More a/c for QF?
My money is on the B787-10 because it is newer technology with lower fuel burn/emissions and commonality with the -8 and -9 models. Increased flexibility for crewing is another factor. Boeing know that if they don't proceed with the -10, then that will give Airbus an opportunity to snare market share in the 350 seat category with the A350XWB.
The B777 is 1990's technology and the only way that Boeing will be able to keep it in production is to heavily modify it with B787 era technology.
The other possibility is that this order could be the much talked about giant order for common (QF & JQ) single aisle jets.
The B777 is 1990's technology and the only way that Boeing will be able to keep it in production is to heavily modify it with B787 era technology.
The other possibility is that this order could be the much talked about giant order for common (QF & JQ) single aisle jets.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mars
Age: 20
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Link?
Haven't seen this reported. Have you got a link?
I agree with GB, the 777 ship has sailed for QF. The 787/380 are the future and I doubt we'll see an order for anything else. The only possibility could be some 330s.
Joint narrow body order is unlikely IMHO as the current A/C are new and any replacement is years away. Interesting rumour, though.
I agree with GB, the 777 ship has sailed for QF. The 787/380 are the future and I doubt we'll see an order for anything else. The only possibility could be some 330s.
Joint narrow body order is unlikely IMHO as the current A/C are new and any replacement is years away. Interesting rumour, though.
Nunc est bibendum
If it's a 'new order' with manufacturers then it's either additional 787 or the A350 (with the possibility of additional A380s); or, it's as GB says and the much vaunted 737/A320 replacement machine to arrive post 2012 or a combination of both.
If QF decides to get 777s they'll come from ILFC and they'll turn up in a hurry (before the end of next year) because QF is short of capacity. They're not going to order the 777 for delivery in two to three years time because the 787-10 will be so close then that it'd be silly.
Time will tell.
If QF decides to get 777s they'll come from ILFC and they'll turn up in a hurry (before the end of next year) because QF is short of capacity. They're not going to order the 777 for delivery in two to three years time because the 787-10 will be so close then that it'd be silly.
Time will tell.
No, just give them to jetstar, Lets see if we can push the 787s to 2015 for the flying rat.
So lets see, first 78 now delivered to QF mainline in 2011. (Didn't mention that at last weeks briefing!) Should be easy!
"Welcome aboard your qantas aircraft, part of the vintage aviation collection in the qantas group, for your flight to Melbourne/London/HongKong or whatever other joints are left on this network.
Please enjoy the 20 year plus airframe we are hopefully going to launch today.
Just have to get throught the paperwork, i mean mels, prior to our departure. All going well, this should be in around 4 hours.
You may have wondered where the beds are on this flight, don't worry you wont need them as the harmonic tones that you hear from the airframe in cruise will make you sleep like a babby in the classy 1970s derivative business product......."
Neglected and abused are words that come to mind when you balance that with the profits delivered today.....
So lets see, first 78 now delivered to QF mainline in 2011. (Didn't mention that at last weeks briefing!) Should be easy!
"Welcome aboard your qantas aircraft, part of the vintage aviation collection in the qantas group, for your flight to Melbourne/London/HongKong or whatever other joints are left on this network.
Please enjoy the 20 year plus airframe we are hopefully going to launch today.
Just have to get throught the paperwork, i mean mels, prior to our departure. All going well, this should be in around 4 hours.
You may have wondered where the beds are on this flight, don't worry you wont need them as the harmonic tones that you hear from the airframe in cruise will make you sleep like a babby in the classy 1970s derivative business product......."
Neglected and abused are words that come to mind when you balance that with the profits delivered today.....
What about 748's?
At the moment there really is no replacement for the 747's theres the 787 but it doesnt have the capacity the the 744 has and the A380 is only suited for so many routes.
It could make sense if the did order the 748, with fleet commonality, crew already trained etc.
At the moment there really is no replacement for the 747's theres the 787 but it doesnt have the capacity the the 744 has and the A380 is only suited for so many routes.
It could make sense if the did order the 748, with fleet commonality, crew already trained etc.
Well Tim, can you get the amended aircraft delivery schedule (last updated 13th august) on the qfintranet site to adjust my misrepresentation.
It now shows the first 25 to jetstar and the first to QF in Oct 2011.
Once this is done, I will be happy to correct my error.
Thanks matey!
It now shows the first 25 to jetstar and the first to QF in Oct 2011.
Once this is done, I will be happy to correct my error.
Thanks matey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Next to Bay 8
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HotnHigh: Geez, let 'em down easy eh mate? The sun will rise tomorrow. Life will go on. Rather humerous though.
Yeah, have to agree with GB, Keg and Tim. I recall Boeing mentioned that the -10 was likely to be launched later this year, and that QF & EK were the two carriers primarily pushing for it. When you think about it, it makes alot of sense (where did QF management find that?!?!?). You can have a widebody fleet of 787s which can operate very efficiently on domestic routes, trans-tasman and regionally as well as new long thin routes such as Vancouver/Dallas/Rome/Santiago/Cape Town etc. Crewing would love it. If the order involves narrowbodies, surely it will be 73Hs, as opposed to new stuff. Too far off I reckon.
GB: How many seats would the -10 be fitted with in a four class config? Appears to be roughly... what A340-500 in size (bit smaller than 772)?
Bring 'em on!
Yeah, have to agree with GB, Keg and Tim. I recall Boeing mentioned that the -10 was likely to be launched later this year, and that QF & EK were the two carriers primarily pushing for it. When you think about it, it makes alot of sense (where did QF management find that?!?!?). You can have a widebody fleet of 787s which can operate very efficiently on domestic routes, trans-tasman and regionally as well as new long thin routes such as Vancouver/Dallas/Rome/Santiago/Cape Town etc. Crewing would love it. If the order involves narrowbodies, surely it will be 73Hs, as opposed to new stuff. Too far off I reckon.
GB: How many seats would the -10 be fitted with in a four class config? Appears to be roughly... what A340-500 in size (bit smaller than 772)?
Bring 'em on!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mars
Age: 20
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HNH,
I suspect you know the plan as well as I do- 15 787-8 to Jet* then transfer those to QF as they get 787-9. First NEW 787 to QF in 2011. I know the theory it won't happen, q wet lease from Jet * etc etc. I don't buy it. Basically two ways to make $$ in the airline game these days.
1. Lots of bums on seats, thin margins, low costs. J*
2. Fewer bums on seats, high yield j and f class. Rat
Look at the results this year. Long haul profit up but pax numbers down. Why? Higher yield. I don't like GD anymore than you do, but he loves to make $. That means 787s with j class and a rat on the tail sooner rather than later. Bet on it.
I suspect you know the plan as well as I do- 15 787-8 to Jet* then transfer those to QF as they get 787-9. First NEW 787 to QF in 2011. I know the theory it won't happen, q wet lease from Jet * etc etc. I don't buy it. Basically two ways to make $$ in the airline game these days.
1. Lots of bums on seats, thin margins, low costs. J*
2. Fewer bums on seats, high yield j and f class. Rat
Look at the results this year. Long haul profit up but pax numbers down. Why? Higher yield. I don't like GD anymore than you do, but he loves to make $. That means 787s with j class and a rat on the tail sooner rather than later. Bet on it.
GB: How many seats would the -10 be fitted with in a four class config?
I believe that the A380 will replace the B744's on the LAX & LHR routes with the B787-10 replacing the B744 on most of the other routes. It is planned to keep the nine youngest B744's (OJS/T/U & the 6 ER's) in service for a while yet to do the Santiago and Johannesburg routes.
Boeings wind tunnel testing of B787-10 models have shown very impressive figures which have the airlines bleating for Boeing to proceed with this version. Boeing originally wanted the -10 to have the same max weight as the -9 so that the wing and landing gear changes would be kept to a minimum. This resulted in the range reducing to 7500NM (which would be enough for most routes) but airline executives always want more range/payload and Dixon has been calling for a higher weight capability to take a max payload up to 8500NM.
I don't see any room in QF's plans for the B747-8 - it's a great aeroplane but it's timing is not right. If it had been on the drawing boards when the B744 ER's and A380's were ordered then things might be a lot different.
Evertonian
Actually...I could get into trouble for this, but my sources tell me it wont be passenger aircraft....but it will have a 7 & a 4 in it!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where I'm not alarmed
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If QF decides to get 777s they'll come from ILFC and they'll turn up in a hurry (before the end of next year) because QF is short of capacity.
Qantas Fleet Planning has been up to ****e for some years. Why they failed to snag a gaggle of B777s is anyone's guess but the question needs to be asked at the next AGM.
SS
QF is not interested in the -900 as the turn around time would be too long. That many pax with a single aisle takes too long to disembark, clean, cater and embark. The result can mean one less sector out of the airframe per day. QF's experience with the -800 has indicated that it is the ideal size consistant with economics and operational issues.
Anyone for 737-900
QF is not interested in the -900 as the turn around time would be too long. That many pax with a single aisle takes too long to disembark, clean, cater and embark. The result can mean one less sector out of the airframe per day. QF's experience with the -800 has indicated that it is the ideal size consistant with economics and operational issues.