PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Qantas still looking at 777-200LR for kangaroo nonstops (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/207727-qantas-still-looking-777-200lr-kangaroo-nonstops.html)

go_dj 23rd Jan 2006 14:23

Qantas still looking at 777-200LR for kangaroo nonstops
 
http://atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=3780

Qantas still looking at 777-200LR for kangaroo nonstops
Monday January 23, 2006
Geoffrey Thomas

Qantas confirmed to ATWOnline last week that its evaluation of the 777-200LR is ongoing despite local media reports indicating it had been shelved. Qantas CFO Peter Gregg told this website that the 777-200LR is "definitely under serious evaluation," although he was coy on the finer details of the operational options under examination.

Originally, the carrier was hoping to offer year-round nonstop Sydney-London service, but that would have required a 120-seat configuration and passengers would have had to pay a 30% fare premium. Late last year, industry analysts suggested to ATWOnline that a 1-hr. fuel-only technical stop westbound in winter would give the airline greater flexibility, allowing operation of the dash 200LR with a 250-seat configuration, including premium economy, with no fare premium.

"The reality is our operational criteria is tougher than other airlines and in service we will find that the 777-200LR will operate nonstop both ways almost year-round," said one Qantas source.

Gregg reconfirmed that the carrier also wants the 777-200LR for other long-haul flights from Sydney to destinations such as Dallas, New York or Frankfurt. It is contending with intense competition from Emirates on routes to Europe via Dubai and also faces the prospect of archrival Singapore Airlines entering the Australia-US market at some point. It wants an ultra-long-range hub-busting aircraft to give it more flexibility. Analysts expect it to order between 10 and 15 777-200LRs. Interestingly, Qantas was one of the seven airlines that helped Boeing design the 777 in the early 1990s and is the only one of those not to have ordered the jet.

Gregg told ATWOnline that the airline's engineering department is very interested in the 747-8 and is taking a hard look at that aircraft, which would replace its 747-400s.

by Geoffrey Thomas

akerosid 23rd Jan 2006 17:44

Even if they don't go for the -200LR, don't they still have a need for the -300ER, to replace some of the older 744s and the 743s?

Keg 24th Jan 2006 00:25

We sure do. I reckon there will be another very significant aircraft order within the next couple of years. :ok: :cool:

qcc2 24th Jan 2006 01:28

renewed leases
 
QF recently renewed the 767 RR leases with BA till 2012. those old bangers are in need of a major refurbishment.:ok:

missy 24th Jan 2006 05:48

Why not configure a B772 to run non-stop SYD-LHR-SYD business class only. As Sam would say "you know it makes sense".

Sheep Guts 24th Jan 2006 07:55

QFcainer,
The first 767 to be srapped happened a few months back it was an ex Americaan airline jo with 85,000 Hrs approx and heap of cycles. It had been in the air an average of 9 hrs day since it was relaesed for service in the eighties.

Sheep

Pimp Daddy 24th Jan 2006 09:00


Originally Posted by Sheep Guts
QFcainer,
The first 767 to be srapped happened a few months back it was an ex Americaan airline jo with 85,000 Hrs approx and heap of cycles. I

?

The first Qantas one?

Cos they chopped up one of the Ansett ones a good year ago and there is whats left of an ex Air NZ one at Auckland as a fire trainer.

DomeAir 24th Jan 2006 19:24

Qantas must be in a real dilemma about the possibility of having an aircraft go non-stop because of what it will do to the existing Kangaroo route.

With the A380 just over a year away and no doubt configured in a very expensive tri-class config, having the choice (well potential) to operate a non-stop service but risk taking away some of your most profitable and highest revenue generating seats must make for some interesting internal discussion.

From a business pax perspective, I think most people would prefer to fly non-stop and the only way to make a long range mid size airliner like the 777-200LR work on such a sector is if you are flying high revenue generating seats (e.g. mainly business (say 70% of seats, 10% first and 20% premium economy but certainly no discount seats).

How viable is it? If you assumed the following scenario:
- Two flights going to LHR (ex SYD) with similar arrival times
- One leaves SYD 2 hours later than the first
- The first is via SIN or BKK, with 550 other pax (you know what the lounge can look like)
- The second is 150 pax all in J & F
- The J class pax is travelling for work and is not paying for his/her ticket

The only way to make the one-stop flight attractive would be to offer a reduced fare in business or first (or charge a premium for the non-stop). Given the uniqueness of the service, they probably would get a premium but there is a lot of alternative competition for the one-stop…

And if the non-stop proved as popular as what I think it would become, the A380 would need to be re-configured in a higher density config…

Given the above, I can certainly see why it is not just a case of "can the aircraft fly the route..."

Apologies for this lengthy (and boring) response!

RaTa 24th Jan 2006 20:07

With the reduced amount of seating to be able to do the distance, Qantas will probably want to charge extra to make the economics work. The big question is will the business customers want to pay the extra to save approximately 2.5 hours? :confused:

Transition Layer 24th Jan 2006 20:51

DomeAir said:


And if the non-stop proved as popular as what I think it would become, the A380 would need to be re-configured in a higher density config…
Exactly, and in steps the little irish man and voila! An A380 with 700 economy class seats, full of backpackers and VFR pax and Jetstar international is born. Now imagine what the departure lounge looks like!!!

TL

podbreak 24th Jan 2006 21:54


Originally Posted by Sheep Guts
QFcainer,
The first 767 to be srapped happened a few months back it was an ex Americaan airline jo with 85,000 Hrs approx and heap of cycles. It had been in the air an average of 9 hrs day since it was relaesed for service in the eighties.

Sheep

Air Canada have scrapped a few in the last few yrs, not to mension TWA and Malev, who all have scrapped 767s. dunno where that stat came from?

theflyer1735 25th Jan 2006 01:19


Originally Posted by DomeAir
Qantas must be in a real dilemma about the possibility of having an aircraft go non-stop because of what it will do to the existing Kangaroo route.

With the A380 just over a year away and no doubt configured in a very expensive tri-class config, having the choice (well potential) to operate a non-stop service but risk taking away some of your most profitable and highest revenue generating seats must make for some interesting internal discussion.

From a business pax perspective, I think most people would prefer to fly non-stop and the only way to make a long range mid size airliner like the 777-200LR work on such a sector is if you are flying high revenue generating seats (e.g. mainly business (say 70% of seats, 10% first and 20% premium economy but certainly no discount seats).

How viable is it? If you assumed the following scenario:
- Two flights going to LHR (ex SYD) with similar arrival times
- One leaves SYD 2 hours later than the first
- The first is via SIN or BKK, with 550 other pax (you know what the lounge can look like)
- The second is 150 pax all in J & F
- The J class pax is travelling for work and is not paying for his/her ticket

The only way to make the one-stop flight attractive would be to offer a reduced fare in business or first (or charge a premium for the non-stop). Given the uniqueness of the service, they probably would get a premium but there is a lot of alternative competition for the one-stop…

And if the non-stop proved as popular as what I think it would become, the A380 would need to be re-configured in a higher density config…

Given the above, I can certainly see why it is not just a case of "can the aircraft fly the route..."

Apologies for this lengthy (and boring) response!

Very insightful DomeAir :ok:

Plus they look the business, Qantas if you are reading this... please, pretty please buy us some 200LR's

VC9 25th Jan 2006 03:29

However the L/H Flight Attendants will insist on a stopover for the a minimum of two local nights along the way. That kills the nonstop service,

lowerlobe 25th Jan 2006 03:51

I doubt whether we will have any say on any new service,it's possibility will be dictated by weight ,weather ,tech crew , revenue and marketing not cabin crew

drshmoo 25th Jan 2006 03:52

The long Haul flight attendants (clearing throat), I mean biscuit chuckers are the ones that will be doing it tough on their feet for 18-20 hours. The pilots go from sitting down to the bunks and back again. The poor biscuit chuckers will want to tear their feet off after that sort of duty time.
.........they got plenty of time on their backs later though I spose:} :}

Bad Adventures 25th Jan 2006 04:19

Probably about as much time as you have with Mrs Palmer and her 5 daughters on a daily basis Drshmoo!! :}

Buster Hyman 25th Jan 2006 04:38

Well, if it's weight restricted to make the distance, I doubt there will be a lot of revenue freight in the lower hold. With the anticipated space available downstairs, perhaps they will install a crew module, a la A340? Rotate the seagulls during the service & Bob's yer Uncle!

1013 25th Jan 2006 11:07

Even if QF cant get a B777 that will do LHR direct they are a great replacement for the ageing B744 fleet and the B777-300ER will carry some 350 odd pax from Asia to London or Frankfurt for alot less than a B744 can.
The savings on fuel as well as initial depreciation will save QF a fortune alone.

Add to that flexibility across the Pacific (even ETOPS) if needed and to Asia.
Its an outstanding aircraft - especially to replace the A330 which is payload limiting on certain sectors as QF has found out to ports such as India and China.

akerosid 25th Jan 2006 17:37

777-300er
 
The 773ER certainly seems like a highly suitable aircraft for QF and can do pretty much everything the 744 currently does, incl. MEL-LAX.
Here's a route from the Great Circle site; 7,250nm from SYD, with 180min ETOPS; shaded areas are the ones it can't reach. SYD-DFW just outside the range (by about 200nm).

http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=&...YLE=&ETOPS=180

Word on another forum suggests BA is expected to order 777-300ER, so perhaps a joint order or even a common specification may be possible.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.