PDA

View Full Version : Why no 777's for QF???


marshall
17th Nov 2002, 03:42
Why is it that QF and the new Australian Airlines will not buy any 777's?

The seem to be sticking with the old 767's and the purchase of A330's.

And when Virgin Blue finally go international will they be using 777's on their routes to Asia?

Strikes me as a bit odd....:confused:

puff
17th Nov 2002, 06:59
God knows what Virgin will do but I can't imagine that they would go with 777s when big brother Atlantic is a fairly big customer of the A340s. Branson has been quoted on many occasions that he doesn't like 2 engines for long haul flying.

Aussiebert
17th Nov 2002, 07:44
I'd say its beacuse they aren't needed...

QF international seems to manage well using 747s and 767s, quite simple to manage capacity with frequencies and the flexability to change flights from one to the other... The A330's will fill the 'gap' so no need for 777s

Australian airlines is operating marginal routes with a low cost base. Why buy new 777s when 767s are the right size for the routes they operate, and are available at low cost 2nd hand

Virgin Blue are still a single type operation and would need a very good reason to change this. Given the 777 is a long haul aircraft, it would be difficult to justify 8 hour flights with the virgin blue style. Much more likely with a virgin atlantic operation, which is exactly what australia will get in the not too distant future

invertedlandings
20th Nov 2002, 02:29
Heard at work that the A330's were "thrown in" with the deal for the A380's at around $40 million (U.S)...bit hard for Boeing to sell the 777 at that price...

Zeke
20th Nov 2002, 11:30
Invertedlandings for US$M 40 you could get an A319 or 737-700, not a A330, 767, or 777.

QF is purchasing both the long range A330-200 & shorter range A330-300. The difference between the 332 and 333 is that the 332 has an additional centre fuel tank for range. The 332 is very versatile, it is capable of Melbourne-Tokyo-New York.

The A330-200 really competes with the 767-400ER, A330-300 B777-200 A340-300E with B777-200ER, the A340-200/500/600 and 777-300 and have no direct rivals

Depending on the airline config, both 332/333 aircraft will give you 250-300 seats three class config, eg 332 (12/36/205), 772 three class is about 310 pax, the 763ER max cattle class is about 290, three class around 210 pax.

Airlines make a lot of money from what is carried under the floor. The A330/A340 floor is actually raised so the pax cabin uses less than half of the fuse cross section, allowing for more freight under floor. Cargo space 332 136 m^3 333 162 m^3 772 has about 160 m^3. 763ER 114 m^3, 764ER 139 m^3.

The 772 goes for about US$M128-148, 772IGW US$M134-153, 763 ER US$M 101, 764ER US$M110. The 332 US$M109-115, 333/333HGW US$M121-128, A340 US$M 123-139.


Economics

Fuel/pax/nm (kg) (small is good) - 764ER 0.0472, 332 0.0460, 333, 0.0470
seats*range (big is good)
764ER 1503360, 772 1494200, 772IGW 2287800, 332 1866410, 333 1507500

Speed

The 777/767s are about 20-30 km/hr faster than the A330/A340 in cruise.

Fuel burns

332 7.1 t/hr, 333 7.2 t/hr, 764ER 7.4 t/hr, 772 7.7 t/hr. 342 7.8 t/h

So the A330 with give QF more pax, more cargo, over a greater range than the 767/777 equivalent for much the same purchase price, with the additional benefit that QF will also get Airbus experience, and tech crews a short CCQ onto the A380. Spares are also cheaper in Euros than US$. . The 764 cockpit is not nearly as identical as the 762/763, another sim (US$M20), so if you are buying a sim it can be a A330 or 764, however the A330 sim is also a A340 sim, ie US$M20 for two aircraft types.

1013
20th Nov 2002, 22:33
Wouldnt have anything to do with the fact that CX could get A330's for about 65% the price of a B777?

Effectively the first B777's CX purchased although fine aircraft I was told was 55 tonnes heavier than the A330.

Price is not only king but the deciding factor.

Im sure if Boeing could produce the B777 for an equivalent price of the A330 then they would clean up.
But then again isnt it Boeing that complains constantly about Airbus being at an unfair competitive advantage because the Airbus aircraft are effectively cheaper to purchase due to that company being financed by government handouts and subsidies from the respective partnership countries?