So you need a new fleet Leigh?
With a decision becoming closer I wonder how carefully QF are watching the Rolls Royce engine problems on the A350? I’m betting after the global 787 Trent engine disaster and combined with a relationship already tested from QF32, having only one type of engine available on the A350 might be the deal breaker.
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
https://airlinerwatch.com/rolls-royc...aise-concerns/
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
https://airlinerwatch.com/rolls-royc...aise-concerns/
With a decision becoming closer I wonder how carefully QF are watching the Rolls Royce engine problems on the A350? I’m betting after the global 787 Trent engine disaster and combined with a relationship already tested from QF32, having only one type of engine available on the A350 might be the deal breaker.
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
https://airlinerwatch.com/rolls-royc...aise-concerns/
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
https://airlinerwatch.com/rolls-royc...aise-concerns/
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, I fully expect that they will order the appropriate version of the 777 which at this time WILL be the right aeroplane. It will replace the A380s eventually and will leave QF in time with a 777/787/737 fleet with perhaps the 737 giving way so that they'll end up with a 777/787/797 fleet eventually. Let Jetstar have the plastic, disposable rubbish (330s/321s/320s) and keep QF all Boeing.
There are endless economies of scale, from training, consumables and spare parts to corporate knowledge.
The Qantas fleet was at privatisation the youngest in IATA at 6.2 years. Boeing all the way along the line.
The allowed a lot of latitude for senior management to put their feet up.
The story often regaled is that QF had decided to switch to Airbus with a combined fleet of A320, A330 and the yet to be designated A3XX.
That the events of September 11, 2001 intervened and provided a 738 option at bargain basement prices may be in part a result of the confused fleet metrics.
When the merry band of American consultants descended on Coward Street, enthralling their audience with tales of cost cutting, the seed of JQ was probably sown.
Clearly, rather than repainting the taxpayer funded legacy fleet and calling it a Qantas lite, the decision was made, likely with solely an industrial focus to put a big firewall between their 'rival work forces' and establish a new fleet.
That Little Napoleon is hell bent on 're-fleeting' JQ with an a new fleet when their fleet age averages 8.3 years and flying 50% of QF's ASK yields only 25% of the revenue, while QF languishes with no aircraft orders and a fleet age approaching 11 years is perhaps reflection of what motivates decision making. It certainly isn't economics or return on invested capital.
Ironically, Little Napoleon may well attempt to sell this emerging engine issue on the A350 as evidence of his unique insights: He didn't order aircraft as he knew this was a likely issue. Rather like claiming the fuel hedge and cost savings from a falling fuel price in FY15 were somehow all his doing!
Bargain buyers
They bought A330s because it was too good a deal to say no to. When they bought the A380 the order for 12 plus 8
was again at bargain basement prices. They had to buy it based on per seat cost and prestige. They then bought the 787
at insanely cheap prices as well. They have a history of buying the cheapest deal. Like buying some Renault , a few Opels and
a fleet of Oldsmobiles.
What they have learned is NEVER buy the first of a new model, like the A380 ever again.
was again at bargain basement prices. They had to buy it based on per seat cost and prestige. They then bought the 787
at insanely cheap prices as well. They have a history of buying the cheapest deal. Like buying some Renault , a few Opels and
a fleet of Oldsmobiles.
What they have learned is NEVER buy the first of a new model, like the A380 ever again.
Last edited by 1a sound asleep; 20th Nov 2018 at 07:17.
I believe that the 777 was been considered when Boeing offered them a great deal on the 6 747 ERs. They wanted a customer for them and no one wanted them, so they were purchased for less than the 777 could be had for. At the moment they are operating the 787 on routes that can accommodate a larger aircraft however the price of the 787 is so good that that is all they will purchase. They are trying at the moment to get the A380 into Haneda to replace the 747 however Airbus has been trying unsuccessfully since 2015 with no success, if they can’t I don’t know what they will send there. They are short of capacity out of Lax to Australia, both Joburg and Santiago are 350 seat routes what they are going to do I do not know and then to top it off they showed the route planning guru Myers the door. Did I mention right aircraft right route? Like 737s between SYD/MLB and DPS.
I believe that the 777 was been considered when Boeing offered them a great deal on the 6 747 ERs. They wanted a customer for them and no one wanted them, so they were purchased for less than the 777 could be had for. At the moment they are operating the 787 on routes that can accommodate a larger aircraft however the price of the 787 is so good that that is all they will purchase. They are trying at the moment to get the A380 into Haneda to replace the 747 however Airbus has been trying unsuccessfully since 2015 with no success, if they can’t I don’t know what they will send there. They are short of capacity out of Lax to Australia, both Joburg and Santiago are 350 seat routes what they are going to do I do not know and then to top it off they showed the route planning guru Myers the door. Did I mention right aircraft right route? Like 737s between SYD/MLB and DPS.
It has not been approved by the Japanese authorities I gues because it was originally built for aircraft a lot smaller.
On Oct. 15, the world's largest passenger airplane, the Airbus A380, landed at Tokyo's Haneda airport for the first time to check whether the airport's soon-to-open new international terminal can handle it.
The superjumbo flew from France, where the manufacturer is based, to the terminal, which is scheduled to open on Oct. 21. The jet will head to New Chitose Airport serving Sapporo, Hokkaido, on Oct. 17.
During the stopover, various checks will be conducted, including whether the airport's passenger boarding bridges fit the double-decker wide-body plane's doors.
The jets are often too big for a taxiway and the number of airports that can accommodate them is limited. They also generate major wake turbulence when they depart and force succeeding planes to wait longer than usual before taking off.
Haneda is not accommodating A380 on the grounds that they could significantly affect other passenger flights during its crowded daytime operating hours.
But they could be accommodated late at night and in the early morning when the traffic volume is low, according to airport authorities.
They have been flying to Narita International Airport near Tokyo since 2008 on flights by operators including Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa
On Oct. 15, the world's largest passenger airplane, the Airbus A380, landed at Tokyo's Haneda airport for the first time to check whether the airport's soon-to-open new international terminal can handle it.
The superjumbo flew from France, where the manufacturer is based, to the terminal, which is scheduled to open on Oct. 21. The jet will head to New Chitose Airport serving Sapporo, Hokkaido, on Oct. 17.
During the stopover, various checks will be conducted, including whether the airport's passenger boarding bridges fit the double-decker wide-body plane's doors.
The jets are often too big for a taxiway and the number of airports that can accommodate them is limited. They also generate major wake turbulence when they depart and force succeeding planes to wait longer than usual before taking off.
Haneda is not accommodating A380 on the grounds that they could significantly affect other passenger flights during its crowded daytime operating hours.
But they could be accommodated late at night and in the early morning when the traffic volume is low, according to airport authorities.
They have been flying to Narita International Airport near Tokyo since 2008 on flights by operators including Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa
With a decision becoming closer I wonder how carefully QF are watching the Rolls Royce engine problems on the A350? I’m betting after the global 787 Trent engine disaster and combined with a relationship already tested from QF32, having only one type of engine available on the A350 might be the deal breaker.
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
My bet.....Qf aren’t going near the A350!
The A-350 is coming to Qantas.
Let Jetstar have the plastic, disposable rubbish (330s/321s/320s) and keep QF all Boeing
Airbus aircraft are actually made of aluminium alloys.
The Boeing 787 and 797 are the ones actually made of plastic.
Regarding disposable rubbish, yes the desert graveyard is full of Qantas Boeing aircraft, and no Jetstar Airbus aircraft. It is very obvious what is the disposable rubbish.
Ummmmm ‘cos they are saving the Boeing’s for later and the JQ Bus’s are already disposed rubbish??
CC - Can you explain the graph? I must be a bit thick
The graph shows how investor sentiment has gone south since the Iberian engine shutdown. Of course the worlds share market have all gone down so read into it what you will but note the decline in RR occurs before the general global decline. I’m not saying one incident means much at all.. but for an airline about to pull out the chequebook it may mean more to them when RR recent history isn’t all that good. Do you continue to go to the same error prone builder when the one down the road is consistently good for the same price? What will the top management engineers be saying to Joyce? I’m certain there will be more water to go under the bridge... but I’m happy to stick with what I’ve been told... ‘Qf aren’t going near the A350’
I believe that the 777 was been considered when Boeing offered them a great deal on the 6 747 ERs. They wanted a customer for them and no one wanted them, so they were purchased for less than the 777 could be had for. At the moment they are operating the 787 on routes that can accommodate a larger aircraft however the price of the 787 is so good that that is all they will purchase. They are trying at the moment to get the A380 into Haneda to replace the 747 however Airbus has been trying unsuccessfully since 2015 with no success, if they can’t I don’t know what they will send there. They are short of capacity out of Lax to Australia, both Joburg and Santiago are 350 seat routes what they are going to do I do not know and then to top it off they showed the route planning guru Myers the door. Did I mention right aircraft right route? Like 737s between SYD/MLB and DPS.
Get your facts right.
Airbus aircraft are actually made of aluminium alloys.
The Boeing 787 and 797 are the ones actually made of plastic.
Regarding disposable rubbish, yes the desert graveyard is full of Qantas Boeing aircraft, and no Jetstar Airbus aircraft. It is very obvious what is the disposable rubbish.
Airbus aircraft are actually made of aluminium alloys.
The Boeing 787 and 797 are the ones actually made of plastic.
Regarding disposable rubbish, yes the desert graveyard is full of Qantas Boeing aircraft, and no Jetstar Airbus aircraft. It is very obvious what is the disposable rubbish.
The history of the Qantas A380 has been a disaster, outclassed very quickly in cost of operation by the 747-8I and has had more engineering issues than any Boeing aircraft I can recall……...
Either way, both are now difficult to justify against modern long-range twins (except as a freighter which, it seems, is where the 748I is well suited).
…….but remains enormously popular with passengers; particularly Premium passengers. I would suggest that "disaster" is ever-so-slightly overplaying the case. If the 748I is so wonderful, is there a reason why there are very few 748-I's in use as passenger aircraft relative to the number of A380's?
Either way, both are now difficult to justify against modern long-range twins (except as a freighter which, it seems, is where the 748I is well suited).
Either way, both are now difficult to justify against modern long-range twins (except as a freighter which, it seems, is where the 748I is well suited).
AerialPerspective,
With respect; are you willing to back up your statement "I'm yet to see an Airbus product of ANY model that has flown anywhere near 20 years, bar maybe a few older A320s"?
We (and our subsidiary) operate quite a few A330s over 20 years old - including the first 2 built. Until recently, we also operated even older A340s. IIRC, your first A330 (-EBA) was delivered in Jan 2003. Almost 16 years ago.
We also operate 748s (freighters) - their economics aren't particularly great, although they do make a great freighter - hence why so few -8is have been ordered, and certainly none by us. They too have had their share of technical issues, particularly around their GENX engines. We previously operated a large fleet of -400s (and 200 & 300 series Classics before that).
I've flown 2 x Boeing widebody types, and now 4 x widebody Airbus ones. Both manufacturers make great machines, although as someone recently remarked to me: "With the A350, Airbus has finally made a Boeing, whilst with the 787, Boeing has finally made an Airbus). Says it all.
VS.
With respect; are you willing to back up your statement "I'm yet to see an Airbus product of ANY model that has flown anywhere near 20 years, bar maybe a few older A320s"?
We (and our subsidiary) operate quite a few A330s over 20 years old - including the first 2 built. Until recently, we also operated even older A340s. IIRC, your first A330 (-EBA) was delivered in Jan 2003. Almost 16 years ago.
We also operate 748s (freighters) - their economics aren't particularly great, although they do make a great freighter - hence why so few -8is have been ordered, and certainly none by us. They too have had their share of technical issues, particularly around their GENX engines. We previously operated a large fleet of -400s (and 200 & 300 series Classics before that).
I've flown 2 x Boeing widebody types, and now 4 x widebody Airbus ones. Both manufacturers make great machines, although as someone recently remarked to me: "With the A350, Airbus has finally made a Boeing, whilst with the 787, Boeing has finally made an Airbus). Says it all.
VS.