So you need a new fleet Leigh?
I know it’s a very different route however both BA and AF operate 380s to Joburg. I think you will find that if it goes there they will just reduce the frequency further to balance the seat numbers.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes dragon man , no one disputes the A380 can get into Johannesburg , but the unanswered question of how much DPD Contingency Fuel will need to be loaded to travel across the Southern Ocean on the SYD-JNB leg has yet to be answered.
The other unanswered question is what Second segment limits , if any , will there be on payload for the 787 on the SCL-SYD leg.
The other unanswered question is what Second segment limits , if any , will there be on payload for the 787 on the SCL-SYD leg.
but the unanswered question of how much DPD Contingency Fuel will need to be loaded to travel across the Southern Ocean on the SYD-JNB leg has yet to be answered
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot more drag / aerodynamic considerations? at FL140- A100 down low on the 380 compared to the Jumbo hence the quite large Contingency fuel uplifts required particularly on routes with no close suitable alternates, on the Sarah Jessica Parker.
( butt ugly, high maintenance, and likely to go to pieces when ever pushed too hard , if you have to ask !)
( butt ugly, high maintenance, and likely to go to pieces when ever pushed too hard , if you have to ask !)
He is certainly blow n something. But it's not uncommon for some people to be scared of modern technology
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With WTI crude finding resistance lines at USD $71.00 a barrel, hedging costs a lot more.
With a fuel inefficient fleet, consuming a lot more jet fuel per RPK, forward hedging costs face headwinds..
With US10Y Treasury at 3.04% yield, and oil term structure suggesting more upside than down...
Qantas need a new fleet
With a fuel inefficient fleet, consuming a lot more jet fuel per RPK, forward hedging costs face headwinds..
With US10Y Treasury at 3.04% yield, and oil term structure suggesting more upside than down...
Qantas need a new fleet
Re the 787-9 - LATAM seem to manage to do SCL-MEL/AKL no worries, but then again they have 330min EDTO, which the A/C is capable of but the question is will CASA allow it?
I agree if they got 330 min JNB wouldn't be an issue but the T/O performance out of JNB could be, the twins don't like hot and high, which is one of the reasons why the A340 was a popular machine ex JNB. Not sure about the 787 performance, but the 777-300ER is v payload limited when it's hot/vs high, far more so than the A330, at least in 200 guise anyway.
From the airbus site looks like RUN and MRU are A380 capable - but as someone pointed out, vs a 747 thats a LOT more seats onto the market with a lot more fuel burn. Interesting times!
I agree if they got 330 min JNB wouldn't be an issue but the T/O performance out of JNB could be, the twins don't like hot and high, which is one of the reasons why the A340 was a popular machine ex JNB. Not sure about the 787 performance, but the 777-300ER is v payload limited when it's hot/vs high, far more so than the A330, at least in 200 guise anyway.
From the airbus site looks like RUN and MRU are A380 capable - but as someone pointed out, vs a 747 thats a LOT more seats onto the market with a lot more fuel burn. Interesting times!
It's a conundrum for sure. It's a similar flight time JNB-SYD as it is to Paris, London, Frankfurt etc. It's the only place I go where you see more quadjets than twins for those 10-11hr flight times. BA operate a mix of 747/380, Air France operate 380s, Lufthansa operate 748i, EK a 380 (but then again they operate 380s everywhere). You see very few 777/787s apart from African operators and various cargo operators who are presumably enroute to other African destinations. Don't know if it's purely for takeoff performance or perhaps those markets support the higher loads from premium carriers for larger aircraft. You would hope a twin capable of flying for 18 hours, only flying 11, would be able to uplift sufficient fuel for a full pax load and still achieve the required performance. It can be very marginal on the 747 in the summer, particularly if there is adverse weather forecast in Sydney. I'm sure the smartest guys in the room have considered all these factors though.
“I'm sure the smartest guys in the room have considered all these factors though.”
Yea for sure. Why would I be a cynic? Are these the same people who are going to give American Airlines 1100 customers a week from LAX,JFK,LAX by putting on the 787 that will then stop all the delays the 747 causes?
Yea for sure. Why would I be a cynic? Are these the same people who are going to give American Airlines 1100 customers a week from LAX,JFK,LAX by putting on the 787 that will then stop all the delays the 747 causes?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“I'm sure the smartest guys in the room have considered all these factors though.”
Yea for sure. Why would I be a cynic? Are these the same people who are going to give American Airlines 1100 customers a week from LAX,JFK,LAX by putting on the 787 that will then stop all the delays the 747 causes?
Yea for sure. Why would I be a cynic? Are these the same people who are going to give American Airlines 1100 customers a week from LAX,JFK,LAX by putting on the 787 that will then stop all the delays the 747 causes?
An 'alliance' with EK cost Qantas 400,000 passengers in the first year. Incidentally EK gained a 1,000,000 (plus) for no Revenue gain to Qantas.
After five years, a return to Singapore confirms what the data already screamed: Passengers prefer going to Europe via Asia. A five year random walk for what exactly?
With all fleet growth directed at JQ, a replicated cost base, flying more air frames generates only 22% of the revenue Qantas does, yet it flies 48% of the ASK. This is likely a suggestion of over scale.
With headwinds indicating Qantas will hedge next FY into much higher WTI/Brent prices, the $597 million gain on fuel price falls in the 'transformation' FY15 profit is quickly at risk.
Fuel included CASK with the current fleet metrics deplete RASK CASK margin quickly at Qantas, far quicker than competitor airlines.
It is a delicate balance, a gamble that needn't have been taken if Qantas simply did what others prudently did years ago: Replaced four engines for two.
Qantas need a new fleet. Stat
Last edited by Rated De; 19th May 2018 at 11:10. Reason: typo!
Interesting, I wonder if the above helps explain staff travel ticket prices increasing about 20% and domestic freight prices to Darwin from Sydney by over 100% ( I suspect elsewhere as well, but I had one from 3 months ago to compare) . I think they are under the pump and are gouging where they can.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting, I wonder if the above helps explain staff travel ticket prices increasing about 20% and domestic freight prices to Darwin from Sydney by over 100% ( I suspect elsewhere as well, but I had one from 3 months ago to compare) . I think they are under the pump and are gouging where they can.
For a US$10 rise in the price of a barrel of WTI/Brent crude, an airline can expect an increase of between USD$100m to $300m in their fuel expense, industry wide give or take.
For an airline with a predominantly four engine international fleet, that is a substantial exposure. As as the 'turn around' Qantas profit in FY15 details, of the $975 million PBT, $597 million was reduced fuel expense from falling oil prices. (Most of the the remaining amount was depreciation change; Qantas wrote off the fleet)
- The order of magnitude fuel saving) was big on the way down and could whip saw expense on the way up.
- A weakening terms of trade (falling AUD) and a rising USD could accelerate a down turn.
- Yields are declining (consider rising fuel prices leading to taper off of demand)
Qantas need a new fleet
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding JNB and twins I think it’s normal(perhaps even standard?) for cathay to use the ‘thrust bump’out of there. The twins really seem to struggle don’t they?
Rated De - your comment re oil price in relation to airline fuel expense makes no sense. You quote USD $100 m to 300mill increase in fuel cost for USD $10 increase per barrel of crude. I would hazard a guess that the increase for some would be much less and for some much more - exactly what fleet size etc are you referring to ? And where does QF for example fit in this ?
Perhaps a percentage increase in fuel cost relative to a percentage increase in crude price might be more relevant as a rule of thumb.
And I do realise that level of fuel price hedging comes into the equation just to confuse the issue further.
Perhaps a percentage increase in fuel cost relative to a percentage increase in crude price might be more relevant as a rule of thumb.
And I do realise that level of fuel price hedging comes into the equation just to confuse the issue further.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rated De - your comment re oil price in relation to airline fuel expense makes no sense. You quote USD $100 m to 300mill increase in fuel cost for USD $10 increase per barrel of crude. I would hazard a guess that the increase for some would be much less and for some much more - exactly what fleet size etc are you referring to ? And where does QF for example fit in this ?
Perhaps a percentage increase in fuel cost relative to a percentage increase in crude price might be more relevant as a rule of thumb.
And I do realise that level of fuel price hedging comes into the equation just to confuse the issue further.
Perhaps a percentage increase in fuel cost relative to a percentage increase in crude price might be more relevant as a rule of thumb.
And I do realise that level of fuel price hedging comes into the equation just to confuse the issue further.
However, for clarification, the rule of thumb is rough and based upon International ASK for a sample of airlines.
Obviously the more exposure to a Qantas type fleet mix increases vulnerability.
Qantas, who have a treasury hedge (options mostly) on WTI/Brent crude at 80% for 12 months, Qantas would be at the upper bound of the rule of thumb.
The rising price means Jet fuel rises a bit above WTI spot (usually about $10). A falling AUD heightens their exposure.
The point of it being that a fleet decision is overdue.
The fleet decision has been made we have the “game changer”. Not the correct aircraft to replace the 747 but been purchased none the less because the price is right. IMO the 787 now is second generation game changer the A350 and 777X when available are what Qantas should be focusing on, also the 787-10 would be a great fit for Asia and the Tasman. Training is in chaos since the decision to retire the 747 at short notice, more crew are to be trained on the 747 even thou they will be RINed early next year. If they can’t work something out (VR) then 380 Captains will be decimated by 747 Captains. Pass rate for FO upgrade on the 330 at the moment is 25%, yes 25%. FOs upgrading to command on the 737 been given 2 months off. I say again complete and utter chaos.
Folks,
What is the problem causing such a high failure rate on F/O training on the 330, and is it only on this type?
Looks more like the system failing to me??
Tootle pip!!
What is the problem causing such a high failure rate on F/O training on the 330, and is it only on this type?
Looks more like the system failing to me??
Tootle pip!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fleet decision has been made we have the “game changer”. Not the correct aircraft to replace the 747 but been purchased none the less because the price is right. IMO the 787 now is second generation game changer the A350 and 777X when available are what Qantas should be focusing on, also the 787-10 would be a great fit for Asia and the Tasman. Training is in chaos since the decision to retire the 747 at short notice, more crew are to be trained on the 747 even thou they will be RINed early next year. If they can’t work something out (VR) then 380 Captains will be decimated by 747 Captains. Pass rate for FO upgrade on the 330 at the moment is 25%, yes 25%. FOs upgrading to command on the 737 been given 2 months off. I say again complete and utter chaos.
- There was despair at the 'alliance' The lack of any tangible gain and a five year commitment caused much division
- Whilst JQ was lavished with aircraft, QF International withered
- Preoccupation with internal agendas, including staff at the expense of strategic considerations
Fish rot from the head.
In a decade a fleet decision was deferred, the industry moved on.
Add supply of qualified pilots to the system that generates the operating revenue as another abject example of poor executive management and importantly worse board governance.
We maintain a few connections inside the 'empire'.
Fish rot from the head.
In a decade a fleet decision was deferred, the industry moved on.
Add supply of qualified pilots to the system that generates the operating revenue as another abject example of poor executive management and importantly worse board governance.
- There was despair at the 'alliance' The lack of any tangible gain and a five year commitment caused much division
- Whilst JQ was lavished with aircraft, QF International withered
- Preoccupation with internal agendas, including staff at the expense of strategic considerations
Fish rot from the head.
In a decade a fleet decision was deferred, the industry moved on.
Add supply of qualified pilots to the system that generates the operating revenue as another abject example of poor executive management and importantly worse board governance.