Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Qantas Project Sunrise Airbus order 2 May 2022?

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

Qantas Project Sunrise Airbus order 2 May 2022?

Old 1st May 2022, 13:24
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: In Space
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I reckon that the Irishman is eventually targeting Syd to Syd non-stop with no jet lag.
The Messnger is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 13:28
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FullWings View Post
I wonder what the ticket prices will be? One 20-hr flight uses considerably more fuel than two 10hr ones.
This is only one side of the cost equation. More fuel, but less airframe hours, less cycles for any cycle-related maintenance, etc. I'm sure the long haul carriers know the numbers, but traditionally nonstops have always expanded with the capability of aircraft to overfly previous intermediate stops.

Furthermore, as I have described many times, cost and revenue are not directly connected. Revenue is driven by what passengers will pay you, not by how much it costs you to provide it.
WHBM is online now  
Old 1st May 2022, 13:56
  #23 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by KRviator View Post
Indeed...It's only 30 years since Qantas took their new 747-400 non-stop from London to Sydney. You would have thought if tomorrows announcement is about the A350 & LHR-SYD non-stop that Airbus wold at least be able to do Toulouse-Sydney non-stop to show off their new toy.

Guess they have their reasons. Maybe it's to placate der fuhrer so he doesn't think he's going to lose his precious QF9/QF10 services out of Perth?
Iím guessing the reason for the night time arrival would be the QF decals placed on the aircraft for its grand entrance in the morning.

With todays winds, and the configuration it flew in, they could have flown LHR-AKL with OHA as an alternate.
swh is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 14:41
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FullWings View Post
One 20-hr flight uses considerably more fuel than two 10hr ones.
I would need to check the maths, but I would not be so sure about that. Yes, fuel consumption is highest at takeoff, and is a direct function of takeoff weight, but the equation is definitely not 1:1. Also the 20 hr sector needs to be compared to two 10.5 hr to allow for another approach/landing & takeoff. But the big savings is doing away with the interim airport landing and handling fees which is a considerable portion of total cost. On the revenue side I'm not so sure how it will work out. As a rule of thumb, an airline can charge a premium for a non-stop service (or rather competitors with a connection need to offer a discount), however on such a long route where the time saving is marginal, I don't know to what extent will this work. I for one would rather pay less and spend a night in a Bangkok hotel to break it into two shorter legs. The key is how much of the premium traffic will they manage to capture to fill F/C. I have taken QF first, and the experience was quite disappointing in comparison with what the competition has to offer.


andrasz is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 15:35
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: the hills of halton
Age: 70
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How many cabin crew will they use ? Will they need 3 sets of flight crew also ?.
widgeon is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 17:33
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess they will work out something with the regulator. The longest continuous duty Iíve done was just under 28hrs last year under an alleviation.

I would need to check the maths, but I would not be so sure about that. Yes, fuel consumption is highest at takeoff, and is a direct function of takeoff weight, but the equation is definitely not 1:1. Also the 20 hr sector needs to be compared to two 10.5 hr to allow for another approach/landing & takeoff. But the big savings is doing away with the interim airport landing and handling fees which is a considerable portion of total cost. On the revenue side I'm not so sure how it will work out. As a rule of thumb, an airline can charge a premium for a non-stop service (or rather competitors with a connection need to offer a discount), however on such a long route where the time saving is marginal, I don't know to what extent will this work. I for one would rather pay less and spend a night in a Bangkok hotel to break it into two shorter legs. The key is how much of the premium traffic will they manage to capture to fill F/C. I have taken QF first, and the experience was quite disappointing in comparison with what the competition has to offer.
Itís non-linear and by the time you get out to the 20th hour of flying, you have had to carry the fuel to do that for 19hrs, burning a significant amount to do that. For a given L/D ratio, there is a point eventually where adding more fuel doesnít measurably increase the range, similar to the rocket equationís relationship to velocity. Itís an informed guess, but Iíd expect to use at least 40% more fuel on a 20hr ULH sector than two 10.5hr ones with the same payload; at ~USD1,200/mt thatís going to be significant. Also, you might save in cycle-denominated engineering costs but youíre going to work the engines harder, especially taking off with likely very little or no derate.

FullWings is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 17:37
  #27 (permalink)  
When you live....
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: 0.0221 DME Keyboard
Posts: 949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In Perth


UnderneathTheRadar is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 19:18
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The A343 flight was done during the Le Bourget Airshow in 1993
Rwy in Sight is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 21:36
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by widgeon View Post
How many cabin crew will they use ? Will they need 3 sets of flight crew also ?.
The expectation is that they'll still use a Captain, F/O and 2 S/Os as they currently do on Ultra Longhaul services such as Perth/Darwin-London and Dallas-Sydney.

There was a push by some of the Pilot representatives to at least include a second F/O, rather than second S/O, to allow the 'landing' crew to optimise their rest prior to descent but this has been deemed unnecessary……by those who will rarely if ever have to do it.
C441 is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 21:37
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by andrasz View Post
Also the 20 hr sector needs to be compared to two 10.5 hr to allow for another approach/landing & takeoff. But the big savings is doing away with the interim airport landing and handling fees which is a considerable portion of total cost.
Not only a 20 to 21 hour comparison, but there's ground time as well, it seems impossible nowadays to turn a long-haul widebody in less than 1.5 hours, so now 22.5 hours. You also need a commercially sensible intermediate stop bang on the Great Circle track to achieve this. If you are doing passenger work at the intermediate stop it's then a challenge to balance loads equally, every time, on both legs, so some revenue wastage there.
WHBM is online now  
Old 1st May 2022, 21:43
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 56
Posts: 2,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No, it is going via Perth so that AJ can get the Network, Cobham, Alliance and VARA chaps to put in a price to fly the shiny jet.
Stationair8 is offline  
Old 1st May 2022, 22:36
  #32 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
  • Approval of Project Sunrise, with order for 12 x Airbus A350s capable of flying direct from Australia to any other city including New York and London, starting from Sydney in late 2025.
  • Domestic fleet renewal from late 2023, with order for 40 x A321XLRs and A220 aircraft; 94 purchase order rights spread over at least a decade.
  • Major improvements in emissions, running costs and passenger comfort vs retiring aircraft.
  • No change to FY23 capital guidance; structure of orders to align with Group Financial Framework[1].
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/me...pe-its-future/
swh is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 00:22
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Somewhere on the Australian Coast
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
The expectation is that they'll still use a Captain, F/O and 2 S/Os as they currently do on Ultra Longhaul services such as Perth/Darwin-London and Dallas-Sydney.

There was a push by some of the Pilot representatives to at least include a second F/O, rather than second S/O, to allow the 'landing' crew to optimise their rest prior to descent but this has been deemed unnecessaryÖÖby those who will rarely if ever have to do it.
When did that get canned? The ability for the Captain and at least one of the FOs to get the rest they wanted was the only thing that made 20 plus hr duties even vaguely palatable or acceptable from a fatigue mitigation standpoint.
DirectAnywhere is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 04:25
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by blubak View Post
Oh there you go,GT in the know again.
I guess he was on the phone to Alan this morning & advised him what seating was required.
Im sure his face will pop up at the Airbus hosted cocktail party in Sydney tomorrow evening.
Oh God, he is such a BS artist tool.

"About 270" is not what it will carry, it is nowhere near 238 - which is what it will ACTUALLY be configured for - he can't even get the figure correct. It nearly makes me vomit every time I see this dolt's face on TV with the banner saying "Aviation Expert".

Wouldn't know an aeroplane or an aviation fact if it slowly surfaced in his morning porridge.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 05:25
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Oztralia
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely JQ will end up 320/321xlr and send the 78ís to mainline?
SixDemonBag is online now  
Old 2nd May 2022, 05:47
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SixDemonBag View Post
Surely JQ will end up 320/321xlr and send the 78’s to mainline?
More chance being sold vs handing over. They did try to sell 1/4 of the 788's back in 2019. When backlogs for big twins start to bite again in a few years, then I would expect them to be flogged off for a premium again. The next year or two is all about taking advantage the travel boom, then it's back to business when the red ink starts to appear again around the network.

Doubtful that JQ will go into the 2030's and beyond with big twins. A321 will do a whole heap of Asia, Aussie Pilots, Asia CC. That last bit seems to always be the most important bit.
PoppaJo is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 06:26
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: OZ
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
12 A350 frames would be about 100ish Captains. Any speculation how senior these slots would likely go? ie don't hold out if your number isn't < 300

A321 commands could be enticing for senior WB FOs (or those not wanting to endure the dodgy seat back on the 73) or even those 65+ bidding back with an easier conversion compared to 73.
Buckshot is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 07:31
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: melbourne
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective View Post
Oh God, he is such a BS artist tool.

"About 270" is not what it will carry, it is nowhere near 238 - which is what it will ACTUALLY be configured for - he can't even get the figure correct. It nearly makes me vomit every time I see this dolt's face on TV with the banner saying "Aviation Expert".

Wouldn't know an aeroplane or an aviation fact if it slowly surfaced in his morning porridge.
Will be very interesting to see ticket prices on these flights. Having only 238 pax is going to really test the economics of this service,the outlay for this aircraft is massive & with fuel prices like they are now its going to be a interesting exercise to convince the punters to pay a premium so they can save a couple of hours to get from point A to point B.
blubak is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 08:02
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstar comms said today the 20 A321xlrs are destined for Jetstar from next year.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 2nd May 2022, 08:06
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ollie. They are 2 different orders for A321xlr's.

I've also heard that they are different engine types. JQ CFM and QF P&W
SandyPalms is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.