Qf 777
Max,
I believe EK writing the rules ( with a little help from the french - $$ talks ! ) on the 330/340-380 CCQ as we speak. IMHO Boeing will respons with B777/B744, at least for SO's. A large HK based airline currently evaluating the latter.
My concern for the QF guys/girls - what color will they be ? Horrible feeling there will be a lot of silver/ochre (and the corresponding pay rates) amongst them.
Regards to all,
Oz2
I believe EK writing the rules ( with a little help from the french - $$ talks ! ) on the 330/340-380 CCQ as we speak. IMHO Boeing will respons with B777/B744, at least for SO's. A large HK based airline currently evaluating the latter.
My concern for the QF guys/girls - what color will they be ? Horrible feeling there will be a lot of silver/ochre (and the corresponding pay rates) amongst them.
Regards to all,
Oz2
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be very surprised if this is true. I am almost certain they will opt for either the A340-500 or the A350.
Why would QF order the 345???? It can't do LHR-SYD non-stop and fails dismally in all respects v the 772LR. I believe both the ULH types are unlikely to be ordered by QF and this is out of 773ER/346 and 787/350.
This week's FI said QF's order was still expected this year and could be up to 60 frames in the 787/350 and 773ER/346 categories. There appears to be more interest in the 787/350 category now and they seem to have gone a bit cold on the 773ER/346.
Recent trends from other carriers infer that the 773ER is starting to dominate the 346 and that is hardly surprising when the respective specs are taken into account. QF don't like the 330/340 cabin width as it is too narrow for the 744 Skybed and Skybed II to be launched on the 380s.
I think Airbus have done a tremendous job getting the 350 up and about so quickly, but will it appeal to QF. The 350 is a long hauler only. Only Boeing, with the 787-3 has a 763 replacement aircraft suited to domestic trunk routes and the 788/9 would seem to be a good fit capacity wise for QF.
So, my guess is that we will see an order around Oct/Nov for around 30-40 787-3/8/9 and 20 773ER. The possibility of a 772LR order is still there but unlikely IMO.
Why would QF order the 345???? It can't do LHR-SYD non-stop and fails dismally in all respects v the 772LR. I believe both the ULH types are unlikely to be ordered by QF and this is out of 773ER/346 and 787/350.
This week's FI said QF's order was still expected this year and could be up to 60 frames in the 787/350 and 773ER/346 categories. There appears to be more interest in the 787/350 category now and they seem to have gone a bit cold on the 773ER/346.
Recent trends from other carriers infer that the 773ER is starting to dominate the 346 and that is hardly surprising when the respective specs are taken into account. QF don't like the 330/340 cabin width as it is too narrow for the 744 Skybed and Skybed II to be launched on the 380s.
I think Airbus have done a tremendous job getting the 350 up and about so quickly, but will it appeal to QF. The 350 is a long hauler only. Only Boeing, with the 787-3 has a 763 replacement aircraft suited to domestic trunk routes and the 788/9 would seem to be a good fit capacity wise for QF.
So, my guess is that we will see an order around Oct/Nov for around 30-40 787-3/8/9 and 20 773ER. The possibility of a 772LR order is still there but unlikely IMO.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not sure donpizmeov, but as it flew overhead an airport withsome problem, and they wanted to land, but wouldnt go into landing logic (or whatever its called) , QF maintenance watch were talking to Airbus to figure out how to get it into landing mode: solution from airbus, shut an engine down. It worked.
Beats me as to how/why/what.....
Beats me as to how/why/what.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Heard a few rumors now that EK are strongly considering trading in there 345s for 772LRs. Also swapping older 772s for 332s/350s. And reducing the order (perhaps entirely) for the 346HGW and increasing the number of 773ERs.
Will be interesting to see what comes of that?
Will be interesting to see what comes of that?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard a few rumors now that EK are strongly considering trading in there 345s for 772LRs. Also swapping older 772s for 332s/350s. And reducing the order (perhaps entirely) for the 346HGW and increasing the number of 773ERs.
Will be interesting to see what comes of that?
I believe that to be true and EK look to be heading for a fleet consisting of A359,772LR/LRF,773ER,A380/F. The 340s are on the way out and the 340 is practically dead and buried. The 4-engines-for-long-haul mantra will die with it.
Will be interesting to see what comes of that?
I believe that to be true and EK look to be heading for a fleet consisting of A359,772LR/LRF,773ER,A380/F. The 340s are on the way out and the 340 is practically dead and buried. The 4-engines-for-long-haul mantra will die with it.
Evertonian
Was it China Airlines A300 at TPE that crashed (twice from memory) after a go-around because they hadn't reset the "landing mode"? Would it be the same landing system? 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it quite funny to hear the ignorant out there (that have never flown a Airbus) INFORM us.... who fly the A340/330 on a regular basis... of the pitfalls of the aircraft.
I can't be bothered writing anything else as I'm sure you would prefer to say in ignorant bliss....
I can't be bothered writing anything else as I'm sure you would prefer to say in ignorant bliss....
Night Watch
I agree entirely. It is amazing how the QF incident has changed from the actual facts. The bus isn’t perfect but for the life of me we don’t have anywhere near as many problems with them and we have four times as many. I think this is just the same old Boeing v Airbus drivel I hear else where. If you want to know the real pro’s and con’s of each aircraft type, maybe some of you should talk to some aircrew that work for an airline that has extensive experience operating both.
I agree entirely. It is amazing how the QF incident has changed from the actual facts. The bus isn’t perfect but for the life of me we don’t have anywhere near as many problems with them and we have four times as many. I think this is just the same old Boeing v Airbus drivel I hear else where. If you want to know the real pro’s and con’s of each aircraft type, maybe some of you should talk to some aircrew that work for an airline that has extensive experience operating both.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Errrr umm.... I am sorry to report the following reply from my source, whom, although a highly intelligent person, is after all a yank..
verbatim:
So... what does everybody think about the state of origin tonight... should be a good game?!!? anybody... anybody?
awww CRAP!!
verbatim:
Sorry to get your hopes up, I thought the news bulletin said QANTAS, but it said QATAR. But a friend of mine who is part of the Boeing team that went to QANTAS awhile ago stated that he thought QANTAS was about to buy 777s, maybe that’s why when I saw QATAR I thought QANTAS.
awww CRAP!!
Nunc est bibendum
ROFLMAO!!! Good one Borgie. At least it kept us all busy for a little bit! 
Besides, it's always good to have yet another opportunity to poke fun at Airbus and those who expound the virtues of the French beasts!
They take it all so seriously too! 
Besides, it's always good to have yet another opportunity to poke fun at Airbus and those who expound the virtues of the French beasts!
They take it all so seriously too!
Bottums Up
max AB,
I recollect hearing/reading that Airbus explained the rather ugly looking nose/flt deck of the A380 as being thus designed so to be at the same height as an A330/340 to facilitate CCT.
I recollect hearing/reading that Airbus explained the rather ugly looking nose/flt deck of the A380 as being thus designed so to be at the same height as an A330/340 to facilitate CCT.
The A380 will not, I repeat will not be a CCQ type rating with other current airbus products. EK maybe wishfully thinking that it will be but the Europeans and Yanks have already closed the door on it. I too have heard the story about the design of the nose and the level of the flight deck. My understand is that it is the way it is because it will make the endorsement process smoother for those that are coming from other airbus and Boeing products.
404,
Do you mean Mixed Fleet Flying (MFF) rather than Cross Crew Qualification (CCQ).
There will be CCQ on the A380. This means a shorter endorsement course for those off other Airbus types. I believe Airbus went to some length with a CCQ type ethos in mind, the FCU panel etc are very similar to make the transition faster/easier. (no doubt reduced the A380 development costs as well which was probably forefront in their minds).
There is CCQ for A320 to A330 which reduces the type course to about 4 sims or something like that. I'm not sure, but don't believe there is MFF for A320/A330
MFF is flying multiple types under a common endorsement. e.g A330/A340 or A320/A321 etc.
Cheers
Do you mean Mixed Fleet Flying (MFF) rather than Cross Crew Qualification (CCQ).
There will be CCQ on the A380. This means a shorter endorsement course for those off other Airbus types. I believe Airbus went to some length with a CCQ type ethos in mind, the FCU panel etc are very similar to make the transition faster/easier. (no doubt reduced the A380 development costs as well which was probably forefront in their minds).
There is CCQ for A320 to A330 which reduces the type course to about 4 sims or something like that. I'm not sure, but don't believe there is MFF for A320/A330
MFF is flying multiple types under a common endorsement. e.g A330/A340 or A320/A321 etc.
Cheers
The The
I mean MFF. Where I work both terms are used to mean the same thing. So to refrase what I just said, there will be no MFF with the A380 and other current airbus pruducts. By way of interest the FCU on the 380 looks nothing like any bus I have flown. The MCDU is also completely different being all touch screen from what I can tell.
I mean MFF. Where I work both terms are used to mean the same thing. So to refrase what I just said, there will be no MFF with the A380 and other current airbus pruducts. By way of interest the FCU on the 380 looks nothing like any bus I have flown. The MCDU is also completely different being all touch screen from what I can tell.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This week's Flight International has a story on the QANTAS position re new aircraft (page 4) ...
Main points:
- Has widened fleet study to include 350 and 787 (which I thought was already under consideration)
- Order for c. 60 acft expected before year end
- Qantas now "less interested in aircraft in the 346/773ER category than it was last year" (not quite sure what this means? - don't know how interested they were last year!)
- Focusing on mid sized widebody category, for growth and to replace 763s.
- "We have extended consideration for a possible replacement of the 767s and 747s ... to include A350 and 787."
For what it's worth, it seems very odd that Boeing would be looking at aircraft of 787 size if it wanted to replace its 747s; the 787 is a fine 767 replacement, but if they want a 747 replacement, the 773ER seems to be the way to go.
My personal expectation is still of various variants of 787s and 777s, with Boeing possibly offering to take back the apparently little loved A330s.
(Just as a thought, without knowing the background (i.e. payscales etc.), if AO were to take A330s, would it be possible for crews to transfer between JQ and AO?)
Main points:
- Has widened fleet study to include 350 and 787 (which I thought was already under consideration)
- Order for c. 60 acft expected before year end
- Qantas now "less interested in aircraft in the 346/773ER category than it was last year" (not quite sure what this means? - don't know how interested they were last year!)
- Focusing on mid sized widebody category, for growth and to replace 763s.
- "We have extended consideration for a possible replacement of the 767s and 747s ... to include A350 and 787."
For what it's worth, it seems very odd that Boeing would be looking at aircraft of 787 size if it wanted to replace its 747s; the 787 is a fine 767 replacement, but if they want a 747 replacement, the 773ER seems to be the way to go.
My personal expectation is still of various variants of 787s and 777s, with Boeing possibly offering to take back the apparently little loved A330s.
(Just as a thought, without knowing the background (i.e. payscales etc.), if AO were to take A330s, would it be possible for crews to transfer between JQ and AO?)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here is the Flight International article;
DATE:14/06/05
SOURCE:Flight International
Qantas widens study to cover A350 and 787
Australia’s Qantas Airways has widened its fleet-modernisation and expansion studies to include the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 and says orders for up to 60 new aircraft could be placed by the end of the year.
Last year the Oneworld alliance carrier began evaluating aircraft to replace its Boeing 747-400s, and assessed the A340-500/600 and 777-200LR/300ER.
Qantas is now less interested in aircraft in the A340-600 and 777-300ER category than it was last year, and has begun focusing mainly on aircraft in the mid-size widebody category, both for growth and to replace its fleet of 767-300ERs, say industry sources.
“Having looked at the 777 and the A340 last year, we have extended consideration of a possible replacement for our Boeing 767s and 747s to the 787 and the A350. This would involve up to 60 new aircraft,” says Qantas.
The carrier’s mainline fleet comprises A330-200/300s, 737-300/400/800s, 747-300/400/400ERs and 767-300ERs. On order are Airbus A380s, as well as more A330s and 737-800s.
Hong Kong’s Cathay Pacific Airways has issued a long-awaited request for proposals for A340-600s or 777-300ERs and expects to place orders later in the year. The airline expects to receive responses in July.
NICHOLAS IONIDES/SINGAPORE
s the Flight International article;
DATE:14/06/05
SOURCE:Flight International
Qantas widens study to cover A350 and 787
Australia’s Qantas Airways has widened its fleet-modernisation and expansion studies to include the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 and says orders for up to 60 new aircraft could be placed by the end of the year.
Last year the Oneworld alliance carrier began evaluating aircraft to replace its Boeing 747-400s, and assessed the A340-500/600 and 777-200LR/300ER.
Qantas is now less interested in aircraft in the A340-600 and 777-300ER category than it was last year, and has begun focusing mainly on aircraft in the mid-size widebody category, both for growth and to replace its fleet of 767-300ERs, say industry sources.
“Having looked at the 777 and the A340 last year, we have extended consideration of a possible replacement for our Boeing 767s and 747s to the 787 and the A350. This would involve up to 60 new aircraft,” says Qantas.
The carrier’s mainline fleet comprises A330-200/300s, 737-300/400/800s, 747-300/400/400ERs and 767-300ERs. On order are Airbus A380s, as well as more A330s and 737-800s.
Hong Kong’s Cathay Pacific Airways has issued a long-awaited request for proposals for A340-600s or 777-300ERs and expects to place orders later in the year. The airline expects to receive responses in July.
NICHOLAS IONIDES/SINGAPORE
s the Flight International article;
From airbus ... "The A380 cockpit is halfway between the aircraft’s two passenger decks so the pilot’s eye line is virtually the same as in other large Airbus aircraft. This not only makes taxiing easier but improves the aerodynamics at the nose of the aircraft, reducing cockpit noise levels."
My understanding is that CCQ approval will be applied for the A380, however the DGAC has yet to approve it. If CCQ is available, I could not see why second officers/cruise pilots could not do MFF A330/A340/A350/A380.
In many ways the A340-600 is trickier then the A380 as its very long.
I have heard a few QF guys not select approach mode on the FMGC on downwind at SYD and wonder why they dont slow down when they go from selected to managed speed.
Also heard of a QF A330 that had a total RAD ALT failure which caused some concern for the crew involved.
In these cases the aircraft did what is was supposed to do...the crew were somewhat green.
They are just aeroplanes at the end of the day, if any aircraft is not doing what you want it to do, be it a dutchess, A330, or 777, kick the autopilot off and hand fly it.
My understanding is that CCQ approval will be applied for the A380, however the DGAC has yet to approve it. If CCQ is available, I could not see why second officers/cruise pilots could not do MFF A330/A340/A350/A380.
In many ways the A340-600 is trickier then the A380 as its very long.
I have heard a few QF guys not select approach mode on the FMGC on downwind at SYD and wonder why they dont slow down when they go from selected to managed speed.
Also heard of a QF A330 that had a total RAD ALT failure which caused some concern for the crew involved.
In these cases the aircraft did what is was supposed to do...the crew were somewhat green.
They are just aeroplanes at the end of the day, if any aircraft is not doing what you want it to do, be it a dutchess, A330, or 777, kick the autopilot off and hand fly it.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
swh :ok
I still smile when I hear of the newbie saying, "what's it doing now" and the old hand "there it goes again"
Mind you, I'm still torn between persevering with my new Palm Pilot (Navman GPS inc) "what's it doing now" and going back to the old paper diary and road map.
and dont even begin to ask me about "interfacing" the TV and DVD player with the new Home Theatre kit.
It's when we move from instinctive mode to a complex third party learned mode that the trouble starts.
I still smile when I hear of the newbie saying, "what's it doing now" and the old hand "there it goes again"
Mind you, I'm still torn between persevering with my new Palm Pilot (Navman GPS inc) "what's it doing now" and going back to the old paper diary and road map.
and dont even begin to ask me about "interfacing" the TV and DVD player with the new Home Theatre kit. It's when we move from instinctive mode to a complex third party learned mode that the trouble starts.
Bottums Up
G'day Gaunty,
Mrs C had something of a dummy spit a month or so ago because the whatsit wouldn't respond to the remote control.
That she had the widget remote in her hand was totally irrelevant. The big problem was that each device had its own remote, TV, VCR, Stereo.
Your's truly, ever in search of Brownie Points, heads of to see Uncle Harvey and purchases a wonderfull > $100 learning remote what'll do 'em all.
An hour to program all the required features into the machine and hey presto, one remote control does all three devices AND there are even three quick start buttons (touch screen of course) that'll perform a sequence of instructions, such as turn TV on, turn stereo on, select stereo AUX input, select surround sound, then leave remote at TV to change chanels and volume etc!
No Brownie Points earned because each different device has 3 pages and Mrs C can't remember ('cause she has a mental block with this sort of technology a bit like mine and security!) how to get from one page to the next. 
Mrs C had something of a dummy spit a month or so ago because the whatsit wouldn't respond to the remote control.
That she had the widget remote in her hand was totally irrelevant. The big problem was that each device had its own remote, TV, VCR, Stereo.
Your's truly, ever in search of Brownie Points, heads of to see Uncle Harvey and purchases a wonderfull > $100 learning remote what'll do 'em all.
An hour to program all the required features into the machine and hey presto, one remote control does all three devices AND there are even three quick start buttons (touch screen of course) that'll perform a sequence of instructions, such as turn TV on, turn stereo on, select stereo AUX input, select surround sound, then leave remote at TV to change chanels and volume etc!
No Brownie Points earned
because each different device has 3 pages and Mrs C can't remember ('cause she has a mental block with this sort of technology a bit like mine and security!) how to get from one page to the next.