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

Perth to London

Old 13th Jan 2019, 09:08
  #501 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,675
The 737-10 still only has one FWD door I believe so it’s not going to have a quick turnaround.
Occasionally I see Virgin disembark from the front via air-bridge and the rear via ramp and then up the stairs. I know this does not suit hot or wet weather and can run fowl of ICAO standards. If I recall Air Asia at KLIA2 wanted to continue with using roll up stairs and walking pax along the tarmac but the Malaysian DCA said no to that and made them include air-bridges in the new terminal. The resaon given at the time was the ICAO "requirement" for RPT pax to be "contained" and that walking across the tarmac for jet operations is not really compliant. I shudder to think how regional airports cope.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 09:54
  #502 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 572
Try ABZ in Scotland - no jet -bridges or buses at all and they risk passengers dying from exposure and polar bears getting to the terminal in winter..........

I think steps are not a bad option in some circumstances

But airlines want o fly long singled aisled aircraft because they can make more money on Short/medium haul than operating short single aisled aircraft or twin aisle aircraft and damn passenger convenience
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 10:41
  #503 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 507
Who needs Aerobridges anyway!

PoppaJo is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 10:58
  #504 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 572
Dead weight cost and something else to go wrong and giving you AOG

Some Minimum Wage operative driving a set of steps is much cheaper, can be used 24/7 and on multiple aircraft
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 10:59
  #505 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,271
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.
It also makes sense for JQ that the aircraft return to QF in time for their first major checks and the parent company foots the bill, while the little brother gets the new factory fresh jets with no maintenance costs.

From what Iíve seen, JQ have no trouble filling the 787s to Bali once a day but thereís probably more money to be made sending 2 full 321s twice a day instead.
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 21:11
  #506 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Icarus2001 View Post
Occasionally I see Virgin disembark from the front via air-bridge and the rear via ramp and then up the stairs. I know this does not suit hot or wet weather and can run fowl of ICAO standards. If I recall Air Asia at KLIA2 wanted to continue with using roll up stairs and walking pax along the tarmac but the Malaysian DCA said no to that and made them include air-bridges in the new terminal. The resaon given at the time was the ICAO "requirement" for RPT pax to be "contained" and that walking across the tarmac for jet operations is not really compliant. I shudder to think how regional airports cope.

Gold Coast? Everyone (international included) does it at OOL. Scoot and Jetstar 787s included.
Slezy9 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2019, 22:02
  #507 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,675
Originally Posted by Transition Layer View Post
It also makes sense for JQ that the aircraft return to QF in time for their first major checks and the parent company foots the bill, while the little brother gets the new factory fresh jets with no maintenance costs.
We won’t mention that QF Engineering in Narita were ordered to buy a qantity of B787 spare parts - this was before QF had any B787’s and there are no intentions for QF to operate B787’s to Japan. Yet more subsidising of JQ International.

Going Boeing is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 02:49
  #508 (permalink)  
ebt
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 156
Originally Posted by Going Boeing View Post


We wonít mention that QF Engineering in Narita were ordered to buy a qantity of B787 spare parts - this was before QF had any B787ís and there are no intentions for QF to operate B787ís to Japan. Yet more subsidising of JQ International.

You're assuming that doesn't get re-charged onto Jetstar, minus adjustments for inter-company transactions. If you can prove that, I'd be interested to see it. And surely any other provider would also have some spares on-hand for one if their customer has an AOG, even if it comes from a pool?
ebt is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 05:09
  #509 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,070
The resaon given at the time was the ICAO "requirement" for RPT pax to be "contained" and that walking across the tarmac for jet operations is not really compliant.
It's not a requirement, it's only an ICAO recommendation as a risk mitigator ie to remove passengers from the dangerous ramp environs. If it was a requirement, there would be thousands of non-compliant airports around the world. Those that do it manage just fine.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 05:44
  #510 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by PlasticFantastic View Post
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.)
By the time 737-10, A321, or 797 is in the fleet, how full will MEL-SYD be based an annual growth and no potential to schedule extra flights because they're already going every 10 minutes in peak? The sweet spot is 80% load factor because you need some wiggle-room for delayed passengers and seasonal variation (I hazard a guess Friday, being the busiest day of the week, would be operating low to mid 90 percentile).

Remember MEL-SYD is either the second or third busiest route in the world; we're not talking about your average sector here with only several flights per day - it needs bigger aircraft! Using your logic, ANA should sell up all those 777s and buy more 737s for HND-CTS.

More 737s isn't the answer anyway as pilots are coming up short, so in the meantime, why not redeploy the existing JQ 787s?
HOBAY 3 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 06:56
  #511 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Sydney
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by HOBAY 3 View Post
By the time 737-10, A321, or 797 is in the fleet, how full will MEL-SYD be based an annual growth and no potential to schedule extra flights because they're already going every 10 minutes in peak? The sweet spot is 80% load factor because you need some wiggle-room for delayed passengers and seasonal variation (I hazard a guess Friday, being the busiest day of the week, would be operating low to mid 90 percentile).

Remember MEL-SYD is either the second or third busiest route in the world; we're not talking about your average sector here with only several flights per day - it needs bigger aircraft! Using your logic, ANA should sell up all those 777s and buy more 737s for HND-CTS.

More 737s isn't the answer anyway as pilots are coming up short, so in the meantime, why not redeploy the existing JQ 787s?
Qantas will definitely need to upgauge MEL-SYD. Redeploying JQ's 788s is definitely an option. But, I don't think it would be the best option. Not just because the 788 isn't a particularly efficient plane for high frequency, shorthaul flying, but also because:
  • QF isn't starting from a blank slate, and has other options - for example, it has A330s that it can use on tag flights during the day, given that most of their international flying is overnight; and it could free up some of those A330s to do more domestic flying by the early 2020s if it takes more 789s or 78Js (the A330s would be nearly fully depreciated by then, so fairly cheap to run a few domestic legs a day); as it takes on more 789s for QFi, it may be possible to schedule those for some peak hour flying to swap them between MEL/SYD/BNE bases, since QF usually schedules them for early morning arrivals (depending on QFi's route decisions, of course); it has also been able to free up 737s by redeploying ex-JQ A320s to Network - I haven't looked at Network in a while, but there may be the option to do a bit more of that; and
  • QF has some clearly foreseeable fleet decisions coming up over the next few years that would risk making JQ's 788s an expensive short-term move - for example, QF looks like it will order the NMA, for delivery by 2025-ish; it may well also order A320/1neos to replace the 737NG fleet - if so, it could draw on some of the existing QF Group order book to take A321neos from the early 2020s. These would both be far more efficient for the SYD-MEL route, meaning that QF would need to recover the cost of refitting the JQ788s within only a few years, and would risk being left with a fleet of 788s without crew rests (can those be retrofitted?) that would be a poor fit for QFi operations.
ANA and JAL have already committed to fleets of 777 and 787s for domestic and shorthaul international flying. That's more about slot congestion at HND than it is about the thickness of the routes. From all reports, it's not particularly efficient. But, once they have the fleet, it might not make much sense for them to change it. In any case, you'd have to expect that they'll both be lining up for the NMA to replace a good chunk of those fleets, if Boeing can make it work.

As for QF's own shortage of 737 pilots, are you suggesting that JQ's current 788 crew walk straight into the same roles at QF? If not, it'd just result in more retraining inside QF, which is a fair chunk of the cause of the current shortage...
PlasticFantastic is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 08:15
  #512 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,675
Originally Posted by ebt View Post
You're assuming that doesn't get re-charged onto Jetstar, minus adjustments for inter-company transactions. If you can prove that, I'd be interested to see it. And surely any other provider would also have some spares on-hand for one if their customer has an AOG, even if it comes from a pool?
QF Engineering fought hard to not have the parts on their books, insisting that they should be in JQ’s inventory but an instruction came from a very high level that they must be held in QF International inventory. You wouldn’t insist on that if you were subsequently going to charge JQ when the parts are used.

When you take into account the previous history, such as the promise (when they were operating A330’s) that JQ would pay for their A330 simulator time which was total BS. The then head of QF Flight Training repeatedly tried to get payment from JQ but after a while he was told that no money would be forthcoming and if he didn’t stop his submissions he would lose his job.

Also, all the fuel uplifted by Qantas Group aircraft in HNL is paid for by QF International, yet JQ International still doesn’t make a profit despite many subsidies. If they were making a profit, Joyce would show it on the books but he keeps all those figures hidden.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 08:24
  #513 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Age: 62
Posts: 656
Just read that recently Sir Richard Branson Virgin Atlantic UK wants ASAP to operate LHR-PER non stop with 787-9 and eventually with the A350ULR to SYD if Airbus can tweak the range.

Virgin says our current 787-9 fleet doesn't currently have the right cabin configuration for this PER route, we are always evaluating new destinations for our customers - and Perth is a great city."
rog747 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 09:45
  #514 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,675
I did say at the start of this Perth-London experiment that if it becomes the "game changer" that Joyce touts then the European airlines will jump on it pretty quickly. Advantage lost, back to competing on service and price.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a8606376.html

https://thewest.com.au/news/aviation...ng-b881000561z

The only caveat would be that Branson has a long history of saying things for his own reasons but nothing happening. A little like Joyce and the business class Malaysian venture, Jetstar Hong Kong...
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 11:11
  #515 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 759
The advantage Qantas has this time is that only Australian and UK carriers can fly it, no 5th or 6th freedom rights to middle eastern or Asian carriers so competition is limited.
dragon man is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 11:27
  #516 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 937
Originally Posted by dragon man View Post
The advantage Qantas has this time is that only Australian and UK carriers can fly it, no 5th or 6th freedom rights to middle eastern or Asian carriers so competition is limited.
Well that's just a matter of time and more lobbying
maggot is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 11:38
  #517 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 759
Originally Posted by maggot View Post
Well that's just a matter of time and more lobbying
Well they havnt managed it across the Pacific and they tried that for years. Personally I donít think the Australian government would be that stupid.
dragon man is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2019, 14:04
  #518 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,070
The MEL/SYD airport infrastructure is creaking at the knees with 737's every 10 minutes. How do you reckon they'd go with B797 or A330 loads cycling at that frequency?
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2019, 03:57
  #519 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 745
How do you reckon they'd go with B797 or A330 loads cycling at that frequency
Wide bodies woukd see a significant frequency reduction. An A330 every ten minutes?
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2019, 09:43
  #520 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by Ken Borough View Post


Wide bodies woukd see a significant frequency reduction. An A330 every ten minutes?
Yep, you'd still have a flight every 15 minutes, but you'd have a higher wide-body:narrow-body ratio. By the time demand has grown enough to require wide-bodies every 15 minutes, SWZ will be open which will relieve the pressure for some time.
HOBAY 3 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.