QF International - 14 Aircraft total by 2021!!

[Keg]

Either the document is wildly inaccurate- due in part I guess to the rush to get it out to appear to have some idea as to what is going on- or it indicates the following:

No more ADL-SIN-ADL, PER-SIN-PER, MEL-HKG, SYD-NRT-SYD, SYD-PVG-SYD, SIN-FRA-SIN etc. Basically any route currently operated internationally by an A330 or a 744 (routes other than LAX) appears to be non existent under this plan.

That we would consider the A380 as the only airframe to fly internationally defies belief and indicates incompetence of the highest order- that is until you realise the clear intent is for Red Q (or whatever they end up calling the thing) to fly all those routes I mentioned before and additional 'code share'* services also.

* They'll be called 'code share' but watch QF buy (and pay a premium for) most of the seats on the flight (whether we have pax for them or not) to ensure that RedQ looks like it's paying it's way.

Personally I think the document is a little of column A and column B. It's part stupidity on behalf of QF management, part rushed out inaccuracy. Actually, the latter makes it all stupidity by QF management.

[vitamin B]

Re Trent 972

Couldn't agree more. Had the misfortune once of being shunted off QF 2 onto QF 302 ex BKK to SYD. What a disaster of a trip - hot cabin temperature, only 2 beers - lukewarm - for the whole trip, food tray almost thrown on the tray table. Since that trip, I ensured I was NOT booked on the BA/QF code share flight ever again.

Ultimately I switched to TG as even the QF flights lacked any warmth in cabin service. I have not regretted making the switch some 8 years ago. Even the mainline service within Oz is falling in standard leaving DJ as a viable option.

Still, one cannot really blame the cabin crew for not putting their heart into the service given the leadership (????) being shown by management.

VB

[gobbledock]

Bollocks

Is it any wonder the place is collapsing?? Look at the 'leaders' for want of a better word. Actualy fds comes to mind!
Including the Board you have - Accountants, bankers, miners, fat army generals, consultants, has-beens and suckholes...Did I mention aviation experience?? Whoops, maybe Jimmy Bowtie, thats about it.

And don't forget thislittle gem from the QF website, it always gives me that warm fuzzy feeling. (My bolding in places becasue I fing well feel like it)

The Qantas Board of Directors is responsible for ensuring that Qantas has an appropriate corporate governance structure to ensure the creation, protection and enhancement of shareholder value. This requires that appropriate accountability and control systems are in place.
The Board endorses each of the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) Corporate Governance Council's Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations, 2nd Edition (ASX Principles). In response to the ASX Principles, Qantas publicly discloses each of its corporate governance tools. This Corporate Governance section exemplifies Qantas' commitment to corporate governance.
At Qantas, the Board maintains, and ensures that Qantas management maintains, the highest level of corporate ethics. As such, the various charters and policies located under this Corporate Governance section will be reviewed, and where necessary, updated, on a regular basis.

I am sure this policy was retrieved from an S-Bend somewhere.

[C441]

Can the A380 operate in and out of places such as Perth, Brisbane or Adelaide?

Yes.

Or does this spell the end of Qantas operating internationally from anywhere but Sydney and Melbourne?

Yes.

To be honest I'm surprised they even suggested Qantas, as an aircraft operator, will exist by 2021. I suspect they have few plans for Qantas to be other than the umbrella organisation (to comply with the Qantas Sale Act) for a series of offshoots, perhaps even as early as 2015-16.

One part of former Asian culture they appear to have adopted accurately. There'll be no 'loss of face' that would be displayed in backing away from a concept that appeared flawed from the outset. (And obviously no subordinate 'crew member' willing to tell them they are making an error. It won't matter. They're not listening.)

[Alien Role]

Is it true that future 737-8's are all tagged as ZK-... registrations?? ie. lots of ZK's doing Aussie domestic sectors......
Would the 787 also fit this agenda as Ben Sandilands suggests??

Short Haul EBA up for "negotiation" !!

Role on... downhill..

[Sonny Hammond]

If Dixon's old gem 'Jetstar will never have anymore than 8 aircraft' is anything to go by, this is still probably an understatement of the future.

If I was QF mainline, I wouldn't be worried anymore, I'd be getting the hell out.

[Ticking Timebomb]

AH HELLO,

Can someone please remind remind Qantas Management that AIRBUS the makers of the aircraft have told Qantas on numerous ocassions that a330's aren't designed for short sectors.

But hey who gives a about Qantas when you have ****star.

I see no 737 -800 in International either. Does that mean ****star will takeover Jetconnect services as well ?

[ejectx3]

I love the way there has not been a peep from our esteemed leaders to the troops about this monumental destruction of our futures.

I wonder if they will perhaps mention the fact there will be no career for us in mainline?

Edit: there has been a peep

[Ngineer]

I hear AJ is writing a book, 'How to be successful in small business'.

[blow.n.gasket]

I also found an interesting snippet in the brief.
Mention of changes to the Personal Property Securities Act 2009.
THE PLOT THICKENS.

OLDMATE,
Have a look at p116, CFO'S Group Funding Strategy.

[Oldmate]

Blown; what page of the brief was this on?

[QueenBuzzzzz]

I know this is a naive question, but if the A380s are running at say 85-100% pax load and making money on key, but basic routes ( Mel/Syd-lhr and Hkg and LAX) then how is that a bad thing? I'm not **** stirring, I'm just curious. Personally I think Oneworld is irrelevant, so code share partners will be an unfortunate choice, but the 3 cities are good feed routes. I've been working on the 380 lately and it's like working for a different airline. The product is good, the crew are motivated and the pax are happy. VA only flies to 2 ports.... thoughts?

[unseen]

Ticking time bomb

How would you know what Airbus says to QF?

More bull**** rumors.

Do you think Airbus cares what QF uses them for?

If you want a 300 seat jet for domestic ops, would you chose a -200 or a -300?

Tell me why?

What sector length was the 767 designed for? Hint, it can carry over 70,000 kgs of fuel from memory at 5 to 6,000kgs an hour.... What does QF use it for?

[The Darkness]

Perhaps it would appear that Qantas is trying to become just a seller of tickets - airlines don't actually WANT to operate aircraft, they just want to sell tickets and market themselves.

[Sunfish]

Darkness:

Perhaps it would appear that Qantas is trying to become just a seller of tickets - airlines don't actually WANT to operate aircraft, they just want to sell tickets and market themselves.

This is the failed American "Internet Bubble" business model. We sit around our Board table drinking Scotch or wine. We own a brand. We own a website that sells stuff. We contract out delivery of what we sell to "fulfilment companies" who package and deliver the stuff our website sells.....

The only trouble with this model is that a brand and website don't add value to anything at all. All the value adding is done by the contractors - and after a while they decide to keep the value for themselves, if they create any value at all.

To put it another way, outsourced businesses don't ever go that "extra mile" for the consumer. There will be no more stories about wonderful Qantas staff.

[ferris]

Perhaps AJ is heading for the "petrol station" business model, where you operate a high revenue/minute margin business in order to make money from the foot traffic in your shop (selling high margin items like milk and lollies). After all, isn't AJ a student of MoL, who has stated that his aim is to run his airline at break-even so he can make money from the other money spinners; add-ons such as hotels and car hire (maybe add-ons means muffins and pay-for-bags, too) etc.?

[Sunfish]

Petrol is what is known as a "grudge purchase" market - you have to have it, but you hate having to pay for it and there is nothing the service station owner can do to make it a "pleasant buying experience". The high margin overpriced food and drink sales are for time pressured people to buy.

It is a vicious market with lots of lying, cheating, and stealing because Petrol is "negotiable" like cash - and I speak as someone who spent a few years in the industry.

God help Qantas if that is the Alan Joyce business model.

[Spotl]

Running the sums on the Qantas fleet

I received this via email, so I can't validate the figures, but whether true or rumour it does open the door for further discussion.

Our aviation guru Ben Sandilands has often commented on the lack of 777 aircraft in the Qantas fleet. An anonymous Qantas 747 captain has supposedly lobbed in with some stats that reveal the answer:

"........Last week I flew to LAX on a 747 and spoke to the Delta 777 behind me. For the same sector Sydney/LAX these are the comparable fuel figures: 747s burn off 136,400kg; 777s burn 95,500kg. Fuel flow in cruise: 747s do 11,800kg per hour; 777s do 7700kg per hour. Pax on board: 747s have 260; 777s have 232. I didnt get the actual payload carried by the 777 but on pax numbers they carried roughly 10% less paxs for 30% less fuel used. We are provided with a cost figure by Qantas for additional uplift of every 1000kgs in dollar terms. On that figure the extra 28 paxs cost $27,000. You don't need to be Einstein to know why we are in such trouble......."

[Clipped]

From a friend of a friend of a .........

Any analysis on fuel burn alone should come with a health warning as cost per ATK more relevant which includes staff, maintenance, over flight etc. The capital cost also needs to be looked at as well. However I doubt whether this would improve the A380 case vv B777-300ER (the only model that one should compare due long range capability). In fact it would probably be worse. CX looked at the A380 years ago and decided from our analysis that it would not fit our routes as a B744 replacement. The decision then was to wait for a Mark 2 version and concentrate on the economics of the LR twin B777-300ER. It was not good enough to replace the B744 with a new aircraft which by our analysis would have same issues as the B744 across the Pacific (particularly westbound in winter 15+ hours) from west coast. Dumping payload to make it direct would be the norm by our calculation and we were mystified why QF would launch the A380 on the Pacific for that reason. Also weight and volume left for cargo after full pax is woeful. The other issue is that the Engine Out Critical Point requires extra fuel due suitable airports. At the time while we waited for B777 delivery the decision was made to get a bunch of cheap second-hand B744s as an interim which we could write off in 2 years after fitting out in our BFE. Today we can park these if we have to. The B777-300ER is a star. We got the first one in 2009 and will have 30 by end of 2012. With approx 300 seats 3 class this aircraft flies direct New York and back (15-16 hours) with full load and 10-20T cargo all year round with 2 engine fuel economy which is remarkable. It now has saturation of all our North America routes and is slowly migrating to Europe as well. The other issue to consider is that the A380 has great passenger appeal. It is super quiet and very spacious. I would think that if you just sexed it to just Sydney / Melbourne - Hong Kong / Singapore - London with very careful seat mix you might make money. Other concerns are, disappearing slots at London which in future needs a big aircraft to compensate. For this reason it is rumoured we might get a few if the price is right. I doubt it somehow. We have just taken delivery of 4 of our new B747-8F aircraft. There are ten firm on the way. This aircraft has a new wing which is very impressive and lots of other new technology. While it looks the same it is not a B744. We are commonly carrying 120 to 128 tons of cargo Hong Kong to Anchorage (10+ hours). The pax version which could be the one for us called the Intercontinental. It do direct New York with full pax and some cargo with about 50-60 less seats than the A380 on fuel burns per seat near the B777. "If it ain't a Boeing I ain't going" How often have I heard that from Boeing pilots! Frankly its bull. If you ask our revenue men the A330 is the best money making machine. You cannot beat it on short and medium haul. We have been buying them since the first delivery in Feb 1995 and we are still buying them till the A350 comes in 2016. They just keep getting better as Airbus make incremental improvements in weight, systems and fuel burn. They say they only want two aircraft theA330 and B777-300ER. The 5 B777-200 we have are orphans and the 26 B777-300 regional aircraft work well with 398 seats 2 class. We have some B777-200Fs on order. If Airbus deliver on the A350-800/900/1000 performance it looks very impressive. In fact Australia is the only place not to order them to date. Eight other world regions have gone for this 60% / 40% over the B787 bar 2. Those are about 50/50. We are getting 32 x A350-900s. With the push to 4 class aircraft on very long haul the B787 looks a bit small (about -40 pax less on small version and -80+ pax on bigger version). Airbus are touting the A350-1000 to beat the B777-300ER on fuel burn (-25%) with small increase in payload due to the lighter structure. I think Boeing want to offset this with new B777 version. Not being in HK anymore leaves me a bit out of the loop but I do talk with our Fleet people on how things are panning out. No doubt making poor decisions on fleets can be very costly and hard to reverse. It needs a very robust process involving every section of the airline. We left those days where engineering relationships with manufacturers and influential bosses heavily weighted into the process back in the nineties. (thanks to Rod Eddington). Today I must say knowing what is involved it is quite robust.

[1a sound asleep]

Pax on board: 747s have 260; 777s have 232.

260 pax on a 744? If the 744 was full then the figures would be different. Also need to take in to account freight and revenue. Then its about operating costs - lease payments and maintenance.

Based on these figures a full 744 is possible a better earner than a full 772