Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

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

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

Old 1st May 2018, 17:56
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 265
6 73 FO positions offered to eligible pilots under MOU. (Employed at JQ Nov 04 or earlier)
Iron Bar is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 21:27
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the Trees
Posts: 144
Canít see a huge uptake of this from JQ pilots, most of that vintage are either 787 CPís or senior 320 CPís. Why come over and be flogged on the maggot for significantly less coin?
For the hope of staying at mainline?maybe, but at the seniority numbers they come in at they, like all new hire pilots getting quick slots on the 737 operation, will be waiting around 10 years before they see a wide body FO slot, and east coast command ????
With all that is going on here lately Iím beginning to appreciate why a number of pilots that left here to go to J* on LWOP stayed there!

and yes, Qantas does need a new fleet, but Iím starting to feel itís not mainline pilots in the current form that will be doing the flying.

Last edited by ANCDU; 1st May 2018 at 21:31. Reason: fat thumb!!
ANCDU is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 22:18
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 201
Only pilots eligible for the MOU could go, and they could only fill the JQ MOU slots on the QF list. However, those 6 slots were withdrawn as the MOU only specified command positions. No FO. Itís entirely plausible that JQ FOís have been offered what you said, but it would still mean going through the recruitment process, and the seniority number would be the next one available on the list (somewhere around 2300).

Currently the JQ MOU slots are at the level where youíd get a 737 FO anywhere, or a PER 330 FO. But as I said, MOU was intended for command only.
goodonyamate is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 22:24
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 873
Anyone else see parallels with the banking RC?

Another day, another damning indictment. Commonwealth Bankís culture has been found to be blinded by its own profitability, ruled by an incestuous mates club too chummy to challenge or escalate problems and too many snouts in the trough taking generous remuneration packages despite serious customer failings.
CBA is not, in my experience, the worst, but I could level almost all the same comments Iíve seen made in recent weeks at Qfís atrocious Ďmanagementí.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 1st May 2018, 23:50
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 406
Only pilots eligible for the MOU could go, and they could only fill the JQ MOU slots on the QF list. However, those 6 slots were withdrawn as the MOU only specified command positions. No FO.
I think you may be a bit off there.

Previously there were some JQ pilots awarded MOU positions as S/O but the contract only allowed for a move to F/O or Capt so the positions were revoked.

I donít know about this latest offer but Iím pretty sure they are permitted to take F/O positions. Whether anyone would want to is a very different matter.
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 00:25
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 48
Just announced in ausbt additional 6 787-9s to be ordered for QF
Airbus A320321 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 00:50
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by Airbus A320321 View Post
Just announced in ausbt additional 6 787-9s to be ordered for QF
from the official Qantas announcement,

FLEET UPDATE

The Qantas Group has today announced an order for six additional Boeing 787-9s. This will take Qantas Internationalís Dreamliner fleet to 14 by end of calendar year 2020 and will enable the accelerated retirement of its last six 747s5. (See separate release.)

The 787-9 is around 20 per cent more fuel efficient than the 747 and has significantly lower maintenance costs6. Combined with the airlineís A380s, A330s and 737s, the additional 787s will allow for further utilisation improvements to the Qantas International network.

The first of these additional 787-9s is due to arrive in the first half of FY20. There is no change to capital expenditure guidance for FY18 and FY19.

Our strong performance allows us to invest in more Dreamliners, which are a lot more efficient than the 747s they replace and give our customers a better experience. They also open up new network options and will be an important part of our success moving forward,Ē Mr Joyce added

Foxxster is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 00:54
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 1,545
Question

Originally Posted by Airbus A320321 View Post
Just announced in ausbt additional 6 787-9s to be ordered for QF
Yep, 6 787s to replace the last 6 747s.
Anyone see a problem with this, pax numbers wise?
Tankengine is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:03
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Tankengine View Post

Yep, 6 787s to replace the last 6 747s.
Anyone see a problem with this, pax numbers wise?
From employee Q&As

Whatís the impact on capacity of 236 seats on the 787 vs 364 seats on the 747?
The capacity reduction will be limited because our 787s have less down time for maintenance, so will be flying more. And with a fleet of 14 787s weíll be able to pattern them a lot more efficiently.


ilikecheese is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:19
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Posts: 137
This reduction in capacity is an absolute game changer!
Jeps is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:25
  #271 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,552
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher View Post
Hypothetical questions are raised in my mind. Why can't the soon to be ex JQ A320's be sold on the second hand market instead of being rolled into Network? Is it likely there a difference between the book value & the achievable resale value? If there is a difference, could this be the the source of the capital issues?

Lots of assumptions in those thought bubbles, just musing.
Very good points.
There is a crossover where old versus new is considered necessary, a large input in the consideration is the fuel price.
Simply put if fuel is cheap enough, it makes sense to hold on to older aircraft, despite supposed higher maintenance and operating costs.

With the IATA required reductions in CO2 difficult to achieve with the current fleet metrics, fleet renewal was increasingly obvious.
The fact that the RPK costs 64% more to deliver across the Pacific is empirically relevant when considering the relative urgency of the renewal.
It may well be, contango in the fuel price and an increase in the cost of capital forced their hand.
We were prepared to consider the narrative of RealityCzech with the caveat that they 'didn't' need a fleet renewal if fuel price was low. We surmise that the narrative of Relaityczech is more an industrial theme that has been used many times before. Qantas has demonstrated a liking for fear and doubt. Scaring the staff is an airline management preoccupation. Effectively QED, Qantas needed a new fleet.

Effectively a book value of zero represents the accountant perception. Depreciation schedules vary enormously from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Economic life in an asset is a different metric.

Given the current JQ fleet of A320 are older and may in most jurisdictional contexts have a close to zero book valu,e perhaps the only place they can go realistically is into yet another subsidiary?
Rated De is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:26
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 873
Jeps: When too much reduction is barely enough!

RD: Why ‘Aged’ A320’s ‘forced’ into another entity? Repeat the depreciation process? If they are ‘sold’ isn’t there a corresponding profit negating benefits? Sorry to seem obtuse...

Fundamentally I understand the need for accounting ‘practices’ (as my accountants bill attests, I use enough myself) but I have issues when companies devote more time to a ‘perfect’ accounting position than operating the business.


V-Jet is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:40
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 941
Originally Posted by Tankengine View Post

Yep, 6 787s to replace the last 6 747s.
Anyone see a problem with this, pax numbers wise?

Its all about the yield , make the punters pay more for the same.

Last edited by dragon man; 2nd May 2018 at 01:50.
dragon man is online now  
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:45
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by ilikecheese View Post


From employee Q&As

What’s the impact on capacity of 236 seats on the 787 vs 364 seats on the 747?
The capacity reduction will be limited because our 787s have less down time for maintenance, so will be flying more. And with a fleet of 14 787s we’ll be able to pattern them a lot more efficiently.



beaaahaaahaaaaaaaaaaa!

What is is about “daily services” that they don’t understand?!
Tankengine is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:04
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Somewhere on the Australian Coast
Posts: 869
Originally Posted by Tankengine View Post
Anyone see a problem with this, pax numbers wise?
According to the FAQs because the 787s require less maintenance they'll be able to fly more passengers. Not sure how that works given the 747s pretty much arrive everywhere and turnaround and depart immediately after (except for HND) but I'm no genius.

Reckon the training system's under pressure now? This announcement has just dropped AT LEAST 260 additional movements (minus a few inevitable retirements) in to the system in the next two and a half years. That's roughly 10 a month on average, more if the RIN results in displacements and further residuals. Not sure how the system will cope. Not well, would be my conclusion at this point.
DirectAnywhere is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 04:36
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 64
Posts: 340
Be interesting to see how the RIN from this pans out. Obviously some will go to the 787, but a high percentage would have the numbers to displace from the 380.
mrdeux is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 04:51
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Dubai
Posts: 18
What will happen to the Santiago and Joburg flights with no 747's? Also will this be a significant down gauge on the Pacific routes currently operated by 747's? Whatever new routes the additional 787's explore will surely be a reduction in existing routes operated by 747's. You can't have it both ways.
redkite1 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 04:52
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 201
Smile

Originally Posted by Beer Baron View Post

I think you may be a bit off there.

Previously there were some JQ pilots awarded MOU positions as S/O but the contract only allowed for a move to F/O or Capt so the positions were revoked.

I don’t know about this latest offer but I’m pretty sure they are permitted to take F/O positions. Whether anyone would want to is a very different matter.
Thanks BB, I knew it was something like that

Be interesting to see how the RIN from this pans out. Obviously some will go to the 787, but a high percentage would have the numbers to displace from the 380.
I dare say quite a few crew will disappear with the old girl.
goodonyamate is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 04:57
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 49
Posts: 106
My bet is zero chance of the ER's to be gone by 2020. Think back to the Classic and how long they hung around, so Zero chance.

But it looks good on paper to the market stating that they are getting rid of those expensive pesky gas guzzlers.
This morning Sky Business were talking oil to potentially spike through $100per barrel by years end so if this becomes reality QF have been smart pre-empting the market by this news. If the oil price doesn't come to fruition then they lose nothing and can potentially extend the ER's life expectancy.

Sometimes things aren't always black and white.
OnceBitten is offline  
Old 2nd May 2018, 05:44
  #280 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,552
This morning Sky Business were talking oil to potentially spike through $100per barrel by years end so if this becomes reality QF have been smart pre-empting the market by this news.
Literally most of the 600 787 airliners flying have been protecting their operators from rising fuel included CASK for the last five years!
Sorry we politely disagree, pre-emptive it is not. Any oil industry analyst has been warning that contango is very much part of the term structure of crude oil pricing for the last 12 months. Qantas are forward hedging fuel, but they are hedging into a bigger headwind.
The point of this thread is that they have been way behind on this issue having only been spared because of the low fuel prices, which now is accepted are no longer so low.

Qantas need a new fleet.

Last edited by Rated De; 2nd May 2018 at 05:56.
Rated De 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.