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

Qantas non-stop PER to LHR?

Old 18th Dec 2017, 01:46
  #381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: WLG (FORMERLY PER)
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
yes hope it succeeds. But the cynic in me says that if QF had an aircraft that would do SYD/MEL direct to LHR then PER wouldn't have been an option. Hope they keep it going after they get 777X and they can do direct LHR from East Coast.
topend3 is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 02:08
  #382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chad Gates
Is Don
My own personal feeling is that some East Coast based pilots in QF are hoping that if this fails, the aircraft will be transferred back east, bringing with that more opportunities in their base of choice. I think youíd be hard pressed to find a West Coast based pilot with the same defeatist thoughts. Only an opinion.
Yes Chad. Thatís possible. Fact is though that if PER-LHR fails it will probably not result in more airframes for the East coast, but the same number, and no Perth base and a net decrease in aircraft and opportunities.

Iím East coast based but have decided to commute to PER. I would love all 53 aircraft crewed from the East coast but it ainít gonna happen.
IsDon is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 03:34
  #383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can someone please explain to me why it is in anyone’s best interest for the PER-LHR route to fail?
I don't think anyone wants to see it fail. I suspect, what is is going on is more nuanced, an anxiety about the potential TOO fail, and what if it does go wrong. A lot has been staked on this working.

There is precedent, Jetstar Pacific, Jetstar Asia(s) "400 aircraft by 2020", Air Asia X joint venture (forgetting to tell Tony Fernandes), RedQ, Jetstar HKG, Jetstar Japan. None of those ships have really come in. There have been so many announcements & ventures that are going to be the "next greatest thing" anydaynow.

I for one wish it to succeed, but it appears to be a highly complex plan that involves just more than one challenging sector. Everything has to go just right every day to get this right, from LAX to LHR. When it comes to aviation, that increases my anxiety level about the sustainability of the plan and ultimately commercial success.

Sources indicate a recent lightning strike for one of the new 787's, grounding it for 3 days with 50 exit points found. What is plan B here?

He is a legendary storyteller, management by narrative & announcement. Operational success requires more than just good PR skills. The execution has left a trail of wreckage behind, understandably, this history makes people nervous.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 03:51
  #384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 51
Posts: 1,043
Received 110 Likes on 53 Posts
I certainly don’t want to see it fail, would love to see Aussie airlines in former glory.

The skygod comment directly related to the don’t you know who I am comment, well the way I read it smelt of arrogance.....

The ole how do you know a pilot at a party? Don’t worry he will tell you!

And yes thread drift I know skygods are in the minority I just happen to know a few of them.

Great for QF any expansion and will be great to see internal movement!
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 04:21
  #385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 603
Received 62 Likes on 25 Posts
Originally Posted by Global Aviator

The skygod comment directly related to the donít you know who I am comment, well the way I read it smelt of arrogance.....
Sorry, you got that one badly wrong. Letís just say that olí Don wonít be getting too many Christmas cards from QF management and HR types.
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 04:52
  #386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Global Aviator
The skygod comment directly related to the donít you know who I am comment, well the way I read it smelt of arrogance.....
No worries, and I see how it could read that way. No damage done, no egos bruised.
IsDon is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 06:58
  #387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,188
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
I don't think anyone wants to see it fail. I suspect, what is is going on is more nuanced, an anxiety about the potential TOO fail, and what if it does go wrong. A lot has been staked on this working.

There is precedent, Jetstar Pacific, Jetstar Asia(s) "400 aircraft by 2020", Air Asia X joint venture (forgetting to tell Tony Fernandes), RedQ, Jetstar HKG, Jetstar Japan. None of those ships have really come in. There have been so many announcements & ventures that are going to be the "next greatest thing" anydaynow.

I for one wish it to succeed, but it appears to be a highly complex plan that involves just more than one challenging sector. Everything has to go just right every day to get this right, from LAX to LHR. When it comes to aviation, that increases my anxiety level about the sustainability of the plan and ultimately commercial success.

Sources indicate a recent lightning strike for one of the new 787's, grounding it for 3 days with 50 exit points found. What is plan B here?

He is a legendary storyteller, management by narrative & announcement. Operational success requires more than just good PR skills. The execution has left a trail of wreckage behind, understandably, this history makes people nervous.
THIS.

Don't worry don no one could mistake you, your 787 cheerleading is actually refreshing. I was just having a chuckle... Glad your getting a window seat back, in the best airbus Boeing's ever made

Last edited by maggot; 18th Dec 2017 at 08:09.
maggot is online now  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 07:18
  #388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ironically it was 1 April. Singapore replaced by a dubious partnership with Emirates.

  • End of a well established European gateway.
  • Qantas lost over 350,000 passengers in the first year of operations.
  • EK made three times as many passengers.
  • No upside in Operating Revenue- did they actually make anything?
Whilst they grew JQ, convinced of lower labour cost being the only thing that matters, the whole industry moved on without them
  • TWO B787
  • Return to Singapore, an advance to the rear if ever there was one.







There is precedent, Jetstar Pacific, Jetstar Asia(s) "400 aircraft by 2020", Air Asia X joint venture (forgetting to tell Tony Fernandes), RedQ, Jetstar HKG, Jetstar Japan. None of those ships have really come in. There have been so many announcements & ventures that are going to be the "next greatest thing" anydaynow.
IFF the aircraft rolled off the production line 1.5 tonnes lighter, that is not good management, that is luck.


Just as Mr Joyce claims credit for the 'turnaround' any cursory analysis of the profit and loss shows:


By writing off $2.56 billion in the value of the fleet last year, Qantas' bottom line this year looks much better, with a more modest depreciation charge of $1.1 billion. This accounting stroke of a pen has improved Qantas' fiscal performance by $326 million.
And, thanks to Saudi Arabia's King Salman, fuel prices have plunged – improving, with its fuel efficiency drive, Qantas' ledger sheet by $597 million.
With all other expenses largely unchanged, it seems this year's stunning "accelerated transformation" is little more than dumb luck and an accounting exercise.
My sources tell me that the aircraft will likely suffer weather events upon arrival, of sufficient frequency that if not limited by reason of carriage of fuel, will necessitate a rather expeditious diversion to an alternate port as the crew hit hard limits.

Of course regulatory capture and a spent labour representative body may well do the bidding to CASA to extend it beyond a hard 20 hour TOD.




I for one wish it to succeed, but it appears to be a highly complex plan that involves just more than one challenging sector. Everything has to go just right every day to get this right
There is substantial execution risk, a year of consistent operation in all seasons, ought see whether those questioning this route and aircraft are right or wrong.
Rated De is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 07:30
  #389 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,583
Received 11 Likes on 2 Posts
Of course there will be days when the PER-LHR flight won’t make it due LHR wx requirements. Such was the case when the 744 first starting operating SIN- LHR. Of course the long tour of duty is what makes any diversion more complicated than what SIN- LHR ever was. I’m sure this is no surprise to the boffins beavering away on QCC2 to make a go of this route and as late as Friday last week I was discussing this very issue with some of the 787 team. Such issues have long been a feature of various Qantas routes over the years. I’m sure they’ll remain issues into the future with various other routes as well.
Keg is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 08:41
  #390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Lake Como
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can someone please explain to me why it is in anyone’s best interest for the PER-LHR route to fail? If it fails it will undoubtedly mean less 787s which flows on to less recruiting and less progression/promotion within the group.
So if PER-LHR fails it will mean less 787's and QF will keep flogging old 747's burning 10 tonnes an hour until the world's oil supply runs out? Right, good plan!
Lezzeno is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 08:54
  #391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,188
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
It won't fail, by decree if necessary...
maggot is online now  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 19:04
  #392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,317
Received 144 Likes on 69 Posts
IFF the aircraft rolled off the production line 1.5 tonnes lighter, that is not good management, that is luck.
Not really - while there is certainly some variability in the airframe weights between line numbers, it's no where near 1.5 tons on a 787. Rather, the 787 has benefited from aggressive weight reduction programs, such that all current production 787s are similarly 'underweight'.
Current production 747-8F are over 5 tons light than the early production, there has been a similar % improvement on the 787 (especially compared to the first ~20 aircraft which were badly overweight).
tdracer is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2017, 22:08
  #393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,188
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
So lots of practice in building the first 600 or so
Same went for the dugong
maggot is online now  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 06:25
  #394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,268
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
So what are the diversion options at LHR knowing that every aircraft these days has to go into a hold pattern before arrival? STN? LGW? BHX?
crewmeal is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 06:35
  #395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,188
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by crewmeal
So what are the diversion options at LHR knowing that every aircraft these days has to go into a hold pattern before arrival? STN? LGW? BHX?
At the risk of stating the obvious, it depends on the weather. LGW is close enough that there'll pretty much always be gas for it. But it can share the FG issues that LHR will occasionally have by being so close.
Timing is important, it's planned to arrive at 5am iirc, which is mostly traffic holding free. A free pass.
MAN or AMS was carried often when needed when I used to fly up there, or a DPA on the latter or FRA/maybe CDG.
The London basin has many more environment controls these days vastly reducing the airborne pollution that the industrial revolution made seem normal making the old pea souper less of a thing than back in the day.
maggot is online now  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 07:11
  #396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,268
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Then of course you run the risk of crews going out of hours and screwing up the operation completely.
crewmeal is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 07:36
  #397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Lake Como
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Timing is important, it's planned to arrive at 5am
Of course it will never run late so no problems
Lezzeno is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 08:42
  #398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,188
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by Lezzeno
Of course it will never run late so no problems
Heh. Yeah, they would be smart to pour a lot into it to be more on-time than not. But, **** does happen.
maggot is online now  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 16:23
  #399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by crewmeal
So what are the diversion options at LHR knowing that every aircraft these days has to go into a hold pattern before arrival? STN? LGW? BHX?
As others have said timing is everything. Over the last two hours 1400-1600GMT only 20 out of 70 arrivals have been in any form of holding pattern, none of those involved more than a quick 360 degree spin around the holding point - nothing even elongated to the usual racetrack.

My last few diversions from LHR due to fog when returning from down under have been into Manchester, Paris and Frankfurt.
Cremeegg is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2017, 20:11
  #400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,317
Received 144 Likes on 69 Posts
Originally Posted by maggot
So lots of practice in building the first 600 or so
Same went for the dugong
Sorry for the thread drift - but this pattern is quite consistent for new airliners.
Initial aircraft are over initial spec weight - sometimes badly. Air framer launches a big weight loss program - with various incentives to encourage the engineers/designers to shave weight. Program is successful and later aircraft are significantly lighter - often below the spec weight.
Later on, the weight will start going up again as they discover various bits that fail because they made them a bit too light, along with a push to reduce recurring costs by using cheaper processes and/or materials which invariable weigh a bit more.
I've been on four major aircraft programs and they all followed that trend...
tdracer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.