14th Jun 2016, 18:31 - Wikipost
|
|||
|
|||
|
Virgin Embraer Fleet
Maybe you should read my post. Which says - last thing they (Virgin) need is another type (which is clapped out).
Given they(Rex) have a "monopoly on most routes" as you say, makes sense that they would make money out of them wouldn't it?
Why would I spend my time reading about some bloody turbo prop outfit? The only time I've seen media on them is when they are writing stupid letters to would be cadets or having industrial action taken against them for one reason or another. Pretty clear where some of that profit comes from!
Wouldn't have a clue what Atr vs Saab numbers are. Who cares?
Given they(Rex) have a "monopoly on most routes" as you say, makes sense that they would make money out of them wouldn't it?
Why would I spend my time reading about some bloody turbo prop outfit? The only time I've seen media on them is when they are writing stupid letters to would be cadets or having industrial action taken against them for one reason or another. Pretty clear where some of that profit comes from!
Wouldn't have a clue what Atr vs Saab numbers are. Who cares?
Buy Rex? Just what they need... another operator with a bunch of clapped out Sh!theaps.
Shiny jets only work when you know how to make money with clapped out ones, but even that has been proven wrong.
How about Rex by some near new ATR's?
I know if you did care, you would realise that those business models are the ones you should care about....they make money and provide jobs.
You can only lose money for so long before your piggy bank shuts up and moves on....
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: EARTH
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A slot is a slot, when talking about movements in and out of the major cities... You can send an A380 or a SAAB340, it doesn't matter.
REX own a **** load of slots and routes now all over the country so wouldn't that attract an airline that want more slots and routes?
Qantas / QantasLink (Not Qantas but is Qantas)
Wouldn't it make sense that with REX's consistent expansion over the last few years, a said airline might try an alliance to complete the network?
VIRGIN / VIRGINLINK... (Not Virgin but is Virgin) just sayin. makes perfect sense!
REX own a **** load of slots and routes now all over the country so wouldn't that attract an airline that want more slots and routes?
Qantas / QantasLink (Not Qantas but is Qantas)
Wouldn't it make sense that with REX's consistent expansion over the last few years, a said airline might try an alliance to complete the network?
VIRGIN / VIRGINLINK... (Not Virgin but is Virgin) just sayin. makes perfect sense!
A slot is a slot......
Except when it is quarantined for "intra-state" services as per the ACT which nearly all REX slots are.
Just because they have a 730am slot does not mean big brother can chuck an A330 into it.
Qantas have the luxury of having so many Sydney slots that they can swap and change by minutes here and there, just watch metron some days....
Buying Rex does not solve anyone's slot problems.
Except when it is quarantined for "intra-state" services as per the ACT which nearly all REX slots are.
Just because they have a 730am slot does not mean big brother can chuck an A330 into it.
Qantas have the luxury of having so many Sydney slots that they can swap and change by minutes here and there, just watch metron some days....
Buying Rex does not solve anyone's slot problems.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Ten Twenty
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's hope the rumour is not true that Virgin are looking at wet leasing their A330 expansion plans into China.
Be a shame considering the future possibility of pilot redundancies with the decommissioning of the Ejet fleet and reduction of ATR numbers. Not to mention the career aspiration of others who are not currently in their preferred rank, base or even country.
Be a shame considering the future possibility of pilot redundancies with the decommissioning of the Ejet fleet and reduction of ATR numbers. Not to mention the career aspiration of others who are not currently in their preferred rank, base or even country.
Expansion as in extra aircraft?
Not sure this would be on the cards for Virgin near term. On the other hand, I'm sure I remember reading that Hainan has more A330s in the fleet than it knows what to do with...
Not sure this would be on the cards for Virgin near term. On the other hand, I'm sure I remember reading that Hainan has more A330s in the fleet than it knows what to do with...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will find the IASC approve they just received will not allow them to wet lease and it will need to be VA's metal operating the services.
In the short term (1-2 years) I think they will pull 2 aircraft of the transcon flying (there has been a softening in the domestic traffic) and replace them with B737's. These 2 aircraft would then operate the international services.
The international flights will require additional crew to operate them, as most likely they will be operated as a 3 man crew. This along with the B737 flying increasing should be enough to absorb all the Ejet crew, it however may require some pilots to move base if they want to retain their current rank or a change in seat ie back to the RH seat for captains or back to the second row for FOs, should they want to remain in their base.
In the short term (1-2 years) I think they will pull 2 aircraft of the transcon flying (there has been a softening in the domestic traffic) and replace them with B737's. These 2 aircraft would then operate the international services.
The international flights will require additional crew to operate them, as most likely they will be operated as a 3 man crew. This along with the B737 flying increasing should be enough to absorb all the Ejet crew, it however may require some pilots to move base if they want to retain their current rank or a change in seat ie back to the RH seat for captains or back to the second row for FOs, should they want to remain in their base.
Back of the coaster calculations...
Daily to Hong Kong - about 1.5 aeroplanes
Daily to Beijing - about 2-2.2 ish aeroplanes
Those numbers will vary if the flights are ex Sydney depending on the schedule as the curfew could drive longer turnarounds in the destination ports which would mean more aircraft (or percentage of an aeroplane).
So round it up and call it 4 machines to do the daily flights approved by the IASC. Current fleet of A330's = 6. The rounding up might account for any additional ground time due to curfew constraints in Sydney.
If they operate to/from a 24 hr airport like BNE or Mel then the turnaround times can be optimised to suit the commercial situation, rather than being driven by the curfew.
Daily to Hong Kong - about 1.5 aeroplanes
Daily to Beijing - about 2-2.2 ish aeroplanes
Those numbers will vary if the flights are ex Sydney depending on the schedule as the curfew could drive longer turnarounds in the destination ports which would mean more aircraft (or percentage of an aeroplane).
So round it up and call it 4 machines to do the daily flights approved by the IASC. Current fleet of A330's = 6. The rounding up might account for any additional ground time due to curfew constraints in Sydney.
If they operate to/from a 24 hr airport like BNE or Mel then the turnaround times can be optimised to suit the commercial situation, rather than being driven by the curfew.
A slot is a slot, when talking about movements in and out of the major cities... You can send an A380 or a SAAB340, it doesn't matter.
Daily Round trip to Hong Kong can be achieved with one unit, depending on departure times, i think Qantas do it with their A330s when they operate to/from Hong Kong?
Beijing daily return would require 2 units, but with possibility for the unit that after its arrived in OZ, to do a tran con return sector, to be ready for next day departure to Beijing.
Beijing daily return would require 2 units, but with possibility for the unit that after its arrived in OZ, to do a tran con return sector, to be ready for next day departure to Beijing.
Just wondering if anyone knew why Virgin don't re-brand Tiger to Virgin Blue? Everyone knows the name, trusts it and hasn't been painted with the tainted with the Tiger name that has zero good will or sentiment with the public.
Makes more sense as a whole and if they went back to the fun low cost carrier they used to be renowned for they might actually start enticing a whole heap of people back over from the competition.
Makes more sense as a whole and if they went back to the fun low cost carrier they used to be renowned for they might actually start enticing a whole heap of people back over from the competition.
TigerAir makes money and apparently has very good loads. So what would be the benefit of doing all that?
A slot is a slot, when talking about movements in and out of the major cities... You can send an A380 or a SAAB340, it doesn't matter.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's going to happen here is what hit Qantas in 2005.
TigerAir is the future growth and profit vehicle. Expect the majority of short haul International to be given to Tiger. Virgin will play a token part in a few services to NZ. The Queensland leisure market will be handed to Tiger. Virgin might even keep a few peak hour runs....
The leader has stuffed the strategy and needs to reduce costs. In comes the Tiger.....
TigerAir is the future growth and profit vehicle. Expect the majority of short haul International to be given to Tiger. Virgin will play a token part in a few services to NZ. The Queensland leisure market will be handed to Tiger. Virgin might even keep a few peak hour runs....
The leader has stuffed the strategy and needs to reduce costs. In comes the Tiger.....
Yep, JB is just replicating the QF strategy a decade after they've done it.
It's sad. VB should have stuck to the virgin mantra of value for money delivered in a cheeky and light hearted fashion. They could have eaten JQ, as JQ is about bums on seats with zero brand loyalty. It's not cool to fly JQ. It was to fly VB. Especially with those button up blouses and backpackers from the motherland on secondment.
People fly QF for status, which is why they get extra yield. They want to be seen in the lounge. They want QF club bag tags. Gold frequent flyer tassles sprinkled around appropriately.
People don't fly VA for status. So when the ticket is VA or JQ, and JQ is cheaper, JQ gets the nod. Tiger is clawing for a fight, but twin pillar strategy of QF isn't letting them in.
If the foreign shareholders where not trying to play chess with each other through VA, it would have withered already.
It's sad. VB should have stuck to the virgin mantra of value for money delivered in a cheeky and light hearted fashion. They could have eaten JQ, as JQ is about bums on seats with zero brand loyalty. It's not cool to fly JQ. It was to fly VB. Especially with those button up blouses and backpackers from the motherland on secondment.
People fly QF for status, which is why they get extra yield. They want to be seen in the lounge. They want QF club bag tags. Gold frequent flyer tassles sprinkled around appropriately.
People don't fly VA for status. So when the ticket is VA or JQ, and JQ is cheaper, JQ gets the nod. Tiger is clawing for a fight, but twin pillar strategy of QF isn't letting them in.
If the foreign shareholders where not trying to play chess with each other through VA, it would have withered already.
People don't fly VA for status. So when the ticket is VA or JQ, and JQ is cheaper, JQ gets the nod. Tiger is clawing for a fight, but twin pillar strategy of QF isn't letting them in.
JB has made mistakes but I think this thread is not giving enough (any) credit to the fact QF has done a decent job of countering VA's move into the premium market.
I'm now off to have a shower, I feel dirty after complimenting AJ and his management team!