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

An 'amazing' revelation

Old 1st Nov 2017, 03:53
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,873
You are sort of right angryrat. It plies it's trade through Copenhagen, Manchester, London and Bangkok. The slave masters still seem to like the bar behind J class.
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2017, 05:35
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Pissing contests aside, the 380 will trundle on for most operators as a niche machine, Don is spot on, its a mass people mover in either capacity or slot constrained airports. It hasnít as was hoped by Toulouse revolutionised travel, itís merely eaten a lot of European taxes and its proven to be in the wider sense a sales disappointment, having said that, itís a nice experience to travel on but now people are used to it per se the premium that has been charged which helped with yields has slipped somewhat.
When you can fill it up with full fare passengers it makes money, get below about 75-80% LF and it burns through any profit real quick.
haughtney1 is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2017, 14:18
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: meh
Posts: 660
what a idiot. you can't fly two airplanes behind each other. the jet wash would be to strong.
Plazbot is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2017, 14:29
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by downdata View Post
Maybe because you have to pay for the goddamn aircrafts in the first place?

The same reason why everyone don't already own an electric car even when the cost per mile is less than 10%(!!!!) of a petrol/diesel engine?
No such thing as 'aircrafts' the plural is 'aircraft'. Just sayin'
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2017, 14:23
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,931
Papabellum,
Quite so, my omission, and it looks like one of the soon to be ex-SQ A-380s will have the doubtful distinction of being the first one "parted out".
At least there is still a small secondary marked, for freighter conversion, for the B747.

Haughtny1
I would agree, but the city pairs with that kind of slot constraint make for a very limited market.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2017, 21:34
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 384
Lufthansa are about to park one, that they lease and it is going to be parted out.

I always thought they A380 was designed to get around the limited slots at Heathrow.
CharlieLimaX-Ray is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2017, 22:53
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by CharlieLimaX-Ray View Post
Lufthansa are about to park one, that they lease and it is going to be parted out.

I always thought they A380 was designed to get around the limited slots at Heathrow.
Etihad and Qatar bought them for this sole purpose, they only took a dozen of them. They only fly them to slot or restricted rights airports like Heathrow, Sydney, JFK, Bangkok, Paris.

The onboard product is absolutely sensational from those two. Singapore is about to upgrade the A380 to match Etihads standard which would be the best first class product in the sky.

Meanwhile Qantas does diddly squat. They still haven’t given me a reason to fly them, it’s been 10 years since I flew them overseas.
PoppaJo is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2017, 18:34
  #28 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 1,922
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom View Post
If you replace one large aircraft with 2 smaller ones, won't you need twice the number of crew?
From the same article the reason he can make such a comment is he has made big cuts in staff costs. Look at the articles from last year the crew had to undertake a pay freeze and sign up for 30% lower than the 744 rates to get the 787.

ďObviously the maintenance and fuel costs are good on the 787, but we also have a deal with our pilots to give ourselves 30% more productivity on the airplane," Joyce said. "It's the same deal with the cabin crews and our engineers. That means the economics are a lot better than the A380."

So there you have it, he has said the economics are better than the A380 because he cut the staff costs.
swh is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2017, 21:46
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by swh View Post
From the same article the reason he can make such a comment is he has made big cuts in staff costs. Look at the articles from last year the crew had to undertake a pay freeze and sign up for 30% lower than the 744 rates to get the 787.

ďObviously the maintenance and fuel costs are good on the 787, but we also have a deal with our pilots to give ourselves 30% more productivity on the airplane," Joyce said. "It's the same deal with the cabin crews and our engineers. That means the economics are a lot better than the A380."

So there you have it, he has said the economics are better than the A380 because he cut the staff costs.
Now thatís just bullshit right there.

I love this 30% figure plucked from the fundamental orifice.

Itís certainly lower than the 747 rate. As it always should have been given remuneration has historically been based on the size of the aircraft.

Fact is, the dollars on the 787 are a lot better than the similarly sized 767 and ball park on the 330. Given the A330 was itself based on 747-300 plus 3% then it was an aberration anyway.

Just because AJ spruiks bullsh1t to keep the media happy does not make it a fact.
IsDon is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 01:48
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 572
Perhaps he should have been a little more specific: BOLD is my addition to the original quote.
but we also have a deal with our pilots to give ourselves up to 30% more productivity on the airplane, dependant upon sector length.

Note, the vertical scale has been removed, focus on the gap between the two lines. Should the B787 end up doing <14 flight time, his statement is far less credible.


LONG HAUL EBA 9 EXPLANATORY DOCUMENT 18/06/2015, p82

This document is still available from the AIPA website, alternatively a link was emailed on 18 June 15.

Last edited by CurtainTwitcher; 5th Nov 2017 at 01:26. Reason: quote
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 02:57
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 376
Originally Posted by Kiwithrottlejockey View Post
Why do you think Air New Zealand dumped the last of their four-engine airliners?


It ain't exactly rocket science.
No, but it's very close to it given it's both science and economics relating to gas turbines
Dragun is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 04:10
  #32 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,406
"Ultimately we never lost confidence that the 787 was almost the perfect aircraft for Air New Zealand with long routes and relatively small traffic numbers. I think it will prove for Christopher and the team a real economic game changer."
Former Air New Zealand CEO Rob Fyfe in JULY 2014...

Ultimately Mr Joyce will never look east for 'airline comparison purposes', as Air New Zealand is way ahead of Qantas.

Taking at face value Mr Joyce's comments is mainstream media procedure. He is never challenged. Sadly QF pilots bought a growth story for the 787 too..It was never a growth story it was a substitution.

Crew cost reductions are the boast, but the real advantage of the 787 is two fold; much lower fuel included CASK and in pulling capacity from the market a better yield premium is possible as a 747/A380 is replaced with a 787
Rated De is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 04:57
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 954
A lot of J seats on the qf 789s. Obviously hoping for that yield... To sub 2 of them for a 380; that makes for a lot of J seats to get that yield. Possible pipe dream... Just hope they don't totally fork the company
maggot is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 06:33
  #34 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,406
To sub 2 of them for a 380; that makes for a lot of J seats to get that yield. Possible pipe dream... Just hope they don't totally fork the company 5th Nov 2017 05:10
Sadly that ship may have sailed, the push of JQ to the max has had little tangible impact. None of their franchises return anything and JQ Asia is still hidden in JQ segment. Share your sentiment regarding J yield. Who remember Red Q, an airline to be based in Singapore, err no Malaysia err...

JQ HK, an airline in one of the world's most expensive cities, lacking the necessary requisites to meet the law of the land with respect to ownership, then partnered with Stanley and Patsie, perhaps not the best company to keep. Hastily abandoned and never spoken of again.


Dubai cost QF lots of passengers, BITRE data shows it clearly, a nett loss of circa 400,000 passengers from QF metal in the first year. No change to any revenue, as indicated on another thread, it appears that Qantas got nothing..Now a return to Singapore is seen as an advance?

A three billion bailout, then a recanting, only to be 'transformed' and no media ask the question, was this the same Qantas that was 'terminal' in 2011? Personal riches from an interesting 'transformation' and no one, not even the regulator asks a cursory question.

The rising tide lifts all boats, hopefully the economy doesn't sag or a hasty refit of the 787 will be necessary...

The company I keep is asking the question is how long will Perth London exist, before 'customer preferences' re-route the aircraft to Singapore?

I applaud the audacity of Mr Joyce but many outside Australia are glad he is in charge at Qantas.
Rated De is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 19:37
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 572
“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”

― Alberto Brandolini

The Unbearable Asymmetry of Bullshit. Recognise anyone?
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 19:45
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 47
Posts: 13
Well, AJ will have two 787 soon enough. ZNB rolled off the end of the Everett production line either late Wednesday or early Thursday PST. Either the Everett Delivery Centre is a bit full, or there were too many travelling jobs still to do, because it was still sitting North of the bridge all day.
unexplained blip is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 21:26
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Perth
Posts: 10
I know what he meant but it is not what he said. Can you even fly " tail to tail".?
Chasco175 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 02:00
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,767
The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it
Prune quote of the week!!
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 02:41
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,406
From memory about half the floors in QCA? Is that still the rock under which they hide?

Nearly a floor of them in Waterside, a bulldust castle for BA. Although they hot desk it to keep pest controllers guessing, they have spread like any other insect..

No risk on the weekends, public holidays etc as the empire is on days off!

Nuking it from orbit is the only way to be sure!

Last edited by Rated De; 6th Nov 2017 at 06:48. Reason: apologies for incorrect language!
Rated De is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2017, 07:03
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: International
Age: 72
Posts: 1,172
unexplained blip:
The contract delivery date for ZNB is 1 December. Lots of formalities both technical and commercial before the release by Boeing and the acceptance by Qantas.
B772 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.