So you need a new fleet Leigh?

[V-Jet]

Originally Posted by Going Boeing

The main reason that QF pilots want to management to buy some new airplanes is to stop the continuous shrinking of the airline since the bullying Irishman started running the company.

I thought you wrote ruining the company, or is that what you meant?

[Rated De]

Originally Posted by V-Jet

I thought you wrote ruining the company, or is that what you meant?

Brilliant!

[Blueskymine]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"I'm curious why you think that Qantas should have ordered more aircraft by now"

1. Pilots love new aeroplanes - just like spotters (and aircraft manufacturers)

2. New types mean retraining - which adds interest & skills

3. New types means you can try and extort extra cash

4. You can hold up your head with those who have shiny new new types rather the being the girl/guy at the BBQ who has to admit they're flying an airframe that's older than they are.......

I agree with PF (new) - if you are making money why would you take on more debt etc just to have a shiny out of the box fleet? Pay yourself more, retire the debt you have , pay the shareholders and even throw a bone to the whining mob who fly the things

1. Pilots hate new aeroplanes. Especially swapping manufacturers. Just ask a 747 guy how they feel about going to the Airbus. Many would rather retire. And are.

New aeroplanes mean 6 months offline, away from the family holed up in a room somewhere cramming, probing, being examined and scored. You become a broken man at some point during the process. It also becomes harder and harder the older you get.

2. See above.

3. Yep. B scales tend to do that. Or the company can hold your conditions to ransom and threaten any chance of a career or promotion if you don’t play nicely with their train set.

4. Most pilots would prefer to say they fly the 747 classic or a Mad dog at a BBQ. It’s much more purist and interesting to fly.

5. You’re obviously not a pilot.

[Street garbage]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"I'm curious why you think that Qantas should have ordered more aircraft by now"

1. Pilots love new aeroplanes - just like spotters (and aircraft manufacturers)

2. New types mean retraining - which adds interest & skills

3. New types means you can try and extort extra cash

4. You can hold up your head with those who have shiny new new types rather the being the girl/guy at the BBQ who has to admit they're flying an airframe that's older than they are.......

I agree with PF (new) - if you are making money why would you take on more debt etc just to have a shiny out of the box fleet? Pay yourself more, retire the debt you have , pay the shareholders and even throw a bone to the whining mob who fly the things

Extorting cash- is that sort of kinda like share buy back? OR getting paid $495K a week? You are just another Angel completely out of your depth.
its not that hard and blue sky- great posts

[Asturias56]

Interesting.... most of the responses to my post are saying pilots prefer older aeroplanes

But the bulk of the thread is about the need for QF to buy a new fleet.........

hard to have it both ways.....................

[ScepticalOptomist]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

Interesting.... most of the responses to my post are saying pilots prefer older aeroplanes

But the bulk of the thread is about the need for QF to buy a new fleet.........

hard to have it both ways.....................

QANTAS need to buy a new fleet for the business - for the efficiencies new aeroplanes can offer. Not for the pilots. It’s really pretty simple - which bit confuses you?

[Rated De]

That an airline generates operating revenue from flying RTK from A to B ought to be self-evident.Doing so efficiently ought to mean that the cost to the shareholder and indeed the environment is minimised. After all Qantas have made a big noise about bio-fuel purchases, removing plastic cutlery and optimised flight plans. The total “savings” in fuel consumption, expense and CO2 the cost of a few weeks’ transits across the Pacific.The rest of the year Qantas burn more fuel per seat, per passenger than their competitors. Fortunately, fuel is, at the present time, relatively cheap. However, all airlines benefit from cheap fuel. Such that the question ought to be asked whether the fuel spend per passenger RPK is higher or lower than competitors: It is substantially higher. As is the output of CO2, fortunately for the likes of Qantas there is no price on excess emission. As the ICCT reported Qantas spend 64% more generating their RPK across the Pacific than their competitors. That is some “transformation”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...-study/9333616

The original statements made by the long retired and almost completely forgotten relic, Leigh Clifford claimed that the QSA 1992 made re-equipment hard. Around AUD$2.5 billion and counting was spent buying back shares. Strange that no better use for capital could be found than enriching insiders like CEO and top 20 shareholder, Alan Joseph Joyce. It is the fleet metrics that start to tell a story of waste. This is the point UBS referred to and the fund manager, Mr Montgomery highlighted. Just to keep the fleet age where it is (and provision for increasing maintenance and ageing aircraft issues) requires a capital expenditure of AUD $1.7 billion per year. Reducing the fleet age back to what the taxpayer gifted them at privatisation will require a very large capital expenditure.

In addition to benefitting from cheaper fuel, cash flows have also been boosted by a strategy that has allowed the fleet to age. The most expensive part of running an airline is replacing old cheap planes with newer and more expensive models. Airlines cannot escape this capital expenditure lest passengers jump to competing airlines with fancier entertainment offerings and more comfortable seats, bars and beds. You can call it a disciplined approach to capital spending or you could say the board might prefer to see the share price go up now, maximise share price-related incentives for current management and leave the reality of replacing planes to the next guy.

https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wire...ext-for-qantas



So:

• · A mid-late life A330 fleet
• · A to be retired B747 fleet
• · A B737 fleet where the oldest aircraft are 17-18 years old.
• · An A380 fleet of debatable book value.

Of course more expenditure on fleet for JQ could be undertaken, although the revenue generated for a segment as large as the parent indicates that the business is well over scale: ASK flown versus revenue generated is horrible! Little Napoleon claimed he could spend more on Frequent Flyer instead of fleet. Hard to imagine what tangible value a Frequent Flyer business has without an airline.
How big is the required CAP EX? $15-$20 billion? How long does it take to scope, order and find a slot then take delivery of a new fleet?
Does the company issue new equity or continue to gear the company?
Are there production slots?

That Little Napoleon spend his time with social discourse and social engineering while the fleet over which he has presided for 11 years continues to burn more hydrocarbon fuel than necessary, emitting more CO2 than competitors while costing the shareholders more per flight than the competitors is hardly transformative. It is at best negligent.

Someone is going to have to spend the money, Qantas need a fuel efficient and lower emitting fleet.

[High_To_Low]

Any further update on what is going to replace the B744 on JNB?
With the B789 starting SFO in December 19 and SCL in June 20 are we likely to see a SYD B789 base open anytime soon?

[ruprecht]

Rumour has it....

...that the 787 SYD base will be announced with the next round of vacancies. Available for bidding in Apr-May (approx) to open in July. Timed to coincide with the 744 RIN.

[Rated De]

See what happens when you have fleet...

Once again Fort Fumble, lacking fleet capacity and strategy drift ever closer to the lee shore. Little Napoleon resplendent in his dress uniform, stands proudly on the poop deck holding the tiller of the rudderless ship...

https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...23-p533bl.html

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Alan gives the ‘thumbs up’ to the A220. ‘Even the toilets are big’ he quotes...

https://australianaviation.com.au/20...the-thumbs-up/

[davidclarke]

Originally Posted by T-Vasis

Alan gives the ‘thumbs up’ to the A220. ‘Even the toilets are big’ he quotes...

https://australianaviation.com.au/20...the-thumbs-up/

lol “even the toilets are big” is code for let’s throw in another row of seats.

[Rated De]

Originally Posted by davidclarke

lol “even the toilets are big” is code for let’s throw in another row of seats.

That the toilets are big, rather depends on the stature of the person...

[Rated De]

Oh dear, how does the domestic ASK count look like with a few airframes grounded..

One might posit they need a new fleet..

https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...30-p535xo.html

[blow.n.gasket]

With all the revelations in the media lately of under payments in wages by many respected companies , what’s the chance Qantas will have to defend their position reference this trending allegation ?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

This trending allegation should be of great concern to them!

[Rated De]

Qantas urged to ground all of its 737s after second aircraft crack discovered


Well, Well, well, maybe fort fumble needs some more "research flights"

With the fix for this being rather substantive, one might posit where it will be done and how long it will take.
Qantas need new management.

Qantas' head of engineering Chris Snook said calls for a grounding were "completely irresponsible."

No Mr Snook, (patsy) it may actually prove prudent to do so until satisfied that all inspections completed and no further cracks are found.
Then you can stand proudly on the poop deck next to Little Napoleon and both chime simultaneously, "safety before executive remuneration"






https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...31-p5360y.html

[dragon man]

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of #####. The only spare capacity they have is 747, so 330 back to domestic and 747 to Honolulu again maybe.

[Jetsbest]

Huh?

What did the A330 crews ever do to you?

[V-Jet]

I’m not an engineer but unlike any Qf execs I have come across, I have enormous respect for Engineering skills and knowledge. I don’t believe any would deliberately set about making public comments about anything related to aviation safety without very good reason.

Jetsbest - looks like they will be doing a lot for everyone if Qf keeps parking maggots!