alangirvan

Airlines only do this when they:

1. Can’t justify putting their own aircraft on the route, i.e. not enough business. Most of Europe from Australia with the exception of the UK would be leisure therefore low yield.
2. Don’t have enough aircraft to service the route or more correctly the aircraft can be better utilised on more profitable routes, i.e. the UK or US.
3. Don’t have enough crew to service the route. “Same as above”

This is why QF has the joint operation to Paris, and why I think the best way for Qantas to carry traffic to Italy is by having a joint operation with an Italian carrier. Alitalia could fly from Rome to SIN and from Milan to Singapore. Milan would be a business city - Singapore Airlines started a service to Milan last year, and they are now using a bigger plane - 777-300ER replacing 777-200ER. The market is there if QF and AZ do not stand back and watch Singapore AL take it from them.


From trip reports on airliners.net, Alitalia is not too bad in Business Class. I think some of their 767s were flown by Australian crews.

alangirvan

From an outsiders point of view it would appear QF is moving away from using Singapore as a hub to Europe and the UK. Hong Kong and Shanghai seem to be the flavour of the month. Apart from flying from the west coast, the shortest distance to the above from the east coast is via HK and to a lesser extent Shanghai. It is also worth pointing out that to code share, there must be two airlines in agreement. Maybe QF couldn’t come to an agreement with Alitalia. Maybe QF is shy to use Alitalia which over the last decade or so has had a workforce that aren’t afraid to strike at little notice. This is all hearsay of course.

Massive business risks to AZ - they've been on the brink of collapse for years and EU authorities are investigating whether they've been propped up by illegal state aid.

Barge pole/yours, etc.


I seem to recall that, when Jetstar Int'l was launched, there were loud noises about the lower-cost structure being spot-on for re-opening non-operational 'Qantas group' routes that mainline couldn't run at a profit and that this would eventually include multi-sector routes to Europe. Interesting that the growth talk seems to centre on mainline again...

I find it hard to believe that it was not economical for QF to go to Rome. I saw the loads on those flights and it was pretty much full of pax and freight every time. For those that tried to use staff travel on it, they will also testify that it was difficult to get on most of the year.

If you can't make money with an aircraft full of pax and freight, perhaps you should get out of the airline game. I think that most of the routes they pulled out of were economical, but there is more money to be made on other routes. If that is the case just say so, and don't continually feed everyone BS.

743
 

old 743's/744 used too much juice. yields were also too low. now if you had a 777...................................money to be made:ok:

rammel
exactly correct, short and to the point.
Sadly :( propogated by people at the top... who are still there, and apparently will remain, after the pantomime that was the APA takeover.

The airline certainly should remain - certain dracula's could (arguably) be moved on and should be.. "liabilities on the balance sheet" ..."loss of faith from inversors" ... "uncertainty about priority of loyalties" etc etc, the options just keep flowing and flowing!

As a total sidebar - when's the next QF shareholders meeting, one can only hope it will be as volatile as it deserves to be.

alangirvan
If Australian airline accountants had their way Australian airlines (note small "a") would fly just one leg out of Australia and code share the rest of the journey!!!!

Rumour from way up north
Source :-The feed back meeting/road show with that prique CFO Greg.
777 are coming won't say when but confirmed delivery.
Reading between the lines
Might be sooner than you think as deal is being brokered.
How many aircraft types will we have ? Could be up to 8 different types come October next year.
How do we support it? I see some O/T coming on. (Engineering)

FOG

Bolty,

I don't know how much more O/T there is left available!

I'm not aware of any guys on blank lines that have been doing less than divisor since about the middle of last year and there are quite a few of them who are always up the 100 in 30 problem or 900 in 365. You just need to look at open time and see how many lines were being broken due to crewing problems in the last few bid periods.

Good news for all on the 'hold file' I'd think!

Twin.

You don't know anyone on the Classic or the A330?:confused:

Think he might be talking about engineering...

Bring on the 777, far too late and....

FOG

Correct. Many of the A330 crews have been on leave punctuated by the odd trip. I don't know the figures but I am sure they are well short of 900.... :yuk:

This is not unusual ...
 

I know QF pilots who've flown less than 200 hours so far this calendar year due to QF`s great manpower planning. Coincidentally they've been obliged to use (waste?) a truckload of annual AND Long Service leave to help solve the situation. In all　this, QF has;
- pocketed the delayed-A380 compo from EADS,
- trained for 14 jets then gave four away and still kept training,
- implemented (quite rightly) the Carmen rostering system for enhanced efficiency, and
- avoided using the temporary surplus manpower to supplement other parts of the group.
Surely it can`t have been a crisis-managed and reactive "best effort" in dream market circumstances can it? Unfortunately, the alternative conclusion is just depressing... :sad:

They say they'll all be busy next year though!!

fair enough,

should have said -400. :oh:

Any info on how many 777's to expect? Speculation on where they might go (Europe or Asia being possible), especially since DJ will be using them in the not too distant future to the US?

Given that NZ use them to LA, SFO and YVR from AKL, the options could be endless.

Curious times ahead...

Anyone running a book on the chances of an announcement at Paris (which kicks off next week)?

Or (and this is pure speculation) an order involving the 747-8 (given Boeing are saying it will be able to do YSSY-KJFK direct)?

Alternatively, QF might be joining Emirates in pushing for Boeing to develop a 787-10... Boeing have been pushing back on that as it would eat into the(now fully-amortised) 777 programme.

That said, any 787-10 would be several years off (even if work started now) so 777 would be available rather sooner.


Mr Seatback 2,

NZ use their triplers on the London-via-HK run, also.

One suspects that the rat will be wanting to get as long a set of legs as they can on any 777s they acquire; this has been the theme of any comments they've made on the subject in recent years (eg. going back to '02) and when the 787 order was placed last year (or was it '05?) GoD explicitly said that 777s were not ordered at the time as the "commercial guys" couldn't get the profitability sums to work in terms of yield/load mix and service reliability year-round, both ways.

Maybe a couple of years of improvements in aerodynamics, engine technology and weight-saving measures, plus some in-service experience of the various E/LR 777 variants gleaned from other carriers, has enabled them to update the spreadsheets.

ATEOTD if you can make it go to London from Sydney then you can use it to anywhere in between. It doesn't really matter where it'll go - it either works in the fleet, or it doesn't. The 330s weren't 'supposed' to other than domestic but guess what they do now? :ugh:

These things (airframes) have an in-service life of usually 10-25 years so the use plans made when first acquired are unlikely to stay the same throughout such a time-frame. You don't see any -300s at EGLL these days, even though that's what they were bought to do.

Updated figure is now 10-20 arriving in Sept 08

How is any airline, even one as big as Qantas, going to have the training and engineering capacity and resources to introduce three new major types in a period of about four months? A380 in August, 787 in October, and now 777 in September??? :hmm::hmm::hmm:

It's my understanding that the impending 380/787 arrivals and the accompanying drain on resources is what has really prevented QF from ordering the Triple.

Magoo

As Jetstar are being the first to operate the 787, surely they are doing all the work to introduce and set up for it, thus easing the stretched resources of QF mainline. QF mainline should only be worrying about the 380, which they have had years to work and plan for. Should all be smooth sailing in theory.

Just digressing a bit, but the mention of the 767 airframes retiring got me thinking. As QF start retiring the 76 airframes, do they automatically place 76 Tech Crew onto the 787 or 777, which could be wildly out of seniority, or do these slots still go on seniority?? (Remembering that the 787 is a replacement aircraft for the 76).
It just seems a bit strange and an incredible waste of money if it went on seniority, thus meaning 2 crew having to be trained for new aircraft instead of just the one on the aircraft replacing theirs.
M

mmmbop

Normally fleet numbers reduce over a period of time and crew members start bidding off the fleet. Management massage the movement within the 12 month training period by allocating priority positions on other fleets to crew members of fleets where there is an excess (no bypass involved when it's within the training period). There would normally be very few crew members who would be left in a position where they would have to be assigned to a lower type.

SkyScanner

QF won't be getting Triplers that are 1990's technology, therefore I doubt that we will be getting them next year (are your sources reliable?). Deliveries starting 2012 is my understanding and they will be the "Series 2" version with a lot of B787 technology included - longer range, lower fuel burn, lower seat/km costs, common flight deck, etc. The only way that QF would take early delivery of Triplers would be if they were short term leases with the aircraft being replaced by the "Series 2" when they are available.

From my experience with Jet * Int they are not organised enough to run a chook raffle. Even when the tiniest event happens with the A330 fleet ( Honolulu was not tiny) the phone runs hot from all the bosses at Jet * Int, you end up explaining the sit rep 10 times instead of fixing the defect.

Plus I have heard on the grape vine that CASA have marked Jet * Ints card and have been told there is no way this ADHOC operation will be allowed to introduce new technology/type to the OZ register.

Which brings it straight back to QF engineering...... which means the characters whom now manage engineering with no operational experience yet alone introduced a new type had better pull their finger out and get some people onboard whom can because no consultant agency can pull them thru this.. CLOWNs


FOG

hey bolty
mate is it true that the geoff up in hnl with pornstar cost $4 mill

Re the intro of the 787, The manager flight training said in the Flt op news letter a couple of months ago that QF flight training was happy yo be selected by JQ to train them on the 787:sad:. The article almost made me vomit. Like there would have been any other organisation in the running. Also funny in that JQ selected a training organisation that don't even have that sort of aircraft. Bit like Virgin selecting QF flt training to run the jungle jet training program. So it would seem that QF will be doing all the training program leg work and then charging JQ. Reckon the price was right? Seems like a load of :mad: BS to me.

Can we go back to the beginning? What will Qantas do with the 777-300ER? The 777-300 has been around for some years in the previous version, and Thai and Korean Airlines and Singapore Airlines have already operated the 773 from their home city to Australian ports. Qantas would not need the ER version to operate turnaround services to most parts of Asia. The 777-300 has a range of about 6000 miles according to the range charts on the Boeing site. I do not know if that includes all passengers and freight and 85% weather conditions.

The 777-300ER has a range of about 7300 miles according to the Boeing site. Will Qantas operate the 77W freely on services to Europe over the Himalayas. or does FANS mean that the Himalayas can be avoided?

So, does this leave routes to the USA as places where the 77W would go for Qantas?

Goeing Boeing.... yes

If QF goes with 777s, an ER would give them the flexibility to open up new 7000nm+ routes, rather than being hamstrung by a non-ER version.

Plus, I'm not sure I'd label the -300ER/-200LR as "nineties technology" compared to the 787. The latter has, in regards to its FMS and cockpit layout, been 'dumbed down' to the 777s level so that it may be sold to airlines with multi-type crewing needs, a la A320/330/340.

It's true a 'Series 2' 777 would make sense in order to combat the A350-900/1000, although I suspect a 2012 debut may be a little ambitious.

Cheers

Magoo

Great point Magoo.. but also.. If the technology is so "OLD" why would CX and BA bother buying more of them?

SS

BA & CX already have fleets of Triplers with that era technology. QF is going through a major fleet replacement program and the theme that I have been hearing is that they are only considering the latest technology because of the price of fuel. When you look at SQ who can write off aircraft as fast as 3 years thus they turn them over reasonably quickly and it is not as important to wait for the most efficient. Qantas is required under Oz Govmt legislation writes the aircraft off over 12 years and generally holds onto them for 20-24 years, therefore they want to acquire aircraft that will not be too outdated when they eventually retire them.

777-bs
 

I have said it before and will again,the triple 7 rumor has been ressurected more times than jesus himself.qf couldnt possibly be smart enough/boeing 777 build slots are as rare as hens teeth since the 380 guppy has been delayed.the 787 will go direct to j* do not pass go.Peter Grieg stated at the roadshows,that the j* brand and a/c will aggressively be grown whilst only two new ports for mainline .
wait for two months for the next resurrection of the 777 rumor this is amendment 106a

Every thing revolves around 2012.
The expiry of the EBA, new aircraft types meaning the end of the Long Haul Award, provisions in WorkChoices for Operational Redundancies.
There is your pool of qualified pilots.
Sack 'em then offer 'em a new job on a shiny new jet.
Hell if you want the job you will have to do it for less than JetStar!
The future is bright, the future is the poor house!:bored:
However a certain Federal election result if it goes a certain way might just stuff up a few Oldmeadow plans.
We can only pray!

Blown Gasket

Geoff Dixon has already announced publicly along with alot of mining companies that he will want a exemption from any change in IR laws in the future. Don't think just as because Labour is in power that it will change things in aviation. Geoff claims that aviation is a "special case" and should be exempt from any changes in IR because they compete internationally etc.

To be fair to him, as mentioned above, other countries do have much more favourable work practices than Australia, however I am not sure that attacking IR is really the way of trying to balance it up.

The A380 debacle and the direction that the 787 is heading supports the old addage that you "Never buy the A model of anything"

Unconfirmed third hand rumour that 10-12 777s went to the board in the last couple of weeks to make up for the 787 delay. I suspect that if approved they'll be silver and orange rather than white and red. About a week course or so doing CCQ from 777 to 787.

This is probably rumour no. 5634 about the Qantas Group getting 777s. But, wouldn't if be funny if the Qantas Group decided to allow a little bit of controlled competition against Qantas, and take rush delivery of three 777s in December, and then operate them against the V Australia services to US West Coast. Qantas already does let JQ compete on some domestic legs, and the CHC base for JQ was set up to get up Pacific Blue's nose.

If Qantas own brand flying does not lose sales to JQ services to US West Coast - they continue to fly full and continue with their long term contracts with corporations to fill the Business Class section, it would be worth it to give V Australia a hard life.

I heard leased 330s. Which make a whole lot more sense, I think 777s this late in the game are a bit of a stretch...

I see qantas have been using the 330 AKL-LAX the last few weeks. Is this a permanent fixture? If qantas can get their hands on any 777s they would be silly to refuse. They are a perfect machine for todays current market (long sectors and high fuel prices). Will be interesting to see what sort of compensation they recieve for the 787 delay. I know AirNZ could do with a few spare 777s at the moment.

Nobody has bothered to tell us which version of 777s we are guessing about. If Boeing are offering them very quickly, are they somebody else' cancellations. If they are 777-300ERs, those are substantially larger than the 787-8s that JQ thought they were going to have. Would Boeing offer new build 777-200ERs, 10 years after the type entered service? 777-200ERs are Windows 95 planes.

777-300ERs are a bit big to fly around the region - Phuket, HCM, KL. Even for Qantas mainline, the ER is a bit of a waste to HKG and Tokyo, when the non ER 777-300 already could do those sectors (and Qantas could do an engine competition as well.) The 777-300ER seems like overdoing it for lower yield flights between Australia and Southern Europe.

I hope this is not that " Old Technology" crap. 55 Airlines around the world use these machines and boeing has orders for over 1000 Triplers

No wonder boeing are VERY reluctant to even consider a 787-10 version and undermine this market.

Qf has always had the issue of not one particular variant of the Tripler filling enough roles well enough though. But at the right price the economics might add up. Buying just to compete with VB is a hollow argument. Most LA's are full- reducing capacity to the US is not a smart strategy.:ugh:

only because they are payload restricted..........