PDA

View Full Version : QF 63 SYD JNB Post 744 Retirement.


jjhews
2nd Apr 2019, 05:14
Probably one of Qantas' longest standing routes that I've flown several times; are we likely to see a 787 or A380 replacement on this route after the pending 747 retirment next year?

Brown Cow
2nd Apr 2019, 05:35
A330 through Perth

maggot
2nd Apr 2019, 06:09
A330 through Perth
If only suitable etops were available but that would require bleed/HYD & eng maintenance

Capt Fathom
2nd Apr 2019, 06:24
Here's a nice MAP (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=SYD-JNB%0D%0A&MS=wls&PC=red&RC=navy&DU=nm&E=180&E=240&E=330) with 180, 240 and 330 mins ETOPS shown.

What rules do they use today?

dragon man
2nd Apr 2019, 07:42
I believe the original plan was the 380 until they found out they couldn’t go polar with it as it doesn’t have enough fire suppression for the holds. Because of their age the 747 had a dispensation against this requirement. What is plan B? I don’t know. This question also applies to Haneda as Qantas think the 380 will go there however Asiana and Korean have been trying to get it in there for two years unsuccessfully , what’s plan B? No idea.

Capn Rex Havoc
2nd Apr 2019, 08:59
Emirates flies itís a380 over the North Pole every day. Donít know why quantass wouldnít do it.

maggot
2nd Apr 2019, 08:59
Emirates flies itís a380 over the North Pole every day. Donít know why quantass wouldnít do it.
Well the north pole isn't exactly on the way

Heavy Metal
2nd Apr 2019, 09:23
Bean counters are pushing A380 to JNB and B787 to Santiago. The B787 is unsuitable for JNB. If the A380 approval does not get the thumbs up, I wouldn’t be surprised if a few 744ER’s are retained for this roll(no need to update, no competition), or the destination will be dropped, due lack of a suitable aircraft, and code share used, ie EK via Dubai, dispite how distasteful the travel time would be, to the seasoned traveler.

dragon man
2nd Apr 2019, 09:36
Bean counters are pushing A380 to JNB and B787 to Santiago. The B787 is unsuitable for JNB. If the A380 approval does not get the thumbs up, I wouldnít be surprised if a few 744ERís are retained for this roll(no need to update, no competition), or the destination will be dropped, due lack of a suitable aircraft, and code share used, ie EK via Dubai, dispite how distasteful the travel time would be, to the seasoned traveler.

I think on a code share with a Qantas flight number they could operate Sydney, Johannesburg, Dubai.

rog747
2nd Apr 2019, 09:40
Well the north pole isn't exactly on the way

I assume the OP refers to the QF flight to JNB goes the southern polar route

Is the codeshare with SAA? - they have A340-600's

maggot
2nd Apr 2019, 09:47
I assume the OP refers to the QF flight to JNB goes the southern polar route

Is the codeshare with SAA? - they have A340-600's
Ya don't say.
The south pole is a different prospect

Capn Rex Havoc
2nd Apr 2019, 19:38
Maggot ~ I never was good with my north and Souths - though I do know where yarpie land is. The point I was saying is that I have never heard of carops (etops due cargo fire suppression - I just made that carops word up - I like it) . We are a long way from a landing spot when we fly past Santa and that limitation has never been brought up before.

GA Driver
2nd Apr 2019, 20:13
Fire suppression is part of the ETOPS/EDTO certification process. In a nutshell, the suppression has to be capable of keeping the cargo hold Ďsupressedí for the maximum diversion distance plus 15mins. Didnít think it was an issue for a quads unless it was greater than 180mins. Canít they fit larger bottles?

maggot
2nd Apr 2019, 20:44
Maggot ~ I never was good with my north and Souths - though I do know where yarpie land is. The point I was saying is that I have never heard of carops (etops due cargo fire suppression - I just made that carops word up - I like it) . We are a long way from a landing spot when we fly past Santa and that limitation has never been brought up before.
:)
well my first post was just being facetious but the context of the web ...
I don't know of the limits per se but aware there are certain restrictions as mentioned above. I've never done either region flying so....

GaryGnu
2nd Apr 2019, 22:53
I believe the original plan was the 380 until they found out they couldnít go polar with it as it doesnít have enough fire suppression for the holds. Because of their age the 747 had a dispensation against this requirement.
The A380:

Has a longer cargo fire suppression time than the B744 and B744ER
Is approved for Polar Ops
Has an exemption against CAO 82.0 EDTO requirements for cargo fire suppression for 4 engine aircraft (just like the B744/B744ER)

There may be a reason that the A380 cannot operate SYD-JNB but they should not be the reasons identifed.

Beer Baron
2nd Apr 2019, 23:49
Apparently the 380 was the preference over the 787 as it has better hot and high performance for the return journey.

Bad Adventures
3rd Apr 2019, 05:51
3 more 787-9ís arriving before the end of the calendar year. Surely an announcement where theyíll be flying must be immanent.

crosscutter
3rd Apr 2019, 06:50
3 more 787-9ís arriving before the end of the calendar year. Surely an announcement where theyíll be flying must be immanent.

Yes

But reading between the lines itís not going to be Paris because of Perth Airport 🤥

Nor will it be Chicago because the US government wonít play ball

so that leaves.....Syd Sfo with possibly a year round Vancouver service so expedite those pesky 747 retirements

dragon man
3rd Apr 2019, 06:54
Santiago, San Francisco and Paris would be my bet.

blow.n.gasket
3rd Apr 2019, 08:49
Santiago for the 787 if they can get 330 mins ETOPS/EDTO and RNP AP.

maggot
3rd Apr 2019, 09:30
Santiago for the 787 if they can get 330 mins ETOPS/EDTO and RNP AP.
How does RNP A(R?) help with scl?

blow.n.gasket
3rd Apr 2019, 09:47
Was told to maximise payload on departure .

maggot
3rd Apr 2019, 09:49
Fair enough. Not sure which obstacles in Syd that'll fix but sur


Edit. Doh, ex scl obviously

blow.n.gasket
3rd Apr 2019, 09:51
I think the RNP AR refers to the SCL-SYD sector !

maggot
3rd Apr 2019, 09:52
I think the RNP AR refers to the SCL-SYD sector !
:) Yeah edited as you posted
Time for bed

Bad Adventures
3rd Apr 2019, 11:10
Sydney based cabin crew have just been officially told that they will be endorsed on the 787 later this year as the incoming aircraft will be based there, so Iíd say SYD-SFO is a given now with Santiago and Tokyo also in the running.

SandyPalms
3rd Apr 2019, 11:58
Sydney-Dallas
Brisbane-SFO
Sydney-Santiago
Sydney-YVR

A380 onto Sydney-SFO to replace the 747.
Don’t know how they will solve the JNB issue.

my $0.02

blow.n.gasket
3rd Apr 2019, 18:58
Is there another engine bump on top of the one they’ve already got available ?
I have heard they will struggle out of JNB back to SYD with anything over 25 ℃︎ or
RWY 21 departures ?

Going Boeing
4th Apr 2019, 08:18
I believe that the main issue for the B787 is the "Return to Land" function in the OTP. The certification requires the aircraft to be able to land back at the departure airport after reducing fuel load to below MLW. In JNB, the obstacle clearance in the missed approach is the main issue that results in restricting the the allowed MBRW to be marginal to fly to SYD, can make PER with no problems.

compressor stall
4th Apr 2019, 14:36
I never was good with my north and Souths - .... We are a long way from a landing spot when we fly past Santa and that limitation has never been brought up before.




It would seem your strength is in acknowledging your weakness. Maybe you should pull out a world atlas or look at a wall map. Transposing SYD-JNB in the northern hemisphere (similar latitudes and route distance) is the same as San Diego USA to Tripoli (Libya) with the only alternate along the way being somewhere in Florida (equivalent of Perth, West Australia). That could be why you never think of cargo fire limitation. 65S 070E is the best part of 3000nm from an airport.

Put it another way, 3000nm from Santa Land is the Mediteranean or Central US or the "Stans". That is a really long way with nothing in between.

And finally, cargo fire suppression is one of the fundamentals of EDTO (ETOPS) along with separate maintenance for critical systems etc.

sleeve of wizard
4th Apr 2019, 16:14
I believe that the main issue for the B787 is the "Return to Land" function in the OTP. The certification requires the aircraft to be able to land back at the departure airport after reducing fuel load to below MLW. In JNB, the obstacle clearance in the missed approach is the main issue that results in restricting the the allowed MBRW to be marginal to fly to SYD, can make PER with no problems.
Not exactly Going Boeing,
FAR25.1001 states the aircraft must be capable of performing a one engine inop go-around with a minimum of 2.1% at the same airfield it has taken off from considering 15 minutes fuel burn plus 15 minutes of fuel jettison.
No requirement to land below MLW as you state.

Troo believer
4th Apr 2019, 22:17
Well kids stop arguing. FAOR is in the onboard performance tool and running rough numbers it can do the job with perhaps some restrictions on days above 32* which automatically calculates return to land function. Fire suppression 345 minutes. Polar approval tick. Join the dots ....?

ExtraShot
5th Apr 2019, 01:42
Iíd add that provided the issues with Perth Airport get ironed out (and Iím sure they will), I would hazard a guess that capacity issues can be addressed by adding services through Perth. That would also be a far better service for those customers from Melbourne/Adelaide etc, to connect with, who donít live in Sydney, or to the North/South Pacific/across the ditch.
Additionally it would give the option to bump a few pax onto when the weather isnít playing ball for the direct Sydney to take all of its booked load.

maggot
5th Apr 2019, 03:02
Additionally it would give the option to bump a few pax onto when the weather isnít playing ball for the direct Sydney to take all of its booked load.
? The 787 can't get joburg-syd vv with a full 236 load? Surely

Roo
5th Apr 2019, 04:37
Full pax, Easy! As a rough comparison...
BNE-LAX (6283nm) is 320nm further than JNB-SYD (5963nm). Todays BNE-LAX 789 flight left with all seats occupied, 7 tons of FR8 on top of pax bags and was planned to land in LAX with 2 hours EOD. Transpose the same AC and payload to the current conditions at JNB (17* and calm) and it can do it with a couple of tons to spare. If is was actually 30* in JNB, adjust for the fact that JNB SYD is 320 shorter than BNE-LAX, dont need 2 hours FOD, and lose the 7 ton of FR8. Still fits in OPT.

ExtraShot
5th Apr 2019, 04:51
? The 787 can't get joburg-syd vv with a full 236 load? Surely

No idea, Just going on what Troo Believer posted above.

rog747
5th Apr 2019, 05:36
Does the JNB-SYD and v.v route provide a lot of freight business? - if so then the company will not want to lose that revenue surely...

Ken Borough
5th Apr 2019, 08:14
Does the JNB-SYD and v.v route provide a lot of freight business?

Latest BITRE data is for January 2019. During that month QF carried 157 tonnes inbound from SA and took 13 tones outbound. Add another tonne or two for PO mail. Not a lot for a daily 747 service!

rog747
5th Apr 2019, 08:22
Latest BITRE data is for January 2019. During that month QF carried 157 tonnes inbound from SA and took 13 tones outbound. Add another tonne or two for PO mail. Not a lot for a daily 747 service!

Many thanks - I would think much of the freight is maybe fruit from RSA?

157 tonnes pm is around roughly AVG 5 tonnes a flight

dragon man
5th Apr 2019, 09:01
In summer we are lucky if we can carry that, a lot of it is flowers.

Capt Fathom
5th Apr 2019, 11:03
Full pax, Easy! As a rough comparison...
BNE-LAX (6283nm) is 320nm further than JNB-SYD (5963nm)
Keep talking it up! Seems to be more A380 ops out of JNB than B787 at present!

Roo
5th Apr 2019, 11:36
Not talking it up. Last place I would want to go. Simply pointing out the 789 can do it. 380 can have it.

Bad Adventures
17th Apr 2019, 04:19
Looks like the 380 is to be withdrawn from DFW from November replaced by 787-9 so Iíd say 380 ops to JNB a distinct possibility.

dragon man
17th Apr 2019, 05:33
Well that takes about 3 airframes so it frees the 380 to do either Santiago or Joburg or San Fran. Joburg fits in with Haneda and San Fran has no 380 gates at the present arrival time so Iíd say Santiago.

crosscutter
17th Apr 2019, 06:39
Perhaps DOT approval is not forthcoming....demand is still quite solid for DFW isn’t it?

Transition Layer
17th Apr 2019, 06:52
Lots of MEL 787 positions in the recent training vacancies. Perhaps the plan is to run a daily 787 MEL-DFW and a 787 SYD-DFW to provide the same sort of capacity as present?

crosscutter
17th Apr 2019, 07:42
Let’s not forget the last plan according to DA was Tokyo JNB and SCL to be the last 747 trips into 2020 with HNL returning to the 330 and remaining US services being transferred to other fleets. That email was only 2 months ago

The BNE slots ... BNE Chicago finally? Maybe it’s BNE DFW. Who’s going to do SYD SFO? Maybe MEL base.

C441
17th Apr 2019, 22:27
Perhaps the plan is to run a daily 787 MEL-DFW…..


MEL-DFW-MEL was planned to be the original 787 service but the average overall headwind DFW-MEL meant the service was marginal.
Doesn't mean it won't be done, but unlikely.

Meanwhile there's another 6 MEL based A380 Capt vacancies. Maybe this is to allow MEL base to do SIN-LHR while SYD takes over Jo'burg and Santiago. Jo'burg has always had good premium loads including First Class when the 747 had it.

Who knows what they're thinking when the Networks guru and head of International are moved along in quick succession?? :8

dragon man
18th Apr 2019, 04:43
Another problem has arisen as I believe a 330 is grounded for maybe 2 months as engineering blew up the yellow hydraulic system with a new rig that had not been correctly set. OEB might now be staying longer.

Bad Adventures
7th May 2019, 05:18
Sydney/San Fran going 787 from December so Iíd say the quads to stay on the polar routes for now.

cessnapete
7th May 2019, 06:54
Not talking it up. Last place I would want to go. Simply pointing out the 789 can do it. 380 can have it.


Hey Roo,
Jnb A380, great stopovers for us Poms.
No time change, great hotels, world class golf courses, and steak and wine as good as In Oz. And perhaps a local Game Park drive on your days off.
Same for you minus the time change!.

Andre Meyer
7th May 2019, 11:52
747-8

Buy it and continue on as is.

Mk 1
7th May 2019, 23:39
747-8

Buy it and continue on as is.
No future in 4 holers. Backward move.

dragon man
7th May 2019, 23:58
No future in 4 holers. Backward move.

Do not agree, the 800 has incredible payload capacity and is far more fuel efficient than the 380.

Going Boeing
8th May 2019, 01:14
Yes, the B747-8 airframe/engine combination are performing very well but reports from within Lufthansa indicate that the interior fitout of the Intercontinental Passenger version is not up to an acceptable standard.

4 Engine Aircraft are now following the path of dinosaurs.

Rated De
8th May 2019, 08:27
Do not agree, the 800 has incredible payload capacity and is far more fuel efficient than the 380.

That is correct, they are overwhelmingly a better choice.
They have an impressive cargo volume their payload capacity is comparable to a 747-400ER.

The problem with the aircraft is not the performance it is simply the fuel included CASK.

dragon man
8th May 2019, 09:26
From Johannesburg to Sydney it will uplift in summer approx double the ERs payload.