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

Qantas to get A321 NEO

Old 21st Feb 2019, 05:51
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Why buy aircrafts when you can buy back shares? Those LTI options are not going to vest thenselves!
downdata is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 08:58
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,681
Originally Posted by goodonyamate View Post
QF Domestic making record profits again, great news as there is no reason for the SH pilots to accept a sub standard deal
JQ Domestic also doing well
QF International profitable, hit by fuel costs but the increase in the first half will be fully recovered in the second half, so no reason to take flight plan fuel everywhere
smoke and haze around JQ international, nothing disclosed as usual.
QF International profitable, hit by fuel costs & STILL HAVING TO PAY SOME OF JQ INTERNATIONALís BILLS.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 15:16
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 1,530
Originally Posted by Going Boeing View Post


QF International profitable, hit by fuel costs & STILL HAVING TO PAY SOME OF JQ INTERNATIONALís BILLS.
And your proof is where sir?
morno is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 18:16
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 138
Originally Posted by -438 View Post
There are currently rumours Qantas will be announcing an order of 737 MAX, A321neo, A330neo, A350, 788's returning from Jetstar and 777X. There was even a recent rumour of additional A380's (that rumour is probably dead now!)
Believe what you like, however AJ hasn't ordered any aircraft for Qantas since becoming CEO.
New aircraft orders are not good for his share price!!
Investing in the future isn't good for the share price. And this is an airline business, which runs on technology that is constantly evolving. Shareholders must be stupid.
RickNRoll is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 19:22
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In a better place
Posts: 53
Post edited

Last edited by help me jebus; 25th Feb 2019 at 20:45.
help me jebus is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 19:42
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea
Posts: 650
Spoken as a Boeing guy, I'd prefer a 320/321/350 mix for everything if fleet commonality and strealined training paths were actually a thing. I think the 321 NEO and 350 both work very well in their respective roles, as probably will the 777-X. The 737Max is a sad answer to the 321...it’s an aeroplane that has roots that go halfway back to the Wright Bros. Lots of lipstick, but still a pig.

Whatever they decide it will be at odds with the hopes of at least half of us, it will be too little, and it will be too late.
Australopithecus is online now  
Old 21st Feb 2019, 22:53
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,271
Hereís my guesses...

Sunrise/380 replacement - mixture of A350-900 and -1000 (16 total)
A330 North Asian (thinner routes) international flying replaced by B787 including 787-10s - (total fleet numbers around 40)
A330 domestic transcon and triangle, plus thinner short haul international replaced by 797 - (fleet of around 30)
Traditional domestic flying and off peak triangle/transcon replaced by 737 MAX 8 (60 aircraft)

So basically the versatile 797 picks up a portion of 737 and 330 flying, and the 787 does the long thin routes it does now in addition to most of the Asian A330 stuff apart from SIN. 737 MAXs replace the oldest of the 737 fleet and the long lead time on the 797 ties in well with the retirement of the newest aircraft in the 737 fleet.

Youíd end up with a Mainline fleet of approximately 140 aircraft versus 129 in 2020 when the 744s go and next tranche of 787s have arrived.

An eye watering amount of capex whichever way you look at it
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 02:07
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: M.I.A.
Posts: 125
Originally Posted by Transition Layer View Post
An eye watering amount of capex whichever way you look at it
But would be a lot more manageable if the CEO actually invested in the company rather than his share portfolio and started ordering jets now, not hospital passing an aging fleet to the next CEO whoíd be faced with the need for urgent fleet renewal.
Bug Smasher Smasher is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 02:15
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
I think youíve got that very wrong.

Qantas will put A321 neos on the triangle/trans cont and phase out the 330s.

The 737 fleet will be replaced by 320/321 neos

There will be token 787 services connecting to Europe on the west coast side and the americas on the east coast side.

Mainline will get the 787s from JQ which will become an all
A320/321 operator.

The 787-8 will probably do transcont and thin long distance routes.

They will look at the 797.

The A350 will be the project sunrise winner. Despite the 777 being a great aeroplane, itís an older design and with AJs emphasis on new technology, itís a new generation of jet.

This will replace 380s and they will get 20-30 of them.

MACH082 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 03:40
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
From what I understand the tanks are the same size. The engines are de-rated and the config is more dense. Which is why they donít have the range.

The origanal plan at JQ was to take the -8s setup the network, take some -9s and give the -8s back to QF as transcontinental machines. Hence why they were setup without crew rest etc.
MACH082 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 04:22
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 944
Originally Posted by Transition Layer View Post
Hereís my guesses...

Sunrise/380 replacement - mixture of A350-900 and -1000 (16 total)
A330 North Asian (thinner routes) international flying replaced by B787 including 787-10s - (total fleet numbers around 40)
A330 domestic transcon and triangle, plus thinner short haul international replaced by 797 - (fleet of around 30)
Traditional domestic flying and off peak triangle/transcon replaced by 737 MAX 8 (60 aircraft)

So basically the versatile 797 picks up a portion of 737 and 330 flying, and the 787 does the long thin routes it does now in addition to most of the Asian A330 stuff apart from SIN. 737 MAXs replace the oldest of the 737 fleet and the long lead time on the 797 ties in well with the retirement of the newest aircraft in the 737 fleet.

Youíd end up with a Mainline fleet of approximately 140 aircraft versus 129 in 2020 when the 744s go and next tranche of 787s have arrived.

An eye watering amount of capex whichever way you look at it
Yeah I don't see an a330 neo neo order for us despite its suitability but I also doubt 787-10s. Just need a 'regional config' for a dozen or so 789s. Same sized jet as the 333 and better burn, cheaper maintenance (?) And some of the 333s are getting tired.
maggot is online now  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 04:46
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,305
Oh, it's EBA time, must have something to scare the worker's with...
Right now in a super secret hiding spot, the covert team at Fort Fumble have spent months working the name of this new project...

'Project Sunset'

So long has Little Napoleon talked of new aircraft that his covert team realised the industry long ago re-equipped and moved on and that the sun has set...
Rated De is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 05:17
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia the Awesome
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by MACH082 View Post
From what I understand the tanks are the same size. The engines are de-rated and the config is more dense. Which is why they donít have the range.

The origanal plan at JQ was to take the -8s setup the network, take some -9s and give the -8s back to QF as transcontinental machines. Hence why they were setup without crew rest etc.
The tanks are the same size, 101 tonnes of fuel.

The engines are 70k (although originally 64k)

335 seats

30 tonnes less MTOW so range would be about the same. (Average 4.5 t/hour burn)

As for the second part, that sounds like it could have been possible, the -8 would be a good City Flyer machine.
Roj approved is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 06:23
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,305
As for the second part, that sounds like it could have been possible, the -8 would be a good City Flyer machine.
That is precisely the specific plan behind the order.
They were to replace the aging 767 fleet, offering dual aisle capacity that was needed in space constrained monopoly airports. It is with more than a little irony that Little Napoleon complains of carpark charges and congestion when his fleet plan created a lot of it airside at domestic airports country wide. Instead Boston Bruce Buchanan then CEO of JQ, pitched the board that JQ was to get a few, then all the 788.
His reasoning was that ironically long haul low cost didn't work. It still doesn't but that is another discussion.

Instead Little Napoleon's preoccupation with JQ now sees QF domestic denied an aircraft that would have provided brand differentiation, yield potential and the ability to swing capacity when needed.
Instead QF cram 737 aircraft into already crowded terminal areas, onto crowded aprons and congested runways and have the temerity to claim that it is 'efficient'
Rated De is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 07:33
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 369
30 tonnes less MTOW so range would be about the same.
Not sure about that. The 30T lower MTOW equates to about 345 passengers, and the stretched fuselage is not 30T heavier so unless the -8 is flying empty then the -9 will have a greater range.
Beer Baron is online now  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 08:00
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
The higher thrust engines and increased max takeoff weight of the -9 mean it can fill the tanks to the brim and carry a reasonable load.

You cant fill the tanks up in a 335 seat -8 and expect to carry 335 punters.

The ZFW of both is not hugely different from what I understand.
MACH082 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 10:38
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia the Awesome
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by Beer Baron View Post
Not sure about that. The 30T lower MTOW equates to about 345 passengers, and the stretched fuselage is not 30T heavier so unless the -8 is flying empty then the -9 will have a greater range.
Yes Beer Baron, I see your point. The Basic Empty Weights difference wouldnít be much, but QF wouldnít have much over 200 in an -8, so the tanks could be filled and the range would be similar.

Anyway, the QF 787 training manager has flown both so Iím sure he will be able to provide the numbers if this was to happen.

If there was any swapping of -8 for -9 or vis versa, you can guarantee it wonít be done until the new EAís are signed off in favour of the company.
Roj approved is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 20:53
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 138
Originally Posted by -438 View Post
There are currently rumours Qantas will be announcing an order of 737 MAX, A321neo, A330neo, A350, 788's returning from Jetstar and 777X. There was even a recent rumour of additional A380's (that rumour is probably dead now!)
Believe what you like, however AJ hasn't ordered any aircraft for Qantas since becoming CEO.
New aircraft orders are not good for his share price!!
What about the very soon to be announced in the very near future 797?
RickNRoll is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 23:01
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the Trees
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by Roj approved View Post
Yes Beer Baron, I see your point. The Basic Empty Weights difference wouldnít be much, but QF wouldnít have much over 200 in an -8, so the tanks could be filled and the range would be similar.

Anyway, the QF 787 training manager has flown both so Iím sure he will be able to provide the numbers if this was to happen.

If there was any swapping of -8 for -9 or vis versa, you can guarantee it wonít be done until the new EAís are signed off in favour of the company.
If Qantas donít put more than 200 in a 787 why get it back. From what I read the A321 NEO can take up to 240 pax , I understand J* currently carry 230.Domestically even if you throw a few rows of business in you would still get over 200 pax in , with freight, at a burn of slightly less than a 738. Even trans continental the numbers donít really stack up for a 787 return to domestic with around 200 seats.

Saying that, and knowing the current management itís probably on the cards!!
ANCDU is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 23:43
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
Thatís going to be the conundrum with the 797.

The A321neo can carry over 200 in a dual class layout, and can do up to 4000nm. The 797 will have to be keenly priced and offer significant savings for it to be worthwhile.

The A321neo a very capable machine. Which is why I think the days are numbered for 787s at JQ.
MACH082 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.