Qantas Fleet Order Speculation
The plans have changed - JQ are to keep their 11 (possibly 14 at a later date) B787-8's and will not be getting any B787-9's. Apparently, there is a flight length beyond which the LCC model doesn't work so the extra range of the B787-9 would be wasted in JQ service.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max flight length is about 4 hours. The passengers have bought all the food, beer, iPads and blankets they are going to by then and just want to get off. Land, quick turnaround, fresh pax, sell some more. The orange wide body operation has never been a strictly LCC.
Significant changes coming for group flying plan, domestic and international. I can't see any more 787 for JQ.
Significant changes coming for group flying plan, domestic and international. I can't see any more 787 for JQ.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Iron bar,
How good is your source on this info?.....Managers in both Q & J* are saying that J* will be getting their full complement of 788s.
(Disclaimer: I know, don't trust anything management tell you, but this is from both sides of the fence??)
How good is your source on this info?.....Managers in both Q & J* are saying that J* will be getting their full complement of 788s.
(Disclaimer: I know, don't trust anything management tell you, but this is from both sides of the fence??)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the 800 got US west coast range ability and similar size tanks?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the B787-8 has great range (more than JQ will ever need)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I can't see any more 787 for JQ."
Yep, I'll qualify that by saying no more than the current flying plan/confirmed order book has listed and the boss has justified to the board. Apparently on a plane by plane basis. I doubt they could be deferred or cancelled, not much market for 8 over 9 I believe.
As far as additional aircraft goes, I very much doubt it.
Source outside exec management for Q or J. But probably no more reliable than either.
Watch this space.
Yep, I'll qualify that by saying no more than the current flying plan/confirmed order book has listed and the boss has justified to the board. Apparently on a plane by plane basis. I doubt they could be deferred or cancelled, not much market for 8 over 9 I believe.
As far as additional aircraft goes, I very much doubt it.
Source outside exec management for Q or J. But probably no more reliable than either.
Watch this space.
Lucky they ordered the first 4 or so with the low rated engine pylons so they can't get the full range in case they ever needed it.
A recent Boeing presentation given to me shows the -9 fuel tank capacity is 133 kgs greater than the -8. I assume the additional 450 nm range of the -9 is due to the lower SFC of the -9 engines.
What has me tossed is the -8 EOW is 28 tonnes heavier than the B767-300ER.
What has me tossed is the -8 EOW is 28 tonnes heavier than the B767-300ER.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 787's pylons are able to handle all GEnX thrust ratings. There is no option to buy specific thrust-limited pylons.
This rumour is just like the heavy landing one. A heady combination of rubbish and wishful thinking.
This rumour is just like the heavy landing one. A heady combination of rubbish and wishful thinking.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: NSW
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some figures to wet your appetite. I know firsthand the JQ 787s all weigh about 114ton empty they will carry 335pax and 10 ton of freight at Mach.85 with an average fuel burn over 9hrs of 4750kg hr. They will easy do Syd -Lax. They have the cargo room downstairs to accommodate 335pax and baggage with enough room for 20 ton of freight. All with the baby 64k ibs thrust engines. Just makes you wonder what QF will be able to do with a -9 with big engines.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF 9's are planned for less than 300 pax config. hopefully they will have proper galleys and sufficient lavs (unlike JQ, join then queue) plus crew rest for pilots and cc. So they will have to be proportionally heavier.
JJ's figures look pretty good though.
JJ's figures look pretty good though.
Last edited by Iron Bar; 23rd Jun 2015 at 05:35.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Explained to me by a type rated CX engineer in MEL handling UA 789, greater range of the 9 over the 8 comes from Aerodynamic Slots on the vertical and hori stabs that improve boundary layer flow over the rudder and elevators respectively and hence aerodynamic efficiency.
No magic tricks other than that and as previously mentioned fuel capacity relatively unchanged.
No research on my behalf whatsoever.
I'll leave that to my pending type course.
No magic tricks other than that and as previously mentioned fuel capacity relatively unchanged.
No research on my behalf whatsoever.
I'll leave that to my pending type course.