Qantas Fleet Order Speculation
Oh god, here we go again...
Who remembers the good old days when Flyboat kept his trap shut for a few months? But here he is, back again pushing the exact same barrow, with the same incorrect figures, and the same disgusting attitude.
Why bother? You've said it all before, over and over and over. And given you are not a professional pilot, not an engineer or cabin crew and you don't work for Qantas, one struggles to see why you have such a morbid fascination with other people's income.
If we want to hear the exact same drivel from you again Flyboat, we can click on your profile and read your old posts. It is the same line, again and again and again and again. So save your typing, or the cut and paste job.
If you want to say something new then why don't you enlighten us with what you do for a living, how much you earn, what extensive tertiary education you completed and why you are such a hero to your lucky employer? Or are you only good a throwing rocks at others and not so good at defending yourself?
Who remembers the good old days when Flyboat kept his trap shut for a few months? But here he is, back again pushing the exact same barrow, with the same incorrect figures, and the same disgusting attitude.
Why bother? You've said it all before, over and over and over. And given you are not a professional pilot, not an engineer or cabin crew and you don't work for Qantas, one struggles to see why you have such a morbid fascination with other people's income.
If we want to hear the exact same drivel from you again Flyboat, we can click on your profile and read your old posts. It is the same line, again and again and again and again. So save your typing, or the cut and paste job.
If you want to say something new then why don't you enlighten us with what you do for a living, how much you earn, what extensive tertiary education you completed and why you are such a hero to your lucky employer? Or are you only good a throwing rocks at others and not so good at defending yourself?
Pilot costs do have an impact on the cost of the operation.
Last full financial year fuel costs were about 1/3 of total costs. So say the B787 is flying a 16hour sector, with 4 crew. Average burn (Very rough figures here) 5 tonne/hour costing $5000 per hour, for a total cost of $15,000 per hour. (Any lower cost for fuel will mean crew costs have an even higher percentage impact on the cost of the operation).
Flight crew cost $300 + $200 + 2*$100 = $700 per hour, but costs of employment (super, allowances leave, regulatory compliance etc) probably increase that at least by 1/3, so call it roughly $1000 per hour. That is 6.7% of the total cost of the operation, just for pilots.
Now imagine you have to pay double time (or more) for every hour beyond 14 hours, and 33% night credits etc. You would then be looking at pilot costs around 15% of total costs for the hours when overtime is paid.
When airline margins are historically very thin (1.6% last year according to IATA), this added costs erases the profiitability of the route. Therefore, we cannot justify the route, and therefore we miss out on the associated expansion.
Demanding double overtime and night credits on long four crew routes would kill the profitability of those routes, meaning we don't do them, meaning we have less growth, meaning we all lose out on increased income and promotions in the long run.
Last full financial year fuel costs were about 1/3 of total costs. So say the B787 is flying a 16hour sector, with 4 crew. Average burn (Very rough figures here) 5 tonne/hour costing $5000 per hour, for a total cost of $15,000 per hour. (Any lower cost for fuel will mean crew costs have an even higher percentage impact on the cost of the operation).
Flight crew cost $300 + $200 + 2*$100 = $700 per hour, but costs of employment (super, allowances leave, regulatory compliance etc) probably increase that at least by 1/3, so call it roughly $1000 per hour. That is 6.7% of the total cost of the operation, just for pilots.
Now imagine you have to pay double time (or more) for every hour beyond 14 hours, and 33% night credits etc. You would then be looking at pilot costs around 15% of total costs for the hours when overtime is paid.
When airline margins are historically very thin (1.6% last year according to IATA), this added costs erases the profiitability of the route. Therefore, we cannot justify the route, and therefore we miss out on the associated expansion.
Demanding double overtime and night credits on long four crew routes would kill the profitability of those routes, meaning we don't do them, meaning we have less growth, meaning we all lose out on increased income and promotions in the long run.
This is now very old, but this passed across a desk I was near in BKK some 10 years ago. I jotted them down as they were written - just for interests sake.
BKK-LHR 11:37 flt time
Overflight Costs: $9520.92
Fuel: $33,860.43 (130.5t)
Maint $6,025.00
Crew $651
TOTAL: $50,057.35
Landing Charges: $9000
Catering: $3500
Then a note underneath '$48000 full crew 2 hours incl Landing Charge'
The note was confusing because it was non specific, but that was what was on the page. I assume $USD.
BKK-LHR 11:37 flt time
Overflight Costs: $9520.92
Fuel: $33,860.43 (130.5t)
Maint $6,025.00
Crew $651
TOTAL: $50,057.35
Landing Charges: $9000
Catering: $3500
Then a note underneath '$48000 full crew 2 hours incl Landing Charge'
The note was confusing because it was non specific, but that was what was on the page. I assume $USD.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some food for thought:
Labor is a significant cost to an airline and one of the few things that can be controlled by management.
Airline profits on average are wafer thin and every bit counts.
Airlines can’t attract capital investment without proving cost savings, efficiency gains and labor reform.
The cost of labor at QF is way beyond even keel when compared to MOST carriers in Asia and certainly not even in the same market as the Chinese carriers who have only just starting cutting up QF market share. The average cockpit crewmember in a Chinese cockpit would cost the airline about 20% of the cost of a pacific baron.
A 30% savings in cockpit crew cost at QF could save the company upwards of several hundred million dollars per annum. Which company would not want this saving to be made?
Labor is a significant cost to an airline and one of the few things that can be controlled by management.
Airline profits on average are wafer thin and every bit counts.
Airlines can’t attract capital investment without proving cost savings, efficiency gains and labor reform.
The cost of labor at QF is way beyond even keel when compared to MOST carriers in Asia and certainly not even in the same market as the Chinese carriers who have only just starting cutting up QF market share. The average cockpit crewmember in a Chinese cockpit would cost the airline about 20% of the cost of a pacific baron.
A 30% savings in cockpit crew cost at QF could save the company upwards of several hundred million dollars per annum. Which company would not want this saving to be made?
several hundred mill a year?
I thought qf's total tech crew bill was 200ish mill
I thought qf's total tech crew bill was 200ish mill
2000 or so total mainline crew, a conservative average wage across LH/SH of $200k = $400 million. Add in employment costs and you're looking at at least $500 million tech crew costs per year. So yes, a 30% decrease in tech crew costs would be at least $165 million increase in profit....or the difference between profit and loss.
Flyboat North-Industrial Action is a two-way street, Engineers action was in direct response to Qantas policy, Lockout and shutdown was entirely industrial policy generated by Qantas. As always an constructive relationship would have saved billions!
Sprite:-- and just think what 100% reduction would save, oh hang on....
According to the 2014 annual report for CX, total staff costs ( 33,000 staff of which 3,000 are crew ) account for 18% of total expenses. ( of that maybe 5% would be Pilots )
Which one is the biggest cost to CX???? FUEL.
Same for QF, the problem is that they have an old gas guzzling fleet that uses TOO MUCH FUEL.
That is NOT the fault of the crew.
According to the 2014 annual report for CX, total staff costs ( 33,000 staff of which 3,000 are crew ) account for 18% of total expenses. ( of that maybe 5% would be Pilots )
Which one is the biggest cost to CX???? FUEL.
Same for QF, the problem is that they have an old gas guzzling fleet that uses TOO MUCH FUEL.
That is NOT the fault of the crew.
Last edited by ACMS; 16th Jun 2015 at 03:36.
"Interesting that Chinese cockpit crew are so cheap when Qantas is losing pilots to Chinese carriers because they earn more on contracts than at Qantas"
1. The foreign crew and their high salaries represent about 1% of the total pilot body for any Chinese carrier. Its safe to say their cockpit crew costs are “under control” when compared to western competitors.
2. An Air China 330 PIC back several years was earning a little more than a QF 330 FO. Exchange rate changes make a big difference.
3. There is a big difference to what a pilot earns and what they cost the company.
4. Care to provide the number of wide body PIC’s at QF that have resigned from QF to work for a Chinese carrier?
1. The foreign crew and their high salaries represent about 1% of the total pilot body for any Chinese carrier. Its safe to say their cockpit crew costs are “under control” when compared to western competitors.
2. An Air China 330 PIC back several years was earning a little more than a QF 330 FO. Exchange rate changes make a big difference.
3. There is a big difference to what a pilot earns and what they cost the company.
4. Care to provide the number of wide body PIC’s at QF that have resigned from QF to work for a Chinese carrier?
Actually according to the QF 2014 annual report staff costs represented 19.4% of total.
CX was 18% as I said above. F all difference.
( These are total staff costs % and the Pilots are a small part of that. )
A BIG part of the 1.4% difference would be the extortionate salaries the QF mangers, CEO CFO get. Way more than CX.
Base salary of QF CEO $2.1 mill AUD
Base salary of CX CEO $1.1 mill AUD
Joyce has amazingly continued to receive that huge payout ( plus bonus ) even though QF have been hemorrhaging money at a great rate.
CX was 18% as I said above. F all difference.
( These are total staff costs % and the Pilots are a small part of that. )
A BIG part of the 1.4% difference would be the extortionate salaries the QF mangers, CEO CFO get. Way more than CX.
Base salary of QF CEO $2.1 mill AUD
Base salary of CX CEO $1.1 mill AUD
Joyce has amazingly continued to receive that huge payout ( plus bonus ) even though QF have been hemorrhaging money at a great rate.
Last edited by ACMS; 16th Jun 2015 at 04:00.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know of 5 or 6 Qantas pilots now flying for Chinese airlines, but I am just a lowly line driver so couldn't tell you accurate numbers, I would say there are more.
Regarding exchange rate, at 1:1 they were ahead, now much more so!
Regarding exchange rate, at 1:1 they were ahead, now much more so!
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Age: 48
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If QF were are private company yes entirely true the T & C s are absolutely none of anyone's business.
But you are a public company, with public shareholders so they are entitle to know pretty much everything about wages from the cleaner to CEO.
Moreover your company tries to fleabag on the Australian taxpayer to the tune of $3 billion, & will likely try to get back on the public tit so your wages & conditions are of interest to every taxpayer.
Someone said you had a dozen each of 380s, 744s, and 330s for your international fleet - pretty much what you had 30 years ago really, so you have remained static while the market has grown 600%.
Look at the scale of the widebody fleets at SIA & Cathay , how much they have grown , and the number of aircraft they have on order. Both airlines serve 10 to 12 European cities , you guys are reduced to what is it - a daily flight to London.
Do you think you might have a bit of a problem ?
ACMS as you seem to like direct comparisons how is this one
Ten CX Second Officers: 1 million ; Ten QF A380 Second Officers : 2.5 million
It's a bit more than as you would say "Sweet F____ All" , such eloquent & sophisticated language you have.
I would say pretty much all of the LH crew are overpaid by $100K, in terms of any reasonable comparison. The SOs taking home $280K on the 380 , just ridiculous & greed beyond words.
Earning what a mid 30s senior associate in legal/accounting/principal engineer - all who studied for 4 plus years full time , would earn , on the back of a 12 month vocational level course at Flight training Adelaide.
That is why your international business mathematically just cannot make a profit.
The T & C s are of interest because your employer consistently attempts to parasite on the taxpayer & because they are the prime reason you are failing
Do a very basic analysis of a Cathay V Qantas HK/Aust return flight, on a wages basis the Cathay guys would be paying somewhere between $20K to $40K less per flight in wages for that service. Same for SIA - you are getting murdered on wages costs per service to the tune of $30K for every service.
That is why you can't make money & why you don't have any orders for new 787s, 777s, A350s when SIA & Cathay have dozens of such orders.
No money in the bank to pay for the new planes, the company wants to by new fuel efficient aircraft but can't do so because flight/cabin crew are
paid 50% to 250% (A 380 Second Officers) more than their skill set can reasonably justify
Where do guys reckon you will be in 30 years from now , still at 1985 levels you reckon ?
But you are a public company, with public shareholders so they are entitle to know pretty much everything about wages from the cleaner to CEO.
Moreover your company tries to fleabag on the Australian taxpayer to the tune of $3 billion, & will likely try to get back on the public tit so your wages & conditions are of interest to every taxpayer.
Someone said you had a dozen each of 380s, 744s, and 330s for your international fleet - pretty much what you had 30 years ago really, so you have remained static while the market has grown 600%.
Look at the scale of the widebody fleets at SIA & Cathay , how much they have grown , and the number of aircraft they have on order. Both airlines serve 10 to 12 European cities , you guys are reduced to what is it - a daily flight to London.
Do you think you might have a bit of a problem ?
ACMS as you seem to like direct comparisons how is this one
Ten CX Second Officers: 1 million ; Ten QF A380 Second Officers : 2.5 million
It's a bit more than as you would say "Sweet F____ All" , such eloquent & sophisticated language you have.
I would say pretty much all of the LH crew are overpaid by $100K, in terms of any reasonable comparison. The SOs taking home $280K on the 380 , just ridiculous & greed beyond words.
Earning what a mid 30s senior associate in legal/accounting/principal engineer - all who studied for 4 plus years full time , would earn , on the back of a 12 month vocational level course at Flight training Adelaide.
That is why your international business mathematically just cannot make a profit.
The T & C s are of interest because your employer consistently attempts to parasite on the taxpayer & because they are the prime reason you are failing
Do a very basic analysis of a Cathay V Qantas HK/Aust return flight, on a wages basis the Cathay guys would be paying somewhere between $20K to $40K less per flight in wages for that service. Same for SIA - you are getting murdered on wages costs per service to the tune of $30K for every service.
That is why you can't make money & why you don't have any orders for new 787s, 777s, A350s when SIA & Cathay have dozens of such orders.
No money in the bank to pay for the new planes, the company wants to by new fuel efficient aircraft but can't do so because flight/cabin crew are
paid 50% to 250% (A 380 Second Officers) more than their skill set can reasonably justify
Where do guys reckon you will be in 30 years from now , still at 1985 levels you reckon ?
Last edited by Flyboat North; 16th Jun 2015 at 06:02.
Do a very basic analysis of a Cathay V Qantas HK/Aust return flight, on a wages basis the Cathay guys would be paying somewhere between $20K to $40K less per flight in wages for that service. Same for SIA - you are getting murdered on wages costs per service to the tune of $30K for every service.
What crap. A Sydney Hongkong Sydney return is 20 hours credits. Cpt $275 an hour $5500, FO $3750, SO $2475. Total $11725. So on your figures you moron the Cathay pilots are flying for nothing. Crawl back into your hole and stay there, it's obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.
What crap. A Sydney Hongkong Sydney return is 20 hours credits. Cpt $275 an hour $5500, FO $3750, SO $2475. Total $11725. So on your figures you moron the Cathay pilots are flying for nothing. Crawl back into your hole and stay there, it's obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Age: 48
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"What Crap"
What a highly intellectual & sophisticated response you make.
The trip will take a week, or will be only work done by said crew for that one week.
Just sum the total of aircrew + cabin crew wages (annualized) for one week & do a subtraction, you will find the calc is quite accurate.
You also have to work out the difference in cash allowances given at the port , understand the QF boys & girls are on two or three times the cashies
that most other airlines get - likely a couple of grand there already
You starting to see why you are getting eaten alive ?
What a highly intellectual & sophisticated response you make.
The trip will take a week, or will be only work done by said crew for that one week.
Just sum the total of aircrew + cabin crew wages (annualized) for one week & do a subtraction, you will find the calc is quite accurate.
You also have to work out the difference in cash allowances given at the port , understand the QF boys & girls are on two or three times the cashies
that most other airlines get - likely a couple of grand there already
You starting to see why you are getting eaten alive ?
You starting to see why you are getting eaten alive ?
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Age: 48
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I am not sure how gaining a CPL/IR & having a pass in year 12 qualifies someone to know anything at all about business or financial matters.
The reality is that if the QF pilots had real expertise & skills in airline management this fact would have been identified & they would have been hired by airline boards all around the world to run their airlines. As we know not one QF pilot has been hired to run an airline anywhere , but my goodness they talk a big game.
Check the average wages of QF V CX cabin crew & you have your answer right there, then tip in the weekly wages of the Sydney Glamour Boy (A380 Second Officer), & you are easily over $20k crew cost differential per service.
The reality is that if the QF pilots had real expertise & skills in airline management this fact would have been identified & they would have been hired by airline boards all around the world to run their airlines. As we know not one QF pilot has been hired to run an airline anywhere , but my goodness they talk a big game.
Check the average wages of QF V CX cabin crew & you have your answer right there, then tip in the weekly wages of the Sydney Glamour Boy (A380 Second Officer), & you are easily over $20k crew cost differential per service.
FBN-Let me see Qantas Group profit 2008 $1.4 Billion 208 aircraft/Qantas Group loss 2014 $2.8 Billion with 303 aircraft and revenue has declined from $15.627 Billion in 2008 to $15.352 Billion with a 45% increase in fleet. Maybe Mr Joyce(Bernie Madoff of aviation) has grown the wrong entity! Houston we have a problem!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FBN, you keep asking everybody else to check their figures between QF vs (insert airline here) which many have responded with actual figures, but not once have you given any figures to support your argument.
You're a troll.
You're a troll.