QF A380 LAX-MEL Operations
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did GD ever slip back to Business, or heaven forbid Cattle class. Or did his contract state First Class and this is what he insisted on even if it meant bumping a full fare payer off.
If you have a contract. enforce it. Take your lead from those above.
For all you quibbling that the pilots are now being petty, look where they have got their leadership from.
Unfortunately people who are used to 'doing the right thing' are sick of getting p!ssed on from on high.
The do as I say, not as I do bullying culture has finally disengaged formerly 'Company' people to the point that they will rigidly enforce their contracts to protect themselves. The days of 'what you missed on the swings you made up on the roundabouts' have been over for years and now we are starting to wake up to it.
P.S. I don't even work for Qantas but am feeling pretty disengaged where I work as the upper levels of management grab as much as they can, whilst screwing everyone under them. Welcome to the new Australia.
If you have a contract. enforce it. Take your lead from those above.
For all you quibbling that the pilots are now being petty, look where they have got their leadership from.
Unfortunately people who are used to 'doing the right thing' are sick of getting p!ssed on from on high.
The do as I say, not as I do bullying culture has finally disengaged formerly 'Company' people to the point that they will rigidly enforce their contracts to protect themselves. The days of 'what you missed on the swings you made up on the roundabouts' have been over for years and now we are starting to wake up to it.
P.S. I don't even work for Qantas but am feeling pretty disengaged where I work as the upper levels of management grab as much as they can, whilst screwing everyone under them. Welcome to the new Australia.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: An old flying boat station on Moreton Bay
Age: 84
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to have got out of LAX on time. (QF web site)
On the subject of payload, my ball park understanding is that relative to the standard 747-400
. Most numbers including weights, payload and volume are 25% higher, but fuel burn over like sectors is the same.
. At high weights it goes directly to FL 320 plus, without the "step" at FL280 or so.
. At longer ranges,(LAX-MEL) it carries a higher proportion of its volumetric payload (say 744 plus 35%), but is still limited to less than full payload.
. Min cost cruise .86 v .84
I don't know how it stacks up against 744ER. Obviously a lesser payload improvement over payload limited sectors like LAX-MEL.
Still going to wind up in SYD or somewhere further back if MEL weather is nasty and full limited payload is on board.
I stress "ball park" - some numbers are 22% and others are other - just looking for confirmation or a revised ball park number from "one who knows".
On the subject of payload, my ball park understanding is that relative to the standard 747-400
. Most numbers including weights, payload and volume are 25% higher, but fuel burn over like sectors is the same.
. At high weights it goes directly to FL 320 plus, without the "step" at FL280 or so.
. At longer ranges,(LAX-MEL) it carries a higher proportion of its volumetric payload (say 744 plus 35%), but is still limited to less than full payload.
. Min cost cruise .86 v .84
I don't know how it stacks up against 744ER. Obviously a lesser payload improvement over payload limited sectors like LAX-MEL.
Still going to wind up in SYD or somewhere further back if MEL weather is nasty and full limited payload is on board.
I stress "ball park" - some numbers are 22% and others are other - just looking for confirmation or a revised ball park number from "one who knows".
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
I believe that if they taxi on the taxiways at LAX then they have to close the one beside it, that is why they would backtrack on the parallel runway. If they get a bunch of A380's taxiing at the same time at LAX, it is going to cause massive problems.
Nunc est bibendum
Currently the same as for a 744 driver. Depending on what happens with EBA8 will determine what it ends up being. Personally I reckon they're paid enough and the efficiencies gained for flying the A380 should be passed on to the hard working and under paid 767 drivers. 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it will go all right on the Aust - LAX - Aust sector, because the type of cargo carried is no where near the weights to Asia. To Asia there is a lot of meat carried, where I've rarely seen this go to LAX.
On the 747-400 (non ER), it was only sometimes (not every leg) that cargo was offloaded. On the ER of course it is less of an occurrence as the -400.
Overall I think it will do as advertised on these runs, though haven't seen too much of it myself yet. On the first flight it was about 12-T off MTOW.
On the 747-400 (non ER), it was only sometimes (not every leg) that cargo was offloaded. On the ER of course it is less of an occurrence as the -400.
Overall I think it will do as advertised on these runs, though haven't seen too much of it myself yet. On the first flight it was about 12-T off MTOW.
KEG Wrote:
Unfortunately Keg, with the change of leadership coming in the AIPA hierarchy demanded by the membership, any hope of building on an EBA 8 style fleet pay proposal is dead in the water.
BJ and his team are pushing full steam ahead for 6-10% on the A380. This will be locked in well before the "results" from the member survey is discovered neutering any chance of savings at the top end being passed on to the majority.
What else would you expect when BJ's ticket has 3 x A380 Capts at the helm
the efficiencies gained for flying the A380 should be passed on to the hard working and under paid 767 drivers
BJ and his team are pushing full steam ahead for 6-10% on the A380. This will be locked in well before the "results" from the member survey is discovered neutering any chance of savings at the top end being passed on to the majority.
What else would you expect when BJ's ticket has 3 x A380 Capts at the helm
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish I could argue with my company about hotels and allowances etc. At least you guys get to discuss these items, we have no say at all. Like it or leave.
As for the union granting permission to Qantas to operate certain sectors - only in the industrial backwater that is Oz would this occur.
Dont rock the boat guys, you are on clover.
As for the union granting permission to Qantas to operate certain sectors - only in the industrial backwater that is Oz would this occur.
Dont rock the boat guys, you are on clover.
Nunc est bibendum
ow out of interest when you were on the 744, what would the burn from LA to Melbourne?
Don't know of max fuel on the Dugong.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So doing the rough numbers then its used about 215T for a trip (assumed I know to be fuel used) compared to around 170T used in the ER..........if you make it!
Not a massive efficiency gain. Of course not having to do a stop is way more effecient than having to do one.
So the 748 argument comes back to mind
J
Not a massive efficiency gain. Of course not having to do a stop is way more effecient than having to do one.
So the 748 argument comes back to mind
J
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabawocky,
The aircraft will land with about 10% of their fuel for reserves and alternate.
Per seat, it seems the A380 is burning 10% less fuel, lifting about 30% more revenue payload, and supplying about 50% more floor area than the 744ER.
And it still has range/payload up its sleeve, I remember a few people on this thread previously say it did not have the range for trans pacific sectors....
Now does anyone have the 747-300 numbers......
As for the 747-8I, it will have the same operational restrictions as the A380, they are both ICAO CAT F due to their physical dimensions (wingspan).
The aircraft will land with about 10% of their fuel for reserves and alternate.
Per seat, it seems the A380 is burning 10% less fuel, lifting about 30% more revenue payload, and supplying about 50% more floor area than the 744ER.
And it still has range/payload up its sleeve, I remember a few people on this thread previously say it did not have the range for trans pacific sectors....
Now does anyone have the 747-300 numbers......
As for the 747-8I, it will have the same operational restrictions as the A380, they are both ICAO CAT F due to their physical dimensions (wingspan).