Merged: QF 777s and other rumours
Nunc est bibendum
Thread Starter
Bugger competing with everyone else, would you want hand me down SQ 777s full stop! Anecdotal evidence suggests that the term 'discarded' for former SQ aircraft is the correct term! 
The advantages of being able to write off your fleet for tax over seven years I guess. It means you don't have to bother maintaining them too well when you've got them.
The advantages of being able to write off your fleet for tax over seven years I guess. It means you don't have to bother maintaining them too well when you've got them.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My other guess was that the 777s could be like the 737-800s that QF took from the Boeing production line that had been allocated to American Airlines. AA also has a fleet of RR 777s. If there are any 777s that AA has not taken, and does not want, those could be available to a nice home, going cheap.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in a house
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 777 300ER burns 8t an hour vs the 744's 10t an hour. Carries 400 to 440 pax, same as a 744.
J* have a swag of ex 777 drivers from SQ and a couple from EK, so they can certainly crew them. Plus J8 drivers are cheaper than QF mainline ones.
Dunno, but I reckon J* could see the 777. Soon.
J* have a swag of ex 777 drivers from SQ and a couple from EK, so they can certainly crew them. Plus J8 drivers are cheaper than QF mainline ones.
Dunno, but I reckon J* could see the 777. Soon.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few months ago Express Freighters Australia a wholly owned Qantas company put to the Qantas board a proposal for 2 777F to replace the 7474F that are operated by Atlas onbehalf of Qantas Freight.
The lease cost blew the proposal out of the water and Atlas was awarded the six year contract. Could this be the 777s that you are talking about?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Alangirvan said:
Gulf do it with ex-SQ 343s (which were bought off SQ by Boeing as a sweetener for SQ to take 777s - you can still see the SQ 'bird' stamped on the metal bits in the loos).
It's not a question of would they 'want' to - rather would it be cost-effective to.
It comes down to the compensation package - if I were Boeing, I'd be offering 777s on ACMI, or throwing in free pilot training (onto 777 then onto 787) plus op & maint costs over & above whatever the performance benchmark in the 787 contract is. Like I said, it gets the 'frames out of the desert (always a bad look) and gets them into a top client where - who knows? - they might stick. Better that, than have them fill Toulouse's coffers further (and the payments for that would just be a straight bank transfer from Boeing to Airbus and that would
our friends in Chicago).
It'd be even sweeter for Boeing if they could get a few 'frames into mainline colours.
But would JQ want to compete against Singapore, Emirates, Thai, Cathay to Rome with hand me down planes from Singapore?
It's not a question of would they 'want' to - rather would it be cost-effective to.
It comes down to the compensation package - if I were Boeing, I'd be offering 777s on ACMI, or throwing in free pilot training (onto 777 then onto 787) plus op & maint costs over & above whatever the performance benchmark in the 787 contract is. Like I said, it gets the 'frames out of the desert (always a bad look) and gets them into a top client where - who knows? - they might stick. Better that, than have them fill Toulouse's coffers further (and the payments for that would just be a straight bank transfer from Boeing to Airbus and that would
our friends in Chicago).It'd be even sweeter for Boeing if they could get a few 'frames into mainline colours.
Nunc est bibendum
Thread Starter
I wonder.....
A quote of GD himself.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...rom=public_rss
I suspect it's all too late now but it's interesting how this one just bursts into life every now and then.
(I certainly claim credit for part of that too...I figure if I keep talking about it, perhaps it'll eventually come true!
)
"We need to fly a long way and carry a lot of people. But, given the delays, would it be handy to have the 777s now? Yes, and we could get them, but that will change our fleet."
"I tell you, I wouldn't mind the 777 in the fleet right now. But we haven't got big aircraft problems at the moment because things have slowed down."
"I tell you, I wouldn't mind the 777 in the fleet right now. But we haven't got big aircraft problems at the moment because things have slowed down."
I suspect it's all too late now but it's interesting how this one just bursts into life every now and then.
(I certainly claim credit for part of that too...I figure if I keep talking about it, perhaps it'll eventually come true!
)
When Airbus announces the official handover date for the Rats first two 380's, aprox 30 days from arrival, they/QF board will announce the signing up of 20 A350's for the "Group". This is my first rumour so be kind!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is far and away the best chance for the 773ER to enter the QF fleet.
I don't think QF likes the payload/range figures on the 350-1000 and the 773ER stacks up pretty well in the end, even though Dixon and co embarrassingly have referred to it as old tech.
Something is happening here.
I don't think QF likes the payload/range figures on the 350-1000 and the 773ER stacks up pretty well in the end, even though Dixon and co embarrassingly have referred to it as old tech.
Something is happening here.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which 777 would be ideal for Qantas/Jetstar? MEL is about 500 miles further away from LAX/SFO than SYD is, so Qantas got the 747-400ER to do the extra 500miles. The A380 is starting on MEL-LAX because of its range ability. Would the 777-200LR be a better plane for MEL-LAX than the 777-300ER? Reports from overseas are that the 777-200LR is proving itself as a freight carrier. Whereas for BNE-LAX the 777-200LR would be overkill for the distance. The older 777-200ER might be the right size for that market. But Qantas would hardly obtain two units of three different versions of the same type. So, which one would be the best compromise if you are only choosing one?
Whereas for BNE-LAX the 777-200LR would be overkill for the distance. The older 777-200ER might be the right size for that market
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Under the Engine Cowls
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: here
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming the 777 (all models) wasn't/isn't given a proper assesment is ignorant. Incidently there are people whos job it is to asses route/equipment combinations for a range of markets based on many factors. The arrogance of some is astounding.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find neither 773 or 772 are desirable options for QF on MEL-LAX route. Perhaps if Boeing fits 777s with the GenX or RR engines slated for the (now very much delayed) 787, maybe it would be worth it. I seemed to have read somewhere that Boeing could be considering this very thing. 777-400 anyone?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TG have just announced that they're getting rid of their 4 A345s (pulling out of the non-stop BKK to North America route/s).
Would JQ be able to benefit from the temporary use of those? Not perfect, sure, but at least big, go far, and most importantly, available now.
Would JQ be able to benefit from the temporary use of those? Not perfect, sure, but at least big, go far, and most importantly, available now.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: East Coast
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TG have just announced that they're getting rid of their 4 A345s (pulling out of the non-stop BKK to North America route/s).
Would JQ be able to benefit from the temporary use of those? Not perfect, sure, but at least big, go far, and most importantly, available now.
Would JQ be able to benefit from the temporary use of those? Not perfect, sure, but at least big, go far, and most importantly, available now.
Cat on a PC©
I for one would not like to operate a 777 with only 75,000 lbs a side as per the GEnex website. The GE90 is fine except for the odd thrust problem and throwing away the occasional LP blade.
halas
halas