TT 737 Fleet
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: aintsaying
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aww...common you pilots.......
Who cares about the Tigerair staff and BAE staff who improved the on-time performance of the airline to beat all the other Austrtalian airlines?
Those staff who did their bit to make things better only to be sh**t on by VA who want to dump smaller less efficient aircraft onto Tigerair.
No comment from you DEC entry Pilots??????
NO....Nothing????
Who cares about the Tigerair staff and BAE staff who improved the on-time performance of the airline to beat all the other Austrtalian airlines?
Those staff who did their bit to make things better only to be sh**t on by VA who want to dump smaller less efficient aircraft onto Tigerair.
No comment from you DEC entry Pilots??????
NO....Nothing????
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: aintsaying
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The 737 is more efficient?"
Yes, a smaller fuselage diameter, smaller galley, smaller flight deck, on the 737, then yes I must agree the 737 is more efficient.
But how long before the general public wakes up and realise VA has dumped older 737's on to tiger air?....you know...smaller seat pitch.....
And when tigerair's on time departure drops as they leave the current maintenance provider, then what? Who cares? yes?No?(you know.......it drops to match VA's departure rate).
OK, thanks for your informative post, I was not aware the 737 was more efficient than the A320.
I guess lease rates must be cheaper........................
Yes, a smaller fuselage diameter, smaller galley, smaller flight deck, on the 737, then yes I must agree the 737 is more efficient.
But how long before the general public wakes up and realise VA has dumped older 737's on to tiger air?....you know...smaller seat pitch.....
And when tigerair's on time departure drops as they leave the current maintenance provider, then what? Who cares? yes?No?(you know.......it drops to match VA's departure rate).
OK, thanks for your informative post, I was not aware the 737 was more efficient than the A320.
I guess lease rates must be cheaper........................
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to see the strings attached to that contract.
I've seen it done before with new companies introducing new types. Pilots get the free type rating on the new type do few months, resign and head to the competition (Jetstar) who are currently in need of experienced Pilots!
Makes the logbook look a bit brighter I guess!
I've seen it done before with new companies introducing new types. Pilots get the free type rating on the new type do few months, resign and head to the competition (Jetstar) who are currently in need of experienced Pilots!
Makes the logbook look a bit brighter I guess!
As I understand it, older ones go to TT as the lease costs are significantly lower than the new ones. The older ones have their advantages! I'd say the only "advantage" from a pilot perspective is ACARS which might be retrofitted at some stage.
As for reliability, I can say that either old or new, I've found that we hardly ever have an MEL and even rarer is an inflight fault. Leaves every other multicrew type I've flown for dead.
F50, Ejet, A320 all great airplanes but ultimately the business decided on the 73 regardless of pax/pilot perception. I think the 73 fleet has consistently made money since day dot for QF and VB/A. Ultimately even if the above were better it would be a total nightmare to convert all the 73 pilots to another narrow body.
Atlas, I think with the conversion being the entire fleet now, TT Fo's will gain experience and upgrade. Contractors? 73 being the most common type on the planet should be too hard to find someone to come down under for 18 months before they head off to China!
As for reliability, I can say that either old or new, I've found that we hardly ever have an MEL and even rarer is an inflight fault. Leaves every other multicrew type I've flown for dead.
F50, Ejet, A320 all great airplanes but ultimately the business decided on the 73 regardless of pax/pilot perception. I think the 73 fleet has consistently made money since day dot for QF and VB/A. Ultimately even if the above were better it would be a total nightmare to convert all the 73 pilots to another narrow body.
Atlas, I think with the conversion being the entire fleet now, TT Fo's will gain experience and upgrade. Contractors? 73 being the most common type on the planet should be too hard to find someone to come down under for 18 months before they head off to China!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: AKL
Age: 34
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atlas, I think with the conversion being the entire fleet now, TT Fo's will gain experience and upgrade.
aintsaying:
Not sure what you are getting at here. Everything I have read tells me that the cabin length of a 738 is longer than an A320. So it either fits more seats, (more efficient) or allows greater seat pitch for the same passengers.
Either way, passengers fly on Tiger based on price. I'd be amazed if there were more than a handful of passengers who suddenly choose not to fly on Tiger because they swap to 737's.
But how long before the general public wakes up and realise VA has dumped older 737's on to tiger air?....you know...smaller seat pitch.....
Either way, passengers fly on Tiger based on price. I'd be amazed if there were more than a handful of passengers who suddenly choose not to fly on Tiger because they swap to 737's.
aintsaying:
Not sure what you are getting at here. Everything I have read tells me that the cabin length of a 738 is longer than an A320. So it either fits more seats, (more efficient) or allows greater seat pitch for the same passengers.
Either way, passengers fly on Tiger based on price. I'd be amazed if there were more than a handful of passengers who suddenly choose not to fly on Tiger because they swap to 737's.
Not sure what you are getting at here. Everything I have read tells me that the cabin length of a 738 is longer than an A320. So it either fits more seats, (more efficient) or allows greater seat pitch for the same passengers.
Either way, passengers fly on Tiger based on price. I'd be amazed if there were more than a handful of passengers who suddenly choose not to fly on Tiger because they swap to 737's.
I liked the bit where Tiger was the most on time airline in Australia.
cavemanzk, ANZ from what I hear are a top outfit to work for so it would come down to what you want long term.
Certainly it wouldn't be easy 320 to 737 for similar money initially. The command could open some big doors however. My mates on the 320 at JQ cringe at the 73. Lol!
Certainly it wouldn't be easy 320 to 737 for similar money initially. The command could open some big doors however. My mates on the 320 at JQ cringe at the 73. Lol!
