Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Jetstar 787's

Old 11th Oct 2013, 20:37
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: OZ
Posts: 198
A senior manager recently said. The mainline fleet age is commercial in confidence. Hence they report the "groups" fleet age.
The senior manager should check out the interweb where fleet ages of any fleet are readily available.

This examples puts the QF mainline fleet at 10.3 years.

Fleet age Qantas | Airfleets aviation

Funnily enough, Alan's recent claims about the group fleet age and the fleet age graph published on p4 of the ASX statement don't quite stack up unless you take out the 'amaaazing' business.
Buckshot is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2013, 00:45
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,199
The 10.3 years mainline fleet age was achieved a while ago even with the retirement of older aircraft.
Mstr Caution is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2013, 05:07
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The Beech or the Office.
Age: 9
Posts: 331
KEG,

I understand that the "group" currently does operate the same type on different awards ala 330. That is an entirely different scenario.

That was to launch JQ wide body long haul ops, and they were offered the work on those conditions or told there would be a Greenfields operation set up to crew the 330 if they didn't accept it. And the rest is as they say, history.

This is a totally different case. The aircraft will be established and in service in the group and under the JQ LH award. Mainline LH is already established, there is no bargaining tool. I think history can attest to QF mantra "If you don't accept what is offered, they will all go to JQ!" So all things being equal, QF mainline may be offered the a/c under a similar pay scale(or preferably less), or miss out!

I'm glad you find it amusing Keg, but that wasn't the context in which I made the statement. Nowhere in my previous did i say "you were over priced". Don't try and put words in my mouth. I do agree with you that agreeing to a deal is a better outcome than redundancies. However, I and no doubt many others here will find it quite ironic if that "deal" corresponds to what is essentially the JQ package that so many here have been criticised for by so many others for accepting, in order to put food on the table.
I will stand on my statement that you may get to fly the 787, but it will not be on the conditions that you are currently enjoying.

In the end, history may prove me wrong, but I doubt it.
Normasars is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2013, 18:52
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 850
yet to be tested? they've just demoted a bunch of F/O's to S/O.
Derfred is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2013, 20:42
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,992
Wasn't the seniority scope clause "weakened" back in the 90's?
KRUSTY 34 is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2013, 05:27
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 735
From a JQ 'presser'

" I can say from experience that flying on the 787 is a destination in itself.”
Do the bogans of the world really have such low expectations?
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 07:23
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 43
Posts: 1,011
I agree it will not be on the Longhaul Contract, no other airline in the world has a contract like it. It will be a Stick hours contract and you will be actually required to Stick 700-1000 hours a year like almost every other airline in the world. You cant stick 300-500 hours a year and say its an efficient award in anyones language. Having said that it doesnt mean you will be worse off, probably youll get paid more because of the higher stick hours, ala QF 767 vs 737 where the majority of 737 crew actually get paid more than the 767 crew, but they fly more hours for it.
Angle of Attack is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 08:30
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,160
I am currently bouncing off 780 hours for the last 12 months. The only times I have done less are when the company gave away 25% of the fleet to Jetstar.

Maybe you should re-examine your prejudices?

Last edited by Capt Kremin; 14th Oct 2013 at 08:31.
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 08:54
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,160
What may have escaped people's notice here is that the first 787 is actually a Qantas aircraft, leased to Jetstar.



VH VKA
Power Driven Aeroplane with Tricycle - Retractable landing gear
2 Turbofan engines

Manufacturer: THE BOEING COMPANY
Model: 787-8
Serial number: 36227
Aircraft first registered in Australia: 30 August 2013
Year of manufacture: 2013

Full Registration
Registration holder as of 30 August 2013
QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED
Building QCA/3 10 Bourke Road
MASCOT NSW 2020
AUSTRALIA
Registered operator as of 30 August 2013
JETSTAR AIRWAYS PTY LIMITED
Level 4 222 Bourke Street
MELBOURNE VIC 3000
AUSTRALIA

This is true of 17 other aircraft flown by Jetstar. A few questions are begged here.

1. Where did the money come from to pay for this aircraft and the others?

2. What are the terms of the leases and why, when there are many leasing companies, does QF feel it necessary to get involved in leasing aircraft to Jetstar?

3. Does the end of the delivery schedule of the remaining 13 787-8 aircraft correspond to the projected time period where International will, after years of neglect, magically become profitable again?

Or am I just cynical?
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 09:15
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Going nowhere...
Posts: 306
AoA

I'm with Kremin on this one. My ongoing A330 'rolling average' for the last 365 days tends to the high side of 750 stick hours, including two blocks of 4 weeks of leave. And I've twice been up against 100hrs-in-28days issues too. Where did you get 300-500 from?
Jetsbest is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 09:40
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 283
Has anyone got information on who leases aircraft to the Qantas Group and whether any current or past Board members or Executives are involved in these companies?
What The is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 10:12
  #212 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,176
Lightbulb

ala QF 767 vs 737 where the majority of 737 crew actually get paid more than the 767 crew, but they fly more hours for it.
The 737 get paid the equivalent to a 767 crew (on min guarantee of 80 credit hous pay) when the 737 crew fly about 70 hours/ 28 days. Next roster I fly 71.7 for my 80 credit hours*. Times that by 12 x 28 day BPs and I'm at 860 stick for the year0. I've had two sub 500 hour years over the last few years. I was also assigned 3 months leave on top of my normal leave

So you're wrong on two counts. The first is about how many hours we fly when not being assigned all our leave. The second is on how much long haul crew cost when compared to short haul. Wanna try again?

(* My credit hour rate is less than the 737 stick hour rate).

Last edited by Keg; 14th Oct 2013 at 10:14.
Keg is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 10:27
  #213 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,176
Lightbulb

The other point worth making is this. Once again we have someone speaking with an air of authority about something of which they have no idea. I'm not personally attacking you AoA, just stating that you are demonstrably so completely and utterly ignorant as to the reality of our respective awards that it calls into question anything you have to say about what Qantas may or may not do when it comes to negotiating a deal for the 787.

I guess the final point worth making is that you also obviously know nothing of the discussions going on at the moment between AIPA and QF re 787 conditions.
Keg is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 10:43
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,303
how many stick hours are qf pilots doing when only only flying lh?
waren9 is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 11:30
  #215 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,176
When I was flying long haul I used to do average 800-850. It wasn't unheard of for crew to be bumping 900. Blank line holders did less though- maybe 600 stick but they were doing LOTS of reserve. Those flying 850 were doing zero reserve.

I'm not sure where this notion came that we're only flying 500 as a matter of course. The only times anyone has flown 500 hours is if they've been assigned copious amounts of long service leave or excess annual leave.

Last edited by Keg; 14th Oct 2013 at 11:31.
Keg is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 12:01
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,303
kremin

i think who owns the aircraft is moot. real question is if jq are paying the true cost of operating it. been raised before

Last edited by waren9; 14th Oct 2013 at 12:05.
waren9 is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 20:08
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,160
Waren, if QF paid for that and other aircraft, the money came from somewhere. It affected the bottom line of one its entities. The losses of International, particularly the declining profit after the bumper year of 2008, have never been fully explained.

I have seen the terms at which Qantas supplies A330 simulator services to Jetstar and they are NOT on commercial terms. The opaqueness of these leasing arrangements and the cost of aircraft acquisition needs to be addressed.
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 21:33
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 69
Posts: 821
Makes you wonder what, if any reason has been driving the segmentationalisation of the business entities ??
Would the AASB's alignment of accounting standards with internationally agreed standards as driven by the IFRS ,have anything to do with this apparent waste of resources?
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 22:50
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 242
This is the standard: Compiled AASB Standard AASB 8 Operating Segment.
Have a read and a close look at what the can be done, there is an enormous scope for generating opacity by the "Chief Operating Decision Maker".
The term ‘chief operating decision maker’ identifies a function, not necessarily a manager with a specific title. That function is to allocate resources to and assess the performance of the operating segments of an entity. Often the chief operating decision maker of an entity is its chief executive officer or chief operating officer but, for example, it may be a group of executive directors or others.

The method here has been to generate a series of "plausible narratives" ie international is loss making, but yet hide behind opaque accounts which have not been revealed on the basis of commercial in confidence. In otherwords, it is impossible to follow the money without having access to the internal accounts. Public statements about any segment without revealing the corresponding accounts are simply disinformation 101.
FYSTI is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2013, 22:57
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Keflavik
Posts: 7
787 Leases

1. Where did the money come from to pay for this aircraft and the others?
2. What are the terms of the leases and why, when there are many leasing companies, does QF feel it necessary to get involved in leasing aircraft to Jetstar?

Has anyone got information on who leases aircraft to the Qantas Group and whether any current or past Board members or Executives are involved in these companies?
Qantas isn't funding these aircraft through its own cash flows.

The aircraft are financed predominantly through the capital markets and the syndicated bank debt market - it's the usual suspects like the major international and domestic banks, plus pension & mutual funds buying asset-backed securities. QAL don't normally bother with local leasing companies as they can finance the aircraft far cheaper themselves.

QAL remain the legal owner of the aircraft but enter into a lease with JetStar on commercial terms that largely match the costs on the financing. The lenders require these sub-leases to be on commercial terms as protection against a QAL default (the lenders can step in and receive the lease payments themselves on a default). There's no real subsidization in the lease agreements with JetStar - the banks and other lenders won't let them.
spotfx is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.