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 8th Feb 2018, 06:28
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under the big blue hangar
Age: 34
Posts: 211
Sorry I thought the 787 was replacing the 380 out of Melbourne and not an additional service. My bad. I should pay better attention to the press releases next time.
Google also said it replaced a 744 not the 380, still a reduction of over 100 seats. Someone is going to notice
Cheers
Bootstrap1 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 03:10
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 513
Since it became available, the 787 has been doing 5/week MEL-LAX-MEL along with the daily A380. For a month it was to replace the A380 for a month but it now will replace it for 4 of the daily services.
From 25th March, when MEL-PER-LHR starts, it will go back to the original schedule; 5/week until at lest September.
C441 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 04:43
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 459
Considering the A350 is up to 90 tonne heavier than the 787, is it really surprising burning 1000 kg/hr more?
Bula is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 05:00
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
Since it became available, the 787 has been doing 5/week MEL-LAX-MEL along with the daily A380. For a month it was to replace the A380 for a month but it now will replace it for 4 of the daily services.
From 25th March, when MEL-PER-LHR starts, it will go back to the original schedule; 5/week until at lest September.
From the loads Iíve been watching on these two flights what the Einsteinís have done is taken one A380 with a very high load factor and now have two flights with at best a break even but more likely a loss making load factor. IMO thatís why they are going to do SFO from Melbourne, however they still need to get the 787 to Lax for maintenance hence the two services a week.
dragon man is online now  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 07:00
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by mmmbop View Post
A350-9 280T.
B787-9 254T

The A350-9 is over-burning by close to 1000kgs/hr over Airbus quoted specs. It is also over-burning by close to 1000kgs/hr compared to the 787-9 on the same route.
Excuse my ignorance here but what are the payload and pax numbers for both?
dragon man is online now  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 07:36
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 300
Not sure where you are getting bad performer from, on 15hr sectors we are burning average of 6T/hr carrying upto 42T of payload. Compared to a 77W on a similar route we are burning almost 30T less with a comparable payload
TurningFinalRWY36 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 08:10
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by TurningFinalRWY36 View Post
Not sure where you are getting bad performer from, on 15hr sectors we are burning average of 6T/hr carrying upto 42T of payload. Compared to a 77W on a similar route we are burning almost 30T less with a comparable payload
Just imagine if you had the right aircraft for the right route (Qantas) you could operate a 747 on that 15 hour sector at about 11 tonnes an hour average for a 30 tonne payload. We really are managed by a bunch of clowns.
dragon man is online now  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 08:43
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 300
And on that 15hr sector carrying enough fuel for a total endurance of 16.5hrs, people like to rip on airbus but they have made a great aircraft of the A359
TurningFinalRWY36 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 10:16
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Dunda
Posts: 54
The A350-1000 will be in town on Monday. Canít even decide if they want 787s they ordered 12 years ago though so probably a waste of time for airbus.
patty50 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2018, 20:54
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: with the other ex-CX pond scum (a zoologist was once head of Flight Ops)
Posts: 3
Well, I have just started operating the A350-900 into AUS; on first impressions it has the same burn as a 330 but with about 30-40 more pax and gets there 20 mins faster (0.85 IMN cruise). As for the flight deck; it's Star Wars, man. Stunning. Airbus got this aircraft right.
Captain Dart is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 01:52
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by Captain Dart View Post
Airbus got this aircraft right.
I guess thereís a first time for everything.
IsDon is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 02:12
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,499
Folks,
And now fuel prices are headed up again, the great "turnaround" starts to fray at the edges, is QANTAS EVER seriously modernize the fleet???

With a good investment rating, Qantas has no trouble financing whatever, Airbus or Boeing, talk otherwise in camouflage -- but camouflage for what agenda, the "interests of the shareholders"???

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 04:37
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 307
Oh the irony:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantassaurus
gordonfvckingramsay is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 06:12
  #54 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 899
And now fuel prices are headed up again, the great "turnaround" starts to fray at the edges, is QANTAS EVER seriously modernize the fleet???




It is only when the tide goes out you will see who has been swimming naked...
Rated De is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 04:36
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,245
Qantas could be flying towards fleet renewal spending cliff, says S&P

Blind Freddy could have seen this coming. But first we need to blame the foreign ownership laws, and then weíll blame the pilots for not taking the Network/Jetconnect changes lying down.
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 05:35
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,499
Folks,
All the S&P analysis says it what has already been said here, time and again. And, of course, many other places.
So the question remains, what is the real long term agenda??
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 05:47
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 124
People have been saying what a GENIUS bunch the current management are due to the turn around... but us idiot Pilots and Engineers (and others) have been saying otherwise. Most of us have been indicating that fleet renewal should have been ongoing throughout this period, yet is hasnít. What would we know!?

Now, itís seems even the Financial Gurus are cottoning on!
Snippets From the Australian Financial Review, my bolding:

Ratings agency Standard & Poor's says Qantas will have to significantly boost investment in aircraft just as it may have to resume paying company tax in 2020...
OOPS!


. Qantas has used surplus capital to fund shareholder returns rather than grow invested capital, S&P said.
well, Duh!


. We believe increased aircraft investment is inevitable for Qantas given its older fleet and large international exposure," S&P said.
Indeed it is. And so, the choice they now have, is either they renew the fleet, or the competition eventually eats their lunch.

Qantas Management may very well be furious with S&P right now. The only ammo they really had against Mainline Pilots, was to hold Aircraft orders, Ďfleet renewalí, over their heads. Now those darned investment rating/banker types have gone and told everyone that Qantas is at a point where fleet renewal has to happen Regardless.

It has taken a while, but management seemed to have backed themselves into a little bit of a corner here. Thus, Iím fairly skeptical of Managers seeking Pilot capitulation on the Network/Jetconnect issue,( because otherwise we wonít be able to defend the line against Virgin), in return for heading to the board about ordering more 787s, when, if they donít order more 787s, the company will be unable to defend its line against Virgin (and others) anyway.
ExtraShot is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 05:51
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 225
The journos should put the hard questions to the CFO in the half yearly results. He is the reason the airline will face this problem.....
Qantas 787 is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 06:11
  #59 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 899
A quick check tells you that S&P are not inside the tent with the 'approved' analysts. You know the ones that get 'special briefings'

"Since its financial turnaround in fiscal 2015, Qantas has used surplus capital to fund shareholder returns rather than to grow invested capital.
"We do not view this as sustainable."
As we stated repeatedly nearly $1.75 billion was blown lining their own pockets with curiously timed option vesting dates.

Whilst the tide hasn't yet receded sufficiently to see how naked the little fellow swam, it has turned.

Declining international yields, rising jet fuel prices....
One may postulate that the short side open interest may rise in the near term if Qantas don't succeed in getting stories like this pulled from mainstream papers with advertising spend..

Nero and Rome
Rated De is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2018, 06:45
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,242
Problem is that people have been saying QF will go broke/collapse for 20+ years, yet they never do and life goes on.

What's different this time as opposed to the other previous near financial disasters?
neville_nobody 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.