Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Perth to London

Old 11th Jan 2019, 01:08
  #481 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 749
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 02:08
  #482 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 786
Originally Posted by Ken Borough View Post
Thank you, I stand corrected.
dragon man is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 04:03
  #483 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 823
Can I just say this?

Qantas need a new fleet.

On a more personal note, I will add that Qantas need new management as well. Hopefully while there is still enough money/assets to provide a new fleet. Which is NOT a foregone conclusion.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 04:33
  #484 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 786
fish

Originally Posted by V-Jet View Post
Can I just say this?

Qantas need a new fleet.

On a more personal note, I will add that Qantas need new management as well. Hopefully while there is still enough money/assets to provide a new fleet. Which is NOT a foregone conclusion.
I would say that according to some on this forum the above would qualify you with Rated De as a narcissist and probably me as well.😂😂😂😂
dragon man is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 07:10
  #485 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 805
I donít understand the frenzy over a new Qantas fleet, on an actual new fleet/route discussion.

Do you really think the market and management are not as aware of the fleet renewal requirements as the experts on PPRuNe are?

Current fleet order/plan:

6 787s coming
38 787 options
8 380 orders
81 320/321 orders
Sunrise
737 replacement actively looked at
330 replacement actively looked at

The sky is falling
*Lancer* is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 08:02
  #486 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 786
Originally Posted by *Lancer* View Post
I donít understand the frenzy over a new Qantas fleet, on an actual new fleet/route discussion.

Do you really think the market and management are not as aware of the fleet renewal requirements as the experts on PPRuNe are?

Current fleet order/plan:

6 787s coming
38 787 options
8 380 orders
81 320/321 orders
Sunrise
737 replacement actively looked at
330 replacement actively looked at

The sky is falling
The 8 x 380s I think I can safely say will never come. What we are trying to get across is that this has been left so late that the financial spend in a short space of time will be massive.
dragon man is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:50
  #487 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by *Lancer* View Post
I donít understand the frenzy over a new Qantas fleet, on an actual new fleet/route discussion.

Do you really think the market and management are not as aware of the fleet renewal requirements as the experts on PPRuNe are?

Current fleet order/plan:

6 787s coming
38 787 options
8 380 orders
81 320/321 orders
Sunrise
737 replacement actively looked at
330 replacement actively looked at

The sky is falling
I bet you that there will be more of a frenzy when the oil price keeps climbing. CEOs are paid big dollars to have foresight and to look further ahead down the road than anyone else in the company, so that they can try and predict what the market will do and how to react.

Personally I think that they are reacting later than they should have.
777Nine is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 09:07
  #488 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by PlasticFantastic View Post
Also, just because JAL and ANA use 787s for shorthaul routes, it doesn't mean they are great aircraft for those routes. The 787 is optimised for longhaul flying - QF would be carrying a huge amount of unnecessary structure and weight to use it on triangle routes. I'm sure it could still turn a profit; I'd be sceptical that it would be the best use of the aircraft, however.

Joyce has even stated that the A330 is not ideal for triangle or transcontinental flying, which is why QF is interested in the NMA proposal - better capacity than a 737/320, but optimised for shorter routes.
Whilst you're point about the 787 not being optimal for the goldeng triangle is true, it is also true that scheduling 737s up to every ten minutes on a route averaging 87% load factor per month is not optimal either. Having the 787 operate domestically for QF would also allow their 737s to be redeployed to other growth markets.

Last edited by HOBAY 3; 12th Jan 2019 at 09:08. Reason: Spelling
HOBAY 3 is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 09:14
  #489 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,304
Qantas always raved on about right aircraft, right route.
When you look at what they are doing, I don’t think they have any idea!

Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 10:29
  #490 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 749
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom View Post
Qantas always raved on about right aircraft, right route.
When you look at what they are doing, I donít think they have any idea!


The mob from TN who infested QF didn't waste much time getting their hands on 767s for domestic routes. They even bought a few from BA when Ansett collapsed. The 767 wasn't ideal for domestic but they sure made a lot of money. To make it more profitable, some 767s were certified to operate at two different MTOWs: the lower on domestic routes, the higher on long haul routes. The 787 might be 'just right' in the circumstances.
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 10:32
  #491 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Sydney
Posts: 36
Originally Posted by HOBAY 3 View Post
Whilst you're point about the 787 not being optimal for the goldeng triangle is true, it is also true that scheduling 737s up to every ten minutes on a route averaging 87% load factor per month is not optimal either. Having the 787 operate domestically for QF would also allow their 737s to be redeployed to other growth markets.
I don't follow your reasoning. Why would Qantas go out and buy a less efficient and less profitable aircraft to fly one of its most profitable routes? It's one thing to use widebodies to fly tag flights that fill their schedule and help out at peak times; it's another to invest in dedicated planes that would be less profitable.

Surely the better answer would be to buy larger capacity planes that are built for shorthaul flying, like the 737-10, A321 or 797 - which seems to be Qantas' plan. Or, if there are a stack of other unserved routes to just buy more 737s?

(But, as has been said above, QF and VA's current profitability is largely the result of capacity restraint, so not sure that I'd want to dump a stack of extra planes into the shorthaul market just yet.)
PlasticFantastic is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 19:11
  #492 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: OZ
Posts: 198
Plastic, the point was about yield and profit. How much more could the 787 make flying golden triangle in the same 14 hour period it goes to Bali and back on the low yield model? We'll never know cause the figures for the 11 787s are never published
Buckshot is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2019, 22:28
  #493 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,681
The B787-9 is significantly larger than the B767 (virtually identical measurements to the A330-300) and is optimised for LR/ULR routes. The engines are significantly heavier than B767 engines and probably wouldn't handle the large number of cycles incurred with short range domestic flying. I can see the B787 gradually replacing the A330 on QF routes to Asia (probably the B787-10 model) but it would not be a good choice for domestic ops.

That leaves the choice of A321 NEO or the Boeing NMA (available from 2025) as likely options for domestic flights that require a larger capacity than the B737-800.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 02:20
  #494 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 580
I guess itís got to the point where they have left it so late to order any MAX replacements, that the Ď797í slots will actually now be available sooner than they can get the first keys to any MAX.
wheels_down is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 02:32
  #495 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 523
Airbus has them by the balls in regards to the outstanding A380 orders which are unfortunately not fee free cancel. The only way outta that one is write it off as a Management fail, or order more French aircraft!

737-10 is too logical for QF to order. Thatís why Virgin ordered them nearly a decade ago. Why on earth would they order such economical machines! It would be very bizarre behaviour.
PoppaJo is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 03:59
  #496 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 786
The latest rumour I’m hearing and it has been said before is Jetstar 787s back to mainline and Jetstar use the 321 Neos. Actually makes some sense.
dragon man is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 04:36
  #497 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 435
Originally Posted by dragon man View Post
The latest rumour Iím hearing and it has been said before is Jetstar 787s back to mainline and Jetstar use the 321 Neos. Actually makes some sense.
Unlikely. The dual-brand strategy is now permanently embedded in the QF Group consciousness.

The 321s will not have the range for HNL, BKK, HKT, SGN nor NRT.

PG
Popgun is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 04:49
  #498 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: australia
Posts: 26
A lot of people do not remember what it was like to get to London in the old days.
Days of travel, in terrible conditions, guaranteed to give you lung cancer.
Blocked toilets, drunks, drunk to the point of insanity.
Hours of delays.
Perth to London non stop? no smoking? internet? movies? radio? planecam? BYO Maccas! geeze.
Too soft some people.
flopzone is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 05:11
  #499 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Why do people suddenly think a really long, narrow body is a good idea for domestic flying? No carrier locally operates the 737-900 and it already takes an eternity to offload a 737-800 at Qantas. The 737-10 still only has one FWD door I believe so it’s not going to have a quick turnaround.
Good aircraft for some routes no doubt, short-haul international stuff probably, but I doubt you’d want it as your main domestic workhorse.
Beer Baron is online now  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 08:35
  #500 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by Popgun View Post


Unlikely. The dual-brand strategy is now permanently embedded in the QF Group consciousness.

The 321s will not have the range for HNL, BKK, HKT, SGN nor NRT.

PG
The dual brand strategy is not being changed, just the route structure. The B787-8 has proven to be a poor fit for JQ International so they have to make changes.

The A321 NEO LR will take over all the Bali flights from the JQ B787-8 and it has the range for the other destinations that you mentioned (except HNL) from Northern ports (CNS & DRW). If you look at the the number of these aircraft ordered for JQ Intl, there is sufficient capacity to replace all the B787ís.

Passenger preference on the HNL route is for full service airlines so itís probable that JQ will cease to fly it and mainline will operate it on an efficient daily basis.

Beer Baron, I totally agree with you about single aisle aircraft can be too long to be efficient. QF looked at the B737-900 some years ago and found that the extra time to disembark/embark pax would result in one less sector per day, thus less revenue. Using rear stairs can help a bit but not enough to get the required turn around time.
Going Boeing 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.