't believe that cutting and pasting a press release is the way to report a story, but actually asking some questions might be a good idea.:ugh:

chockchucker
11th Jan 2014, 15:10
The third Jetstar 787 arrived YMML early this am.

Wonder where they will store this one? Woomera perhaps?

hotnhigh
11th Jan 2014, 17:06
Transition layer,
It's pretty early on to be smelling rats, don't you think? :=

waren9
11th Jan 2014, 19:59
from fridays weekly missive thats floating around now

This weekend we welcome our third Boeing 787 Dreamliner into Australia. Our first 787 has been operating from Melbourne to Bali over the festive season, allowing thousands of Jetstar customers to experience this game-changing new aircraft.

Next week we will commence 787 services from Sydney to Bali with our second 787, which has been undergoing its AOC validation activities since arriving in Australia. Our third 787 will commence Phuket services at the start of February.

apart from the akl services which havent seemed to eventuate, they actually manage to make it sound like its all going to plan

kookaburra
11th Jan 2014, 20:49
If CASA is back from holidays maybe it will get in the air soon.
If the rumour I heard is true, the second one sitting in Cairns was delivered too close to Christmas and Jetstar didn't get all the paperwork sorted before the required CASA staff went on holidays.
Can anyone confirm another good effort by management?

I hope the loads on MEL DPS MEL are on the way up.
You couldn't book a ticket online for a while where the 787 replaced the 330!
QANTAS web site for that sector refered QF/JQ 35,36 to Jetstar website where there was no flight. Even flight centre, webjet didn't have the JQ direct flights available.
Jetstar call centre staff said, sorry no direct flight as the 787 is subject to regulatory approval....wtf? So you can't book a seat on an existing route....

No wonder the 'group' is losing millions.....

reubee
11th Jan 2014, 21:27
According to Jetstar source, VH-VKA has operated MEL-DPS return everyday since the 18th December. I wonder what the plan was if it had gone tech? and what to do about the potential PR fallout for the holiday makers who would have been inconvenienced.

kookaburra
11th Jan 2014, 22:03
A 330 would go back on or a QF 'spare' aircraft would come to the rescue.
Happens every now and then.
When it happens, apparently the Jetstar pax are sent a letter of apology for not being on a Jetstar flight and on QANTAS instead!

woodja51
13th Jan 2014, 03:28
Does/Do the JQ 787s suffer from any of the gremlins ours at CSA have been having lately ...? Dual CDU lockups and spoiler chatter on start causing flap / fctl lockouts etc... ( apart from having to crack the boards during start to fix this) ...
Only minor things but seem to be often...?
Wja

moa999
13th Jan 2014, 08:25
woodja,
They are brand new aircraft. They have no problems and don't require any maintenance :)

Kiwiconehead
13th Jan 2014, 09:32
They are brand new aircraft. They have no problems and don't require any maintenance

Especially when they are parked on the taxiway in Cairns

woodja51
13th Jan 2014, 09:48
Yes, sound just like CSAs then ... Perfect out of the box... But seriously, all new jets spend a bit of the time to start with , with the cowls up as we dont live in a perfect world... Just interested to see if other operators have other minor issues with them operationally...
Ta

717tech
14th Jan 2014, 09:57
Looks like it ferried down to SY yesterday and VKD has taken its place!

4Greens
15th Jan 2014, 08:06
'Rumours and news' reports that the FAA has grounded the 787. Confused.

OnceBitten
15th Jan 2014, 08:21
Took off out of Melbourne the other day just prior to the J*787 going Mel-Dps, they went straight to FL400.
Just wondering if the loads are that poor or is the aircrafts performance that good?

nitpicker330
15th Jan 2014, 10:32
4Greens------mate confused? Really!! That thread in Rumours and News started back on the 17th Jan 2013 ( one year ago ) when the FAA grounded the 787. Someone posted onto the thread with the latest Battery smoke problem. So no, it's not grounded again..:D

Popgun
15th Jan 2014, 12:29
Took off out of Melbourne the other day just prior to the J*787 going Mel-Dps, they went straight to FL400.
Just wondering if the loads are that poor or is the aircrafts performance that good?

Yes, the performance really is that good.

PG

Capt Basil Brush
15th Jan 2014, 19:42
According to Jetstar source, VH-VKA has operated MEL-DPS return everyday since the 18th December. I wonder what the plan was if it had gone tech? and what to do about the potential PR fallout for the holiday makers who would have been inconvenienced.

Apparently Jetstar have been overnighting A330 crews in DPS for up to 5 days at a time virtually on standby in case the 787 goes tech. I guess if an 330 needs to come to the rescue, there will be a crew in DPS to fly it back home again.

Ken Borough
16th Jan 2014, 00:02
Apparently Jetstar have been overnighting A330 crews in DPS for up to 5 days at a time virtually on standby in case the 787 goes tech. I guess if an 330 needs to come to the rescue, there will be a crew in DPS to fly it back home again.

Not saying it's a correct decision but the cost of this would certainly be much less than that caused by a delay arising from a type change, not to mention the aggro from the travelling bogans.

nitpicker330
16th Jan 2014, 00:31
Believe it not I have a mate on Reserve in Bali for 16 days....(330 CN )

Yes 16 days reserve in Bali, I kid you not.

I guess it's ok as long as QF are paying the bills.......:ugh:

Ollie Onion
16th Jan 2014, 01:11
Isn't that just good planning?? A few posts ago people we're taking the [email protected] because they assumed J* we're running this route with a single acft and it's only plan for disruption was to call in Qantas. Now it would appear they have a plan in place and yet you still take the mick! No pleasing some people.

I have said it once and will say it again, if you feel Qantas is actually paying the bills despite denials to the contrary, how about you prove it! I know the stock exchange would be interested to see if all the filed accounts are fraudulent!

Ken Borough
16th Jan 2014, 01:27
Ollie,

It's a plan, but is it a good one? There are other options that could be developed that don't see crew sitting around on reserve at out-ports 'just in case'. This has nuffink to do with Qantas paying the bills. :ok:

OneDotLow
16th Jan 2014, 01:30
I know the stock exchange would be interested to see if all the filed accounts are fraudulent!

I am under no illusion that what they are doing is legal. That doesn't change the fact that it is happening.

Aircraft leasing rates, fuel accounts setup, engineering turnarounds, JQ exec salaries, purchase of cargo space on JQ aircraft, codeshare seat purchases, disruption cleanup (thankfully less these days), Q Club access etc etc etc.

Speak with those above you and they will acknowledge that it is occurring but that it is 'just the way it is'.

I refer you to the 'Boston Matrix' (google search if you don't know what it is) in all its 'glory'.

Then again, if it gives you your 3 year A320 command, why would you care?

The Green Goblin
16th Jan 2014, 02:37
I don't get why qantas folk keep whinging about jetstar pax using the qantas lounges.

These passengers pay almost $1000 a year for the privilege, or fly a great deal on qantas as well as jetstar, or pay for points when flying jetstar to keep their club membership.

So at the end of the day, it's not a conspiracy. The group owns the lounges, not qantas domestic or international. The revenue from their operation goes to the group.

As for the rest, I know it sucks, but that's life in aviation. Be part of the solution or go on LWOP and try your luck elsewhere.

moa999
16th Jan 2014, 02:38
Ollie Onion, agree with you on the doubt re the rumours of QF on JQ bills. Reality is most people on the ground won't see the bill they will just know that ex QF staff did this for JQ etc.

However if I was Simon Hickey, CEO Qantas Intl or Lyell Strambi, CEO, Qantas Domestic, I would be making darn sure, given that undoubtedly my pay/bonus/potential promotion to Group CEO depends on the profit of my individual business unit that I would be sure making my unit got paid for anything they did for what is effectively a competitor (albeit part of the same umbrella).

And I don't see any particular issues with divisions competing against each other, each with a slightly different market segment target. I look at
Wesfarmeres - Kmart v Target
Leighton - Leighton v Thiess v John Holland
Westpac - Westpac v StGeorge/BankSA/Bankof Melbourne
Lend Lease - Lend Lease v Abigroup v Baulderstone
All companies that are far larger, and I daresay more complex than Qantas

Bumpfoh
22nd Jan 2014, 10:37
See the mighty plastic may have failed today.

JQ35 MEL-DPS being operated by an A332 and very late.

Any word?

600ft-lb
22nd Jan 2014, 10:48
The "Boston Matrix", interesting read on wikipedia - puts a lot of whats happened into perspective. An interesting part of the wikipedia article is the criticism;
While theoretically useful, and widely used, several academic studies have called into question whether using the growth–share matrix actually helps businesses succeed, and the model has since been removed from some major marketing textbooks.[6][7] One study (Slater and Zwirlein, 1992) which looked at 129 firms found that those who follow portfolio planning models like the BCG matrix had lower shareholder returns.

The matrix ranks only market share and industry growth rate, and only implies actual profitability, the purpose of any business. (It is certainly possible that a particular dog can be profitable without cash infusions required, and therefore should be retained and not sold.) The matrix also overlooks other elements of industry. With this or any other such analytical tool, ranking business units has a subjective element involving guesswork about the future, particularly with respect to growth rates. Unless the rankings are approached with rigor and scepticism, optimistic evaluations can lead to a dot com mentality in which even the most dubious businesses are classified as "question marks" with good prospects; enthusiastic managers may claim that cash must be thrown at these businesses immediately in order to turn them into stars, before growth rates slow and it's too late. Poor definition of a business's market will lead to some dogs being misclassified as cash cows.

Jetstar <insert franchise here>

waren9
22nd Jan 2014, 12:23
bumpf i heard a 787 went tech in dps. the return to mel was ccld, and it was to have flown back the following night (last night?), it would seem it wasnt fixed and theyve sent a 330 to pick up the pieces

fruitloop
22nd Jan 2014, 23:42
Nothing bad to report Just a Hydraulic pump failure...So I was told...

training wheels
23rd Jan 2014, 06:07
Saw VKB on the apron in DPS on Tuesday late in the afternoon. Was wondering why it was there.

http://i.imgur.com/ZYIGEVp.jpg

1a sound asleep
27th Jan 2014, 09:03
Fanfare last year that the 787 will be operating to Japan after DEC 2013. I am surprised somebody hasn't got the full story of the mess to the media. Lesson don't let bean counters order new planes from the brochure and then jam in some more seats without doing the full homework. Poor fleet utilisation is costing zillions.

waren9
28th Jan 2014, 02:59
fridays missive

4th one expected in march, penciled in for bne to dps

4 330's to return refurbished to qf by end of the financial year

moa999
28th Jan 2014, 04:08
waren9,
Is that refurbished with the new A330 business suite seats that are due in late 2014, or just refurbished without the orange stripe and silver paint.

hotnhigh
28th Jan 2014, 05:33
They'll be handed back untouched

the_company_spy
28th Jan 2014, 13:18
I doubt J* pay for the re-config it will be coming from QF internationals piggy bank.

Lancair70
30th Jan 2014, 01:31
Poor fleet utilisation is costing zillions.

I'm not an airline exec, pilot or even employee but I do run a business and can not believe that these new 78's are doing such little work. Seems crazy to me or the 78's are so good at making money they only need to fly max 9-10hrs a day to pay for themselves?

Anyone know why ?

OneDotLow
30th Jan 2014, 01:33
Crew shortages, certification issues and "that other reason we don't speak about".

Lancair70
30th Jan 2014, 01:40
One can only guess, the other thing is managements inability to have crew trained up ready to make full use of the new assets and apparently some hints at possible miscalculations re the range and payload capabilities ?

Angle of Attack
30th Jan 2014, 05:04
These things are able to do the longer range flights, ANA has a daily Frankfurt-Tokyo service, but to do it you need decent engines and a sensible seat plan. Jetstar is woefully inadequate when it comes to operational planning, probably had some MBA business graduate work it out. The way Jetstars 787's are setup they are pretty much a domestic or near regional aircraft. And that is a fact...Which is pretty much useless as they wanted a longer range for the 330 replacement. I have heard rumours number 6 or 8 will have upgraded engines but not sure. Deers with no eyes, Deers with no eyes....

The Bungeyed Bandit
30th Jan 2014, 05:14
The 330s will return to QF when they are due for "C" checks. Guess who's gonna pay for that.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.

Ollie Onion
2nd Feb 2014, 05:26
Problem is AMPCLAMP is that the performance is so so bad with the 335 seat config that now that they are here all the plans for SIN to Europe and potentially the USA have gone up in smoke as they just can't make it. We are now seeing them deployed on OZ to BALI until they figure out what the hell they are going to do with them :ugh:

dragon man
2nd Feb 2014, 05:46
Easy, have them reconfigured to three class the same as ANA (155 pax) repaint them in Qantas colours send the bill for all that to Qantas and then let them fly them. Further bill Qantas for loss of revenue to Jetstar until they receive 787s that they can properly utilise.

moutere101
3rd Feb 2014, 01:12
Sounds as if they ordered de-rated engines for some unknown reason. Instead of getting 64K they have something like 60K of thrust.

moutere101
3rd Feb 2014, 01:28
On the 788's climb ability, it can get to 36000ft in 23min./ 157nm at MTOW. I rode a BA one recently, the cabin noise or lack of it is impressive; a constant shush with no tremulant effect no doubt due to the very smooth surfaces.

neville_nobody
3rd Feb 2014, 04:09
Why is it that airline management in Australia just cannot get aircraft configurations right?

All of Australia's airlines in the last 10 years have had very expensive, total stuffups when it comes to getting basic things in aircraft right. And I'm not talking about the aircraft not performing, I'm talking about management ordering a perfectly good aeroplane with the wrong, engines, doors, configuration or variation. Not to mention the whole saga at QF over the 777 vs A380.

Some of these decisions, this is another fine example, could put their entire operation in jeopardy?

It just beggars belief that people who are making billion dollar aircraft orders just can't get the basic stuff right. Are Australian airline managers really that incompetent this often?

Always make me laugh how the media and the Geoffry Thomas brigade go on about how good management is in such a tough industry when the reality is they can't even get the basics right.

Big M
3rd Feb 2014, 05:57
Always make me laugh how the media and the Geoffry Thomas brigade go on about how good management is in such a tough industry when the reality is they can't even get the basics right


Don't laugh, for Geoffrey Thomas is an "Aviation Expert". It is only such expertise that can see the pure genious of a management who will "Shrink to profitability"

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

SOPS
3rd Feb 2014, 06:12
Ask Pan Am, they tried to shrink to profitability.

Going Boeing
3rd Feb 2014, 06:36
Q. Why is it that airline management in Australia just cannot get aircraft configurations right?

A. Because, apart from John Borghetti, none of them have "real airline" experience. We now have degree qualified managers who think that they know everything but don't have "the feel" that you acquire when you accumulate true experience &, consequently, you get bad decisions that have long term implications. :ugh:

Silverado
3rd Feb 2014, 07:23
I have to ask, what's with the "operational spare" sitting at the Lake in SYD for the past 2 days, with no one near it?

Is it to allow for a ''flexible approach with the allocation of flying resources'' :confused:

ratpoison
3rd Feb 2014, 08:00
Are Australian airline managers really that incompetent this often?
Errrrr.......yes I believe so!
One could also add......inept, unskillful, unskilled, inexpert, amateurish, unprofessional, bungling, blundering, clumsy, inadequate, substandard, inferior, ineffective, deficient, inefficient, ineffectual, wanting, lacking, leaving much to be desired; incapable, unfit, unqualified; informal useless, pathetic, ham-fisted, not up to it, not up to scratch, bush-league. :)

Shot Nancy
3rd Feb 2014, 08:09
What is GTs total aeronautical experience?
I think most airlines were created by pilots, QF by a pilot and an engineer.
My how far we have come.

neville_nobody
3rd Feb 2014, 08:36
I guess the bit that puzzles me is that these decisions are not rushed into they are calculated and planned and reviewed. Yet ALL the airlines have massive screwups.

I just don't get how you can have such a long time to a decision and still get it wrong so badly. It doesn't make sense, yet all the airlines are having the same problem.

Ollie Onion
3rd Feb 2014, 08:45
Sometimes I guess that these things are 'calculated' mistakes. Rumours were circulating around 18 months ago that the 787 for J* were not fit for purpose. The fact that they have been pushed into service anyway would suggest to me that a decision has been taken higher up the chain regarding a much wider group strategy.

Any shrewd businessman would have seen the problem coming and would have taken the decision to place the aircraft with Qantas mainline to get the best utilisation out of them. The fact that they have not shows that they would rather place them in a loss making role within Jetstar to perhaps further strangle the dog that has become Qantas International.

kellykelpie
3rd Feb 2014, 09:30
The fact that they have not shows that they would rather place them in a loss making role within Jetstar to perhaps further strangle the dog that has become Qantas International.

It's only a dog because it keeps giving birth to bitches...

Keg
3rd Feb 2014, 10:40
My personal view is that giving the 14 787s to Jetstar was the quickest and easiest way to get A330s for Qanttas. IE: they were at a price too low to refuse and QF then got an efficiency in retiring the remaining 767s and getting the A330s. More luck than good management probably.

CSTGuy
3rd Feb 2014, 12:06
Ask Pan Am, they tried to shrink to profitability.


Don't forget that towards the end, according to the senior management section of Pan Am, they never made a loss - they simply had another year of "negative profit". Obviously the Hooka that's permeating through the halls of Qantas's sabateurs in Sydney was the same stuff in the air cond ducts of Pan Am's all those years ago.

SOPS
3rd Feb 2014, 14:05
So, my question is, where can the Jetstar 787s actually fly to? And didn't anyone from Boeing say at the time of ordering, you know guys putting low powered engines and 330 odd seats in this thing is only going to end in tears?

Australopithecus
3rd Feb 2014, 14:35
Ii was not party to the JQ 787 order process, but I have ordered a fleet of 36 new airliners once. Before the contract was signed every single option, provision for option, alternative vendor etc was hashed out. Sometimes from 08:00 tiil last drinks. Many times, in fact.

It isn't rocket surgery, but you have to pay attention. Having a couple of experienced pilots on the team is key. Eventually the winnowing should yield a useable compromise between the wish list and the essentials. Adequate thrust options rank higher than avionics suites. (Which are next on the list) Dispatch reliability is foremost: can you go? Can you go with a paying load? Can you go on time? 99.9% of the time? Why not?

The A330 initial order was screwed up, as was the follow-up domestic aircraft without brake fans. The 737-800 low thrust model, the 717 low thrust model are both examples of naive aircraft ordering. We have form in this department.

Manufacturers may sometimes offer guidance, but it is more fun for them to watch someone order a cripple: that way you get to sell the same customer twice for no extra effort. The guys who order the follow-on planes will not be the the guys from the first order, so no embarrassment to share.

Ordering planes is like contracting the building of a house: every change once the contract is signed is going to be costly...there are no free do-overs. It pays to do your homework before you accept that lunch date with the salesmen.

I am, however, standing by for the next round of cost-cuttiing, aware as I am that my pay is too generous and may compromise the long-term health of the company. Or something.

Boe787
3rd Feb 2014, 16:06
Keg,
The 330s should never have gone to Jetstar in the first place!
Older 767s were capable of operating any of the international flights that Jetstar international have operated to date!
This would have meant the ludicrous situation that occurs Sydney Honolulu,
QF operating old 767s next to the low cost Jetstar flying near new 330s would never have happened!
Air Canada recently started a long haul LCC, Rouge, no shiny Air Canada 330s for them, old 767s!
Then by now Qantas would have new 787s, either to take on Virgin to from Perth, or to do regional SE Asia flights, or a mix of both, as the 330s do now.
People who fly business class and or fly regularly appreciate a better product, and by all accounts the 787 is a big improvement for passengers, when compared to a 330 or 767!

moutere101
3rd Feb 2014, 17:36
People who fly business class and or fly regularly appreciate a better product, and by all accounts the 787 is a big improvement for passengers, when compared to a 330 or 767!

I flew YYZ-LHR-YYZ on BA 787 set up for 214 seats , on Christmas Eve return Jan 18th, Business ( an upgrade by BA) eastbound and PE westbound. The business lie flat seat was wonderful, the Z setting is to die for in my view. Much of my body weight was transferred to the excellent lumbar support cushion. The PE seat had a poor cushion , my 2012 Ford Focus has a more comfortable seat. The cabin noise was a dramatic improvement . It is a continuous shush , no tremulant or vibration within the sound. The cabin lighting was very easy on the eyes. The fuel burn was very economical . According to one of the pilots who I was able to chat with the burn, was 1.30kg ( ~ $1.30) for each kg of payload for a 7hr 45m sector. For a standard passenger with baggage that is about $122.00.

Algie
3rd Feb 2014, 18:36
Part of the problem for managers who are focussed on finding new and better ways to shave costs and increase revenue is that if they don't have an airline background its almost impossible for them to look at the array of specs available with a new type in the same way as professionals.

Pilots, fleet planners, engineers and load controllers have the range/payload trade-offs embedded within their DNA. I doubt there's ever been an airliner where the hard choices didn't have to be made. And inevitably airliners end up going to the extreme of their range and giving grey hair to marketers trying to reliably sell seats. Think QF's 747 SYD-DFW-BNE operation. Think way further back to DC-9s operating SYD-TSV or ADL-PER. "Fill it up overwing and leave the bags behind"

Professional fleet planners and manufacturers technical marketing reps are good at understanding the implications of each seat layout, each engine choice, each spec. Not for them the "low hanging fruit" of choosing or advising an airline to get the low strength floor, don't buy life rafts, select non-reclining seats, get the low TOW option, buy de-rated engines, save money by not buying ACARS or HF radio etc etc etc.

But those who think that being a great manager is to see self-evident truths that have eluded previous generations look at those range/payload graphs and drift-down charts, ETOPS planning, escape routes, seasonal take-off performance limits, second segment and obstacle issues, engine-out take off and missed approach limits etc etc and want in their hearts to cut through it in the same way well meaning but ignorant manager might by-pass a Matron's knowledge and seek to cut costs on cleaning in a hospital. Great idea but flawed in the extreme.

They just so want there to be a way to jam in lots of people without range implications that it defies logic. Its another manifestation of the law of unintended consequences. Maximise revenue by jamming the cabin while losing revenue opportunities by crippling the range capabilities. So you get an aeroplane like the 787-8 that should happily operate MEL-LAX with say 180-210 pax barely able to get SYD-HNL with well over 300. Or an airline that can't see the virtues of the 777-200LR and instead tries to get an ancient 4 engine 747 fleet to operate ultra long range routes.

Yes it might seem at first glance to be pathetic. But in a KPI driven and cost focussed world eager hearts so want to get it right and not have to make difficult choices based on actual facts and ramifications. Just like little children who get invited to two birthday parties on the same day......they just so want to have it all......

73to91
3rd Feb 2014, 23:13
Air Canada recently started a long haul LCC, Rouge, no shiny Air Canada 330s for them, old 767s!

No doubt the Air Canada team search the globe for the 'best model' and 'best management' in regards to a successfully run LCC.
No doubt they wanted to find the best approach in regards to LCC v parent company and competing on same routes.
New aircraft for the LCC v older aircraft made available from parent, whilst parent get new aircraft and retain their long term, loyal customer base.

I guess the Canadians didn't look at the QF/JQ model:ok:

Boe787
4th Feb 2014, 01:15
Re Airline management in Australia getting it wrong with Aircraft specifications, link below to Aviation Week and Space Technology article interviewing Tim Clark CEO of Emirates is very interesting!
Seems he has the knowledge and hands on approach, which has seen Emirates pretty well get it right with Aircraft choices and specifications!

Emirates President Tim Clark Is Person Of The Year (http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_01_13_2014_p36-651176.xml)

moa999
5th Feb 2014, 04:38
Seemingly all systems go with Phuket routes on 787s -- SYD-HKT commencing yesteray and MEL-HKT on some days in Feb/March and all services from April

Jetstar introduces 787 on Melbourne-Phuket route (http://www.jetstar.com/mediacentre/latest-announcements/detail?Id=1d4b8cf2-78bb-4caa-a81d-042b2985689c&language=en)
Jetstar adds new Thai 787 route, Thai to fly 787s to Perth | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2014/02/04/jetstar-adds-new-thai-787-route-thai-to-fly-787s-to-perth/)

pull-up-terrain
5th Feb 2014, 05:04
I believe they are going to start flying the 787 4 times a week from Melbourne to Narita :ugh:

Don't they realise that so many business class travellers already travel from Brisbane/Melbourne to hop on the QF21 because they don't want to fly shitstar :ugh:

Ken Borough
5th Feb 2014, 05:20
PUT,

I don't think their business travellers will be happy, 787 notwithstanding. At best, JQ's so-called 'International Business Class' should be categorized as 'Premium Economy Class' or just plain 'Economy Class' while their existing Y class should truly become 'Cattle Class'.

moa999
5th Feb 2014, 06:27
Agree Star Class was a more apt name.
It is more like PE on BA (which serves Economy food)..

That said at the right price I dont think you need any more for a day flight.

airspace alpha
6th Feb 2014, 23:05
This appears to be the first B787 for Qantas appearing on the Boeing production line. I don't want to infringe the copyright of the excellent Paineairport.com website which has incredible high definition images of the Boeing flightline each week. So here is a link to Qantas new baby:
Qantas 787 at Paine Field (http://paineairport.com/kpae10095.htm)

plainmaker
6th Feb 2014, 23:18
Yes. Purchased by Qantas and leased to Jetstar. Nothing new there.
Plainmaker

moa999
6th Feb 2014, 23:20
Agreed nothing to see there.

While the first plane had a combined Jetstar/ Qantas sticker I believe most of the rest have been Qantas, yet got a star on tail eventually.

Bunch of planes have the leasing companies stickers

moutere101
7th Feb 2014, 00:22
It is more like PE on BA (which serves Economy food)..

Not so , on my recent YYZ-LHR-YYZ trip on BA in PE they served business class food. The main course on one leg was a very nicely prepared beef tenderloin dish.

moa999
10th Feb 2014, 06:44
And the competition (Scoot) going all 787 by 2015.
Scoot to be an 'all Boeing 787' airline by mid-2015 - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller (http://www.ausbt.com.au/scoot-to-be-an-all-boeing-787-airline-by-mid-2015)

Question is what does Qantas get to match Singapore's A350s

ohallen
10th Feb 2014, 07:22
Question is what does Qantas get to match Singapore's A350s

Surely it is obvious by now, larger Exec bonuses and more slaps on the back about an amaaazing business.

Mstr Caution
10th Feb 2014, 19:32
AJ would have you believe the 787 will allow Qantas to "leapfrog" their competitors.

A little difficult for leapfrogging to happen when there's no orders, only options.

howyoulikethat
10th Feb 2014, 21:43
heard from a good source....original plan sticks!!
787-800 back to QF
787-900 to JQ........

OneDotLow
11th Feb 2014, 04:55
Hahahahaha... Best laugh I've had all day. And some 777's to boot, yeah?

Now back to reality :D

Angle of Attack
11th Feb 2014, 05:52
Jetstar will get the A330's back and the 767's will be replaced by DC-8's that are surplus from a freight outfit in the Congo. They will have a refreshed interior and an Ipad so no one will know the difference. As the 737NG's are replaced by 727's the profit from replacing them with cheaper airframes will result in back slaps all round and the managers will be gone by the time the major checks and fuel bills come in. The Dash 8's liquidity can be acessed by replacing them with a fleet of 4000 Islanders as well. And the big news is that each A380 will be replaced by 460 turbine converted Cessna 152's with a pressurisation mod. The formation will fly to Dubai in the same time interval and a reduced fuel burn of 100 tonnes. That will outway the increased Tech crew complement of 460 per flight as well.

moa999
11th Feb 2014, 06:29
AoA,
Think you forgot the Galaxy C5A conversions.
Proving there is nothing wrong with a 40-yr old airframe

tery84vx
12th Feb 2014, 02:10
Why would jetstar not get crew rest area / bunks on the 787?

blow.n.gasket
12th Feb 2014, 08:35
'ços the Irish Einstein wants to emulate Ryanair?
Can't have those lazy pilots lollygagging around can we!

VR-HFX
12th Feb 2014, 09:50
tery

Cos the way the a/c was configured by the genii...it doesn't go far enough for any tech crew to need a rest.

DirectAnywhere
18th Feb 2014, 01:08
Anyone know where VH-VKB is? The rumours regarding a heavy landing and associated structural damage continue to swirl.

JustJoinedToSearch
18th Feb 2014, 01:27
How many do they have?
There's two in maintainence at YMML at the moment.

Ken Borough
18th Feb 2014, 02:07
I don't know how accurate the data is but you can see here that one 787 appears not done to have done a lot of flying:

http://www.thejetstarsource.com/jetstarjettracker.html

DirectAnywhere
18th Feb 2014, 02:42
Ah well, that seems to have killed that rumour. Ta.

Popgun
18th Feb 2014, 05:59
VKB had avionics issues that can be traced back to the manufacturer...specifically transponder installation damage.

There has been no heavy landing in her.