So you need a new fleet Leigh?

[DirectAnywhere]

Originally Posted by mrdeux

At the pay rate of the lowest aircraft of course.

That goes without saying! Derfred, I think the pilots have something they want, particularly given training forecasts over the next few years. To give it up and force longer type freezes and fleet pay, the rest of the package/s need to be good enough. There are potentially very big dollars at stake here fo the company. CCQ aircraft could complicate matters but there is still a huge churn between SH and LH as SH is the only place to get an upgrade and LH is the place for $$ and lifestyle.

[Rated De]

With WTI crude pipping USD$71.69, oil just topped AUD$96.00. Since the start of April oil prices (hence Jet fuel) is up in the order of 10%.
Geopolitical risk aside, China's recent foray into Yuan denominated oil contracts and clear patterns of increasing consumption suggest further contango in oil prices, Qantas may wish they were permitted more hedging latitude when fuel was considerably cheaper.

Qantas hedging into FY18-19 may be significantly more expensive, and hedging discretion is only 40% of forecast demand outside 12 months. Those 787 orders may be needed sooner than later...

Qantas need a new fleet

[knobbycobby]

The 787 EA is now being exposed for its many flaws.
The 787 had a very high chance of replacing the 747. So now a situation exists where 747 pilots could get sent to the 787 on far less pay/conditions regardless of going to year 4 pay. Quite possibly the mooted RIN will never happen and it's just another mind game to lessen conditions for the third time in a row.
AIPA and the Qantas projections showed lots of Asia flying which would of lessened the effects of losing overtime and night credits. The long tours of duty that the 787 is currently flying was not disclosed.
Simply put the 787 is a long haul 747 replacement type. Slim chance of a growth type.
The company very successfully played SH vs LH and in the end pilots simply took a knife to their own pay and conditions. Very sad to see especially when the full bench of FWA ruled the contract as fair and reasonable. The Short Haul award deserves to be better without question. Sabotaging something adequate because something else is inadequate is just another self imposed race to the bottom.Collective representation should resist collective stupidity. Collective stupidity, Stockholm syndrome and group think is now Collective representation.
Long Haul flying is different with very long trips away from family, a majority of fatiguing night flying and constant jet lag. The protections in the contract provided for these differences.Trade offs in pay in the past provided such. Instead of protecting them for when pilots eventually move to the various types, pilots self sabotaged. Early starts,multi sectors and long duty days are no less challenging. AIPA should be aiming to lift all boats given the shortage.Short Haul just like LH many years ago need to better working conditions. Those that attack their own by slagging off SH vs LH just show how easily manipulated they are by IR strategy.
Doing a 19.5 hour all night duty from Perth to London is not something I would wish on my worst enemy.
The cabin crew union were smart enough to provide protections if anyone had to move to a new fleet via top-up pay.
Let us hope in a time of record bonuses, profits and pilot shortages AIPA and therefore it's pilots show some intelligence and some backbone when the A380 goes and a new type does nothing but "double sunrise" duties of 24 hours from one side of the planet to another. Same for the SH EBA.
Concessions, panicking and comfort letters do not inspire confidence.
Whilst I have a dislike for IR, HR and the mind games they play on pilots, they have played pilots for scared fools and have outplayed AIPA too. If AIPA were to run a survey on their impressions of a comfort letter I'm sure they would not like what they would see.
Not many work groups that are in a global shortage have conceded so much time and time again.
If pilots continue to go backward in boom times then god help us all.
Or maybe Alan is worth his 30 million?

[dragon man]

Originally Posted by knobbycobby

The 787 EA is now being exposed for its many flaws.
The 787 had a very high chance of replacing the 747. So now a situation exists where 747 pilots could get sent to the 787 on far less pay/conditions regardless of going to year 4 pay. Quite possibly the mooted RIN will never happen and it's just another mind game to lessen conditions for the third time in a row.
AIPA and the Qantas projections showed lots of Asia flying which would of lessened the effects of losing overtime and night credits. The long tours of duty that the 787 is currently flying was not disclosed.
Simply put the 787 is a long haul 747 replacement type. Slim chance of a growth type.
The company very successfully played SH vs LH and in the end pilots simply took a knife to their own pay and conditions. Very sad to see especially when the full bench of FWA ruled the contract as fair and reasonable. The Short Haul award deserves to be better without question. Sabotaging something adequate because something else is inadequate is just another self imposed race to the bottom.Collective representation should resist collective stupidity. Collective stupidity, Stockholm syndrome and group think is now Collective representation.
Long Haul flying is different with very long trips away from family, a majority of fatiguing night flying and constant jet lag. The protections in the contract provided for these differences.Trade offs in pay in the past provided such. Instead of protecting them for when pilots eventually move to the various types, pilots self sabotaged. Early starts,multi sectors and long duty days are no less challenging. AIPA should be aiming to lift all boats given the shortage.Short Haul just like LH many years ago need to better working conditions. Those that attack their own by sproting off SH vs LH just show how easily manipulated they are by IR strategy.
Doing a 19.5 hour all night duty from Perth to London is not something I would wish on my worst enemy.
The cabin crew union were smart enough to provide protections if anyone had to move to a new fleet via top-up pay.
Let us hope in a time of record bonuses, profits and pilot shortages AIPA and therefore it's pilots show some intelligence and some backbone when the A380 goes and a new type does nothing but "double sunrise" duties of 24 hours from one side of the planet to another. Same for the SH EBA.
Concessions, panicking and comfort letters do not inspire confidence.
Whilst I have a dislike for IR, HR and the mind games they play on pilots, they have played pilots for scared fools and have outplayed AIPA too. If AIPA were to run a survey on their impressions of a comfort letter I'm sure they would not like what they would see.
Not many work groups that are in a global shortage have conceded so much time and time again.
If pilots continue to go backward in boom times then god help us all.
Or maybe Alan is worth his 30 million?

Well written post, if there is a RIN with no VR on the 747 it will be a blood bath. By my reckoning at least 30 A380 Captains will be bumped, followed by 787 Captains etc etc. The training system can’t even cope now it will go into melt down with a RIN. As only Qantas can do well the right hand wasn’t talking to the left foot.

[Beer Baron]

To put a slightly rosier picture out there.

It’s worth remembering that since the 787 EA was signed up to, of the 15 airframe orders that have come due, 14 have been taken up. (The one skipped is apparently still available)

There has been no indication that the next tranch will not be taken up next year.

I have also heard rumour (this is a rumour network right?) that the Project Sunrise order due in 2019 will include a some non-ULR models of the selected aircraft type for delivery closer to 2020. These aircraft will replace the outgoing 744’s on certain routes.

And finally, given most 787 patterns I have looked at are built on MDC, the lack of night credits is having very little effect at this early stage. This will be true of the upcoming BNE-LAX-JFK patterns also. Beyond that, who knows.

[knobbycobby]

Beer Baron.
The A380 Replacement will do nothing but Sydney London and Sydney New York and Sydney Rio or equivalent.
Alan Joyce was clear in a presentation to the ASX.Its a double sunrise 23-24 hour TOD machine.
The 787 Perth London patterns are not MDC, Nor are any of the Los Angeles patterns.
Also told 787 crews will NOT slip in JFK but fly LAX-JFK-LAX in one return 3-4 pilot so as to avoid MDC. AIPA did not include the 787 to have a two day slip requirement in JFK.
The trip length has to be at least over 7 days, really 8-9 for the MDC to be higher than the stick hours.
The loss of night credits is why the 787 loses on the majority of patterns, not to mention zero overtime. The hourly rate increase never equals the equivalent loss of overtime or night credit for pattern credit in the take home pay.Bigger number sounds good though.
If it did some Asia flying it may mitigate the loss somewhat but it does not.
I suspect due to to ETOPS restrictions the 747 will hang around longer. SYD-JNB and SYD-SCL won't be able to be flown by 787 as far as I can see currently. I don't think QF would have checked this with flight ops.Sure a bag of cash, some Chairmans lounge memberships and some First upgrades may change it in time.
As others have wisely commented, A RIN only functions properly in a slowdown.Even then it is a disaster. Training is at max, retirements are increasing so a RIN will be a nightmare for QF in that environment.Feel for the Allocations department and the training section.
747s owe nothing, are refurbished and the newest ERs are not that old.
As ex classic crews will tell you its not over till it is over.

[Beer Baron]

I find it a little amusing that you use Alan Joyce's statement to discredit the rumour I mentioned but in the same post you say that the future fleet plans he has announced almost certainly wont occur. So do we believe him or not??

The 787 Perth London patterns are not MDC, Nor are any of the Los Angeles patterns.

Have you looked at the patterns??
Many of the London patterns are crewed from the east coast and all of those attract MDC. Of the 49 LAX pattern codes all but 4 are built on MDC and all of the PER-MEL patterns are MDC. Some of these factors will change as more crew are trained and the fleet increases but these are the facts on the ground now. As you say, if 787 flying to Asia increases the EA proposition improves and given the 744 flies to Hong Kong and Tokyo it's a good chance that will happen.

Also told 787 crews will NOT slip in JFK but fly LAX-JFK-LAX in one return 3-4 pilot so as to avoid MDC. AIPA did not include the 787 to have a two day slip requirement in JFK.

There is nowhere in the EA that varies the slip pattern for JFK flights for the 787.

I do agree with you that the SCL and JNB flights are not best suited to the 787 and I think you will be proven right that the 744 will be here longer than announced. However, these route difficulties are the very reason a 777-8 or A350-800 (with 330 and 370 min ETOPS respectively) would be an ideal addition to the fleet around about 2020.

[C441]

Once the initial line training requirements settle down the MEL-LAX patterns will return to a normal 36 hour transit of LAX - and flight time credits. It would not be surprising to see Melbourne crew doing at least some of the JFK’s too once they start in September; especially after Brisbane-Chicago starts.

The 78 hour transit in London will also probably be reduced to 54 once other European ports come online - more options to protect the operation in the event of diversions.

Most future options around daily services will trend towards flight time credits over time ( or no overtime whichever way you look at it! )

[fearcampaign]

Originally Posted by C441

Once the initial line training requirements settle down the MEL-LAX patterns will return to a normal 36 hour transit of LAX - and flight time credits. It would not be surprising to see Melbourne crew doing at least some of the JFK’s too once they start in September; especially after Brisbane-Chicago starts.

The 78 hour transit in London will also probably be reduced to 54 once other European ports come online - more options to protect the operation in the event of diversions.

Most future options around daily services will trend towards flight time credits over time ( or no overtime whichever way you look at it! )

Well said C441.
MDC is irrelevant on PER-LHR as the stick hours are greater than MDC anyway.
Night credits would have meant more hours for this pattern just as LAX/JNB/DFW on the 747/380/330 where Night credits make duty credit greater than BOTH stick or MDC.
The MEL/LHR 10 day patterns won’t hang around forever as PER base reaches establishment nor will 120 hour slips in LAX.
Its only the long slips that MDC comes into play and they are not a sustainable representation of long term flying.

So Beer Baron are 787 BNE/JFK patterns out? They will have a 2 day slip in JFK and therefore be a 9 day pattern?

[maggot]

Yes JFKs will be planned the same as they currently are on the jumbo. 48/48/48

[blow.n.gasket]

Think you will find that SJ , JFK patterns are 48/48/24 hr slips.

[ExtraShot]

. I do agree with you that the SCL and JNB flights are not best suited to the 787 and I think you will be proven right that the 744 will be here longer than announced

I don’t posses any performance charts / iPad app for the 787, but if anyone does, can it lift 236 bums plus crew and a maybe a bit of freight, fuel for a 11.5 odd hr sector (plus reserves obviously, and let’s add in 60 hold in sydney just because), out of JNB on a 35 degree evening with a light variable breeze ( say, 5 up the tail)?

Same out of SCL with relevant sector length considered?

[Beer Baron]

Once the initial line training requirements settle down the MEL-LAX patterns will return to a normal 36 hour transit of LAX - and flight time credits.

They can't do 36 hours slips because of the schedule. The QF95 gets in at 7pm and you need minimum 32 hours rest so the minimum slip becomes ~ 51 hours. Now consider that from September MEL-LAX will become only 2 days per week and MEL-SFO 4 days per week. That means that when you are ready to operate out in two days time there is no flight that day!
Looking at the schedules I can't see how most slips won't be around 3 days in both LAX and SFO, creating a 6 day pattern paid on MDC. If crew operate MEL-LAX-BNE-MEL (to avoid the long slip) the extra day in BNE pushes a 5 day trip out to 6 days anyway and then MDC exceeds stick hours.

It would not be surprising to see Melbourne crew doing at least some of the JFK’s too once they start in September; especially after Brisbane-Chicago starts.
The 78 hour transit in London will also probably be reduced to 54 once other European ports come online

If MEL crew do some JFK flying it will an 8 day pattern (or more) paid on MDC. And if we start flying to Chicago or additional European ports out of PER..... GREAT!!! That's what we want. Yes, we'll miss out on night credits on those flights but that is exactly the international expansion we have been crying out for. More routes, mean more pilots, mean more promotions and more money for most crew.

I'm just saying it can't hurt to be a little positive. We have all suffered huge damage to our careers at the hands of our current management team but if there are some green shoots appearing lets not be too quick to try and find a downside.

[V-Jet]

Same out of SCL with relevant sector length considered?

Mainly ETOPS issue. Also JNB is 5000' - can be an issue in summer.

[ExtraShot]

Sure, but I thought the (Genex powered) 787 is FAA approved 330min ETOPs, so no different to the 777-8, just no QF approval as yet by CASA (which would be the same for the 777 anyhow...) Shouldn’t be to hard to get sorted with enough experience operating the type.

Im well aware Joburg is 5000 plus feet, that’s why I asked the question re; performance, quoting your typical summer weather for the departure times (at least when I’ve operated there)
Otherwise, I’m not sure why it wouldn’t be a good fit to replace the 747, reduced capacity notwithstanding.

[Keg]

Any reason the Dugong can’t do SYD- JNB- SYD? In a couple of years time they’ll all be through the refit and we should have all 12 available at any one time as opposed to the 10-12 we have now depending on what is getting re-config’d, heavied, etc.

[fearcampaign]

Originally Posted by Keg

Any reason the Dugong can’t do SYD- JNB- SYD? In a couple of years time they’ll all be through the refit and we should have all 12 available at any one time as opposed to the 10-12 we have now depending on what is getting re-config’d, heavied, etc.

Could well do that Keg. On the 747 it’s a 4 day trip worth 32 Credit hours.It is only 25 Stick hours however with night credits it’s increased to 32 hours and got a great density of 7:50. 6 hours overtime too.
The rumour is spare A380s will do SYD-SFO and MEL-HKG. 747 Engineer told me that will become MEL-SIN-LHR soon so who knows. 😉😉
Melbourne premium pax dislike MEL-PER-LHR particularly P class however I can’t see them upsetting the game changer for now. Perhaps one day it switches to a PER to single European destination instead of LHR.

[dragon man]

Yes, the 380 is supposed to be going to Joburg which is to be the last 747 destination. On another note management believe that putting the 787 on JFK will stop all the delays on that service. Smoking something pretty strong me thinks.

[ExtraShot]

Yes, the 380 is supposed to be going to Joburg which is to be the last 747 destination

I have little doubt this was the plan back when the 380 was ordered, but do you reckon it still is?

I’m not sure I see it. The current direction for QF seems to be the pursuit of Yield premiums and the minimization of excess capacity (note the almost complete lack of excess capacity QF currently has from AUS to UK).

The A380 on the JNB route would have 100-150 excess seats every day, based on what I’ve heard the current loads are (happy to be corrected). That’s a very risky ~12 tonne an hour, especially in an environment where some analysts are expecting Oil to start rising toward US$100 a barrel in the next 18 months or so.

I wrote elsewhere what I thought the plan for JNB possibly might be... the 787s replacing the 6 weekly 747s out of Sydney, and the ‘proposed’ 4 weekly 330s out of Perth making up the lost capacity. This would have the added benefit of enabling the destination to be served 10 times a week rather than the current 6, whilst improving connections to/from around the country, where Sydney is a backtrack or inconvenient in comparison. It also allows for an easy reduction in services when the next downturn occurs, without necessarily sacrificing daily access in and out of JNB.

A couple of potential issues with this are sorting out the conflict with Perth Airport over Terminal use, and whether the 787 can reliably take a full load of punters back to Sydney year round (I’d be surprised if it couldn’t), but I think it might be more likely than the 380 taking it over.

[blow.n.gasket]

A380 to JNB , will be an interesting exercise considering the complete lack of suitable alternates, and how much DPD Contingency Fuel will have to be loaded for the more southern route ?