Rest of A332's & 3's to JQ?

[Capt Kremin]

The QF A330's have the same problem. 15 minutes limit on the Oxy generators.

[Bolty McBolt]

T to B

For what its worth, I was involved on the periphery with the set-up of JQ international (consultant) and can tell you that - at least from what i was involved in (aircraft and related svcs) - there werent a whole lot of favours given by QF to JQ. Based on the bencmarking we did they're paying pretty fair rates for things sourced from the mother ship (at least at that time).

Mate I can't agree with you there. I have to deal with the short comings of the Jet * Internantional A330 handling contract (maintenance) on a daily basis. The cost of a transit done by qf including sup checks etc is approx a third the price of any of the stations/ports visited for just a transit. The price was forced upon us from a very high level well below cost !

[QFinsider]

Bolty you are spot on...

That it the whole furphy of the J* arguement.
Does the market and observers really believe that Q is the only airline that can co-control a premium airline and a so called Low cost model. Same aircraft same routes generate the same costs. If the fare structure generates any yield I would be astounded. Notwithstanding the pay structure, yield is yield. Accounting can produce any figures management want...Beleiving that J* is somehow much cheaper than a mainline carrier neglects the fact they borrow are gifted and otherwise acquire things at nominal value....If the supporters of this crap beg to differ show me an audited set of accounts, paying particular attention to what comes from the parent. There is no magic, it is tricky accounting nothing more... Guess there really are fairies at the bottom of the garden!

Want to test the robustness of the yield from a LCC, look at the morphing of Ryan Air, super cheap fares but so many add-ons with new being added every day..
As a business matures in aviation, aircraft age etc business adds cost and a low yield model relying on volume must find addtional revenue...
Hence Ryan Air looking into charging for the dunny...

Of course Qantas management were the smartest guys in the room...That's why we are adding capacity when all other airlines are shedding it...

J* sole aim was to apportion cost, log it back through mainline at every oppurtunity, hence load up the parent with ridiculous costs. Just look at what flight operations must absorb in its budget (Qantas is an airline, flying people) the cost apportioning is ridiculous,so many unrproductive empires in accounting/finance/marketing/OHS/HR et al .Aided and assisted by workchoices there was the setting to break the pesky unions..Kind of like a waterfront/workchoices sort of shake up...

I will stand corrected when stand alone accounts are produced...somehow dont see that happening

If however J* is about low wages, then that "cost" is lower for sure..As an operating overhead, what percentage of overhead is that, particularly with respect to flight crew/engineering etc?

[Taildragger67]

Oxy bottle time

Just a question on the Himalaya-crossing question - is it not the case that routes between Singapore and Europe tend to track south of the Himalayas (hence no special oxy requirements) but those out of Bangkok are more likely to track over the Himalayas (and so require extra oxy)?

Hence twins running ex-Singapore are fine as they are, but ex-Bangkok will need the extra oxy? Could this be why BA use 777s via Singapore and 744s via Bangkok?

GC tracks over the hump

Thanks

[Transition Layer]

Despite the Great Circle tracks, BKK-LHR and SIN-LHR routes generally converge over India near Delhi and both go up through Afghanistan, therefore same Oxy requirements. BKK is normally on the northern most route and SIN uses the southern routes, although this is dependent on traffic.

SIN routes to Europe will occasionally go through Iran or even the Middle East depending on winds.

[speeeedy]

As an operating overhead, what percentage of overhead is that, particularly with respect to flight crew/engineering etc?

Pilots wages in QF are just under 4% of total expenditure.

So even if you cut the pilots wages by 25%, the total expenditure would still be 99% of what it was.

I think Mr Joyce is smart enough to see the value in that extra 1%, or more correctly he can see the value that would be lost if he tried to extract that 1% from a front-line and well respected group such as pilots. He would have learned this from Dixons folly in taking on another front-line and well respected group last year.

A couple of other points of interest:

1) The executive wage bill exceeds the pilots wage bill prior to the 500 management positions going, once the purge is completed the exec wage bill will be fairly close to line ball with the pilots.

2) As a percentage of JQ Expenditure the J* pilots wages are the same as QF... Coincidence?

[Jabawocky]

You can only cut costs so far, far better to concentrate on extracting just a few dollars....yes just a few extra dollars per ticket and also those few extra tickets that make all the difference.

Stating the obvious I know! But thats where its at.

[ratpoison]

from a front-line and well respected group such as pilots.

Hahaha, Speeed, don't know where you have been for a number of years now, but we get as much respect from management and the traveling public as does a turd floating in a swimming pool.

[ditzyboy]

Going Boeing...

Thanks for clarifying that. I misunderstood your post.

I believe that the problem relating to QF flying "twins" over the Himalayas was due to the B767's having pax oxy generators of limited duration that was insufficient for what was required before the aircraft could descend to 14,000'.

The QF A330's have the same problem. 15 minutes limit on the Oxy generators.

Capt Kremin and GB -

The International -200s have 22 min PSU oxygen. Is that still not enough to meet the requirement?

[Going Boeing]

Ditzy, it depends on the route. Routes through Afghanistan in the North/North East area have "escape" routes that would require the aircraft to remain well above 14,000' for much longer than that. The requirement for the Southern route may just be inside that, but if we are talking about JQ operating A332's to ATH & FCO then it is likely that they will fly routes through IRAN (despite the higher Air Navigation charges) & Turkey where the 22mins oxy will be sufficient.

[Capt Kremin]

....wot GB sed....

[MrWooby]

Another problem with having A330's flying the European routes over India/Pakistan and especially Afghanistan is that there are very few levels to operate at and with aircraft spaced every 10 mins having an aircraft cruising at M0.82/.83 stuffs everybody up. If you ain't doing M0.85 then get out of the way.

[genex]

QFInsider

I have checked guys like you in the simulator....so sure they're right til the "Pull Up" warning sounds. I really sincerely wish you well in your career in the cockpit....just stay there and there alone......or if you want to start an airline with your own money and wisdom, then I'll listen.

Here's the news little one:......QANTAS CAN OPERATE ITS OWN LCC CHEAPER THAN COULD A STAND ALONE COMPETITOR AND BETTER THAN COULD THE PARENT QF DINOSAUR TRYING TO BE A YOUTHFUL BALLERINA.

Is that nearly clear enough? Jetstar is not perfect. But it is way better than not having it. Now wrap yourself up in your little cocoon of self righteousness and have a good sleep. Hate is a terrible sin and you should try to be rid of it.

[Back Seat Driver]

genex a checkie... BBWWWhhhaaaahaaahhhaaaahaa
with the stuff he posts here, he probably checks their bags as they go through the security gate at the sim centre.
Ah you crack me up.

[goodonyamate]

genex a checkie...

haha wouldnt let him check my mailbox.....

[Boomerang_Butt]

Slight drift here, but wasn't the issue flying over the Himalayas why QF got the 767RR (22mins oxy as opposed to 12min on the GE)? If so then an A330 with 22min shouldn't be a problem either, depending on the restrictions/route of course...

And this might seem a silly question, but I do sometimes wonder why QF didn't palm the 767s off to Jokestar and use the new A330s on routes where they are gunning for Premium pax... the number of J class pax who complain of this very thing is astounding! Or is it because the managers don't really care about mainline any more and want to paint everything orange?

[Bazzamundi]

The cost of owning and maintaining the 330's is cheaper. Is it true that some 330's were handed to QF as compensation for the 380 saga? If so, the cost of owning them would be bugger all.

As for 20 year old 767's with high maintenance costs, that would not fit the LCC model, would it? Mainline suffers not just the increased costs of operating them, but also the loss of premium revenue from punters shafted with an older, less luxurious type.

[Boomerang_Butt]

Let's not even start on the 767 going to Japan...

[Taildragger67]

Boomerang Butt,

Slight drift here, but wasn't the issue flying over the Himalayas why QF got the 767RR (22mins oxy as opposed to 12min on the GE)?

The 763s Qantas ordered from Boeing, are CF6-powered.

The RR-powered 767s in Rat colours are the 7 leased from BA, which runs an only-RR 767 fleet. BA was happy to lose some capacity, QF was scratching for some, looks like everyone kicked a goal. They've not been used for runs up to Europe.

do sometimes wonder why QF didn't palm the 767s off to Jokestar and use the new A330s on routes where they are gunning for Premium pax

Lower seat/mile costs mean that you can make a profit on lower margins - the key to survivability for a LCC.

Also if your premium pax are only on it for a couple of hours, they don't really care what it is, as long as it's on time.

[ditch handle]

Quote-

"also if your premium pax are only on it [clapped out 767] for a couple of hours, they don't really care what it is, as long as it's on time."

______________

HNL