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 10th Mar 2019, 08:05
  #841 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A 738 burns approximately 21.20 kg fuel per passenger on a 90-minute sector. A 788 burns, depending on configuration between 21.45 kg per passenger and 33.0 kg per passenger on a 90-minute sector.

Given Qantas in economy have a 30-inch pitch seat, a higher density is likely, bringing the fuel per passenger close to that achieved by a Jetstar 788 of 21.45kg per passenger. Of course you are correct there will be a small fuel saving, but to achieve that small ‘saving’:
  • · Qantas require nearly 4 738 to uplift the same passenger count. ( Or maybe a B717 instead of the fourth B738-Interestingly the hourly cost is almost the same)
  • · 8 pilots not 4 are required
  • · 8 engines, not four are required
  • · Assuming that the configuration is greater than 216 passengers, the 788 or alternative twin aisle will require 8 flight attendants (16 in total) as detailed in CAO 20.16.3, Qantas can, fly with 4 flight attendants on the 738, although often times they carry an additional flight attendant. Thus they require 16 flight attendants spread over the four 738 aircraft.
  • · Four gates, dispatch staff and engineering support are required, in both Sydney and Melbourne.
  • · Four aircraft are now squeezed into the airspace that two could occupy. Of course the same congestion applies to the check in, baggage and tarmac space.
  • · There are four invoices totaling somewhere in the vicinity of $2,700 per hour, not two.
Currently the Qantas A330 domestic configuration can deliver 297 passengers at around 26.5 kg of fuel per passenger. Again the airspace is less congested, less pilots are needed and if less than 100% load factor is achieved on the 738 Qantas still need to squeeze four of them in the airspace and on the gates.The yield and revenue mix is difficult to quantify outside fort fumble, but our guess would be that the premium seat would yield significantly more in Qantas livery than Jetstar

Depends on their focus. If management talk about fuel (isn't it a DFO KPI?) and exclude all other practical considerations, then sure thing, shut down an engine when sitting at a holding point as the three aircraft in front wait to cross the same intersection. Naturally departures may also be sequenced off the active runway, so you may be a while. Of course having crossed the intersection, kindly wait for the occupied gate to become unencumbered so that your aircraft can enter the same apron, fourth in line.

Qantas need a new fleet.
Rated De is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 12:03
  #842 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 610
Received 137 Likes on 44 Posts
As usual, things are more complicated than your analysis.

2 pilots vs 4?
Well, a 737 crew do a SYD-MEL-SYD pattern they are paid 3 hours. 787 crew do it and they get 5:30 and the 787 hourly rate is higher. So from a pilot cost perspective is it cheaper running 2 737’s?
Obviously the 787 looks better if they do another return service but you’ll be outside the peak time by then so do you need to fly a widebody load then?

If less than 100% load factor is achieved on the 738...
Well that is surely a situation where 2 737’s are a significant advantage. Look at how Qantas dynamically manage capacity during the peak hours each day. On days with a light load they cancel the half-past the hour flight and roll pax onto the on the hour flight. Huge cost saving for the company.

You can’t do that with a half empty 787 as you’d end up with an hour long hole in the schedule and business passengers won’t stand for it.

Gate congestion?
How many gates in SYD, MEL and BNE can 787’s park on? A quarter, a third, of the available gates?? If you widen the gates you end up with fewer anyway.

And what of the cost of the aircraft? The 789 costs almost triple the price of a 738 yet holds less than double the passengers.

The 789 is a brilliant aircraft and I hope they order many more but to say that they are foolish for not running them SYD-MEL ignores a lot of the real operating dynamics of that route.
Beer Baron is online now  
Old 11th Apr 2019, 06:01
  #843 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
International has been a difficult division for Qantas, which has faced an influx of competitors adding routes to Australia and driving down airfares.Earnings grew 6 per cent last financial year, but plunged 60 per cent in the first half of this year, from $224 million to $90 million, thanks to a $219 million blow-out in its fuel bill.
If the rumoured discussion took place, resulting in Ms Webster being rapidly escorted form the premises, then telling the truth in a time of company wide deceit is indeed a revolutionary act.

Qantas need a new fleet.




https://www.smh.com.au/topic/qan-199
Rated De is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2019, 07:43
  #844 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Dunda
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So much for OEB going on the 5th of April. Does it have a new retirement date or just ‘whenever Jetstar get their 787 back’? Passengers must be happy especially the ones getting upgrades.
patty50 is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2019, 10:41
  #845 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,615
Received 599 Likes on 169 Posts
Originally Posted by patty50
So much for OEB going on the 5th of April. Does it have a new retirement date or just ‘whenever Jetstar get their 787 back’? Passengers must be happy especially the ones getting upgrades.
It was and still leaving on 30th April.
dragon man is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 00:19
  #846 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect there may be a first new aircraft order from Joyce about to happen. With Boeing looking at having cancellations for the Max there will be a lot of new aircraft at very good prices.
What's the betting that 75 Max 8s will be ordered as soon as the aircraft is OK'ed.
It would help Boeing to have long established customer support them.
limelight is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 00:36
  #847 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by limelight
I suspect there may be a first new aircraft order from Joyce about to happen. With Boeing looking at having cancellations for the Max there will be a lot of new aircraft at very good prices.
What's the betting that 75 Max 8s will be ordered as soon as the aircraft is OK'ed.
It would help Boeing to have long established customer support them.
Why would they? Its unlikely the public will ever accept them after the crashes and Boeing's almost point blank refusal to accept responsibility, instead being shamed into doing anything by foreign regulators grounding the aircraft, and their cosy relationship with the US regulator which means nothing will change.
Dee Vee is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 00:37
  #848 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,615
Received 599 Likes on 169 Posts
I have been told that Qantas have knocked back any more additional flying for Jetstar, I’m guessing no aircraft probably.
dragon man is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 00:42
  #849 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 51
Posts: 1,054
Received 115 Likes on 57 Posts
I reckon LL is on the money, well if a SH order goes in. Yes the 320/321 would be perfect but that’s a complete type replacement.

The general public WILL forget.

The slightly knowledgeable may not. However if it’s a direct flight on a Max v stops? Only flight?

Unless the Max never flies again it will sell, maybe under a new name.

Mmmmaaaaxxxxximum $ value is what will be seen!
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 04:03
  #850 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 282
Received 33 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Global Aviator
I reckon LL is on the money, well if a SH order goes in. Yes the 320/321 would be perfect but that’s a complete type replacement.

The general public WILL forget.

The slightly knowledgeable may not. However if it’s a direct flight on a Max v stops? Only flight?

Unless the Max never flies again it will sell, maybe under a new name.

Mmmmaaaaxxxxximum $ value is what will be seen!

Yeah, there’s a fair chance Boeing would love to get a high profile legacy customer to place some orders so as to espouse confidence in the aircraft. Both for future orders and those already flying. So a too good to refuse deal could make that a reality.

It it wouldn’t be out of the realms of possibility for this to be the case. Add in that the training, engineering and operational expertise is already there as well, so more $$$ saved.
ExtraShot is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 04:11
  #851 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ExtraShot
So a too good to refuse deal could make that a reality.
Qantas would have problems rebuilding one of them if it nosedived into planet earth...let alone killed anyone... Safety is one of their top priorities, would they jeopardize that?
Dee Vee is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 04:46
  #852 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 282
Received 33 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Dee Vee
Qantas would have problems rebuilding one of them if it nosedived into planet earth...let alone killed anyone... Safety is one of their top priorities, would they jeopardize that?

So no one should buy anymore 737 max aircraft ever again?
ExtraShot is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 06:31
  #853 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Sydney
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Clearly, Qantas, CASA, EASA, FAA etc would have to be satisfied that Boeing has fixed the issues with the 737MAX, and that it is safe to fly. That is kind of a threshold issue, and it is pretty clear that the various safety authorities are looking into this much more thoroughly than is normally the case - i.e. each country certifying the MAX and not following the usual practice of accepting the US certification.

I'm fairly certain that the point being made is that, once recertified, Boeing would be eager to land a blue chip order like Qantas to help restore the reputation of the plane.
PlasticFantastic is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 11:14
  #854 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 282
Received 33 Likes on 7 Posts
I'm fairly certain that the point being made is that, once recertified, Boeing would be eager to land a blue chip order like Qantas to help restore the reputation of the plane
Exactly. Maybe it’ll be Qantas, maybe not, but someone will get some cheap aircraft out of this, that’s for sure.
ExtraShot is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 12:20
  #855 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 642
Received 19 Likes on 5 Posts
Boeing: "you can have the 737 Max"
Qantas: "that's good"
Boeing: "the 737 Max is cursed"
Qantas: "that's bad"
Boeing: "the 737 Max has MCAS"
Qantas: "that's good"
Boeing: "the MCAS is also cursed"
Qantas :"that's bad..."

Does the Max come with a free frogurt, or contain potassium benzoate...?
ruprecht is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 02:19
  #856 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wouldn’t worry about QF ordering the MAX. Ay Jay doesn’t see the need for an airline to own aircraft.
Jeps is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 04:05
  #857 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,192
Received 27 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by ruprecht
Boeing: "you can have the 737 Max"
Qantas: "that's good"
Boeing: "the 737 Max is cursed"
Qantas: "that's bad"
Boeing: "the 737 Max has MCAS"
Qantas: "that's good"
Boeing: "the MCAS is also cursed"
Qantas :"that's bad..."

Does the Max come with a free frogurt, or contain potassium benzoate...?
The frogurt is also cursed
maggot is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 07:53
  #858 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by maggot
The frogurt is also cursed
if the crew followed the checklist Memory items they would not have lost control. It’s not a fault with the Max, it’s pilot error in this case unfortunately. The stab trim cutout switches should not have been reengaged.
Troo believer is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 08:30
  #859 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,362
Received 76 Likes on 34 Posts
Better call the world’s regulators and Boeing then. They'll be glad to hear that the Max has been safe all along.
Australopithecus is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 11:13
  #860 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 2,269
Received 322 Likes on 175 Posts
Originally Posted by Troo believer

if the crew followed the checklist Memory items they would not have lost control. It’s not a fault with the Max, it’s pilot error in this case unfortunately. The stab trim cutout switches should not have been reengaged.
MCAS had trimmed the stab to the point that pilots could barely control the aircraft using the elevator, and the manually rotating the trim wheel was impossible. The electric trim was re-engaged as a last ditch effort to regain effective control.

Last edited by dr dre; 18th Apr 2019 at 13:52.
dr dre is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.