QF International - 14 Aircraft total by 2021!!
 

Look at page 109 of today's investor briefing released to the ASX.

QF International consists of ONLY A380s. So 14 or 20? Either way for anyone in doubt about where QF international is headed Mr Strambi spelt it out quite nicely today.

RIP.

Qantas will soon not be seen outside of Australia! :ugh:

The A380's won't just fly domestically so I guess QF will still be seen outside Australia

Good pickup KWIII. Direct link: Qantas Investor Briefing December 2011. (the fleet graphic is actually on page 108)

I've been reading over this bit by bit today and was quite surprised when I came across that page.... to say the least!

I'm a bit puzzled by the statement that "B787-9s allocated based on return measures".

It really beggars belief that they are moving to an all quad-engined fleet when their competitors are primarily using twin-jets.

No one said this bunch of ass clowns knew anything about Airlines.

Thats how many they had in the fleet in 1985. There is progress for you.

Slight correction TG - late 1984 there were 21 B747-200s & 2 B747-SPs before the 6 B747-300s arrived (from Nov 84) and 7 B767-200s (from Jul 85). We are shrinking to half that size and the amazing thing is that our fleet managers are blind to the fact that they are leading everyone to unemployment.

Hmmm,

No 787's to QF Int or Dom.

All A330's to QF Dom, clapped out by 2021 must be buying more?

737-800's for QF Dom, they will have to keep churning them over too.

A380? will they still be in the fleet?

I'm no accountant but the talk is that they are costing more to make than they are selling for and new orders are thin on the ground, bit of a rock around the EAD's neck?

https://www.gplus.com/aerospace-_-de...for-eads-49788

RIP QF Int'l and worst case scenario maybe Dom too.

Hasn't this been the master plan from as far back as just after QF management were shown it could be done in 1989?

1. shrink the (expensive in staff terms) 'legacy' Qantas to a small as possible rump

2. any expansion goes to LCCs like Jetstar

3. once the QF rump is so small that it can be closed down without too much pain* if the remaining (expensive) legacy staff won't accept the (inevitable) "offer they can't refuse" to work to Jetstar T&Cs, make that offer, shut down the 'rump' (whatever that costs) and..

4. re-brand Jetstar as Qantas (or maybe not, as by then, the brand will be so thrashed it might not be worth the new paint jobs) and Bob (or should that be Alan)'s your uncle!

* remember, in defining 'pain', you're dealing with a man who blithely shut down the whole operation without warning in what could only be classified as questionable circumstances.

I've seen the burn/payload comparisons between the A380 and B777. How any management without a hidden agenda could go the A380 route when most of their competitors are operating the 777 is totally beyond me.

I thnk you're being a bit harsh there GB.

You need to be a little more sympathetic. The 767 and 747 fleet managers have just found out they're going to be back flying aeroplanes within 10 years. That's probably occupying most of their mental capacity at the moment.

Yes yes great idea -
Get them back behind the yoke of these prehistoric sh*tboxes! Captain Underpants in the LH seat and an Indian cadet in the RH seat. That will scare them.

The route map included in one of the slides shows both Santiago and Buenos Aires. It also still shows Perth - Narita, even though this route has been withdrawn.

Love the photo of the J* 320 on page 75, happily flying along with spoilers up and reversers open.

747
 

and only 9 747 left by 2013. a bit of crewing surplus. or will jobs be offered ex asia at a reduced rate?:confused:

The following has been extracted from




By Ben Sandilands, December 12, 2011

Full article available at Plane Talking

Adios, au revoir, sayonara
 

This is virtually QF management putting up the white flag........WE SURRENDER.

Hudson-Fysh and the pioneers of this once great airline had the attitude of .....lets give it a red hot go and compete with skill, dedication, guts and business savvy.

No........- not for this grab bag of clueless losers whose CV's read like a bunch of overfed bankers,miners and mobsters.

Airline experience.............pffftttttt !:hmm:

JB's got it, Fyfe has got it. Its the glint in the eye.......that no bastard is going to beat us.

But when you hear the Leprechaun speak .....its garbled metaphors with no wit, logic OR capacity for articulating a plan based on growth.

WHY?

Because they don't have one.

This latest gem from Sandilands just reaffirms the place that this bunch will be placed in history.

THE S-BEND.

I am getting sick of the pathetic joycian leadership. The pathetic pipsqueak needs some churchill leasons in leadership. Unite against a common enemy rather than wage a tyrannous war against your staff.

We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be.

If Qantas is getting smashed then unite all against the common enemy. If you cannot unite your staff then you are doomed to fail in your quest to restructure. they don't have to like the restructure but they have to see it as necessary or they'll unite to bring you down.

Every dictator has an end date.

Plenty of pretty pictures in the brochure, some of the best bits....

and
and
Awesome team. Where do I sign up to blow my money?

Qantas..the rudderless ship.
 

Qantas is all at sea, it has no direction, and a lack of any real leadership or guidance. It is constantly fumbling from one disaster to another with the employees left to pick up the pieces and put some kind of pride back into the airline. The current leadership and decision making at the rat make the public service look efficient.

An airline that had so much potential, an untouchable brand, loyal employees and the pride of a country behind it....slowly being mis-managed to death. Sad indeed.

You should allow AJ his 'Corporate Weasel Words'.
Afterall, he has no clothes.
Here's a news flash for you AJ.
A great many Kangaroo Route passengers fly QF because they won't fly BA, now or ever again!
You've just added us to their list of airlines to avoid. :ugh:

Can the A380 operate in and out of places such as Perth, Brisbane or Adelaide?
Or does this spell the end of Qantas operating internationally from anywhere but Sydney and Melbourne?

Either the document is wildly inaccurate- due in part I guess to the rush to get it out to appear to have some idea as to what is going on- or it indicates the following:

No more ADL-SIN-ADL, PER-SIN-PER, MEL-HKG, SYD-NRT-SYD, SYD-PVG-SYD, SIN-FRA-SIN etc. Basically any route currently operated internationally by an A330 or a 744 (routes other than LAX) appears to be non existent under this plan.

That we would consider the A380 as the only airframe to fly internationally defies belief and indicates incompetence of the highest order- that is until you realise the clear intent is for Red Q (or whatever they end up calling the thing) to fly all those routes I mentioned before and additional 'code share'* services also.

* They'll be called 'code share' but watch QF buy (and pay a premium for) most of the seats on the flight (whether we have pax for them or not) to ensure that RedQ looks like it's paying it's way.

Personally I think the document is a little of column A and column B. It's part stupidity on behalf of QF management, part rushed out inaccuracy. Actually, the latter makes it all stupidity by QF management.

Re Trent 972
 

Couldn't agree more. Had the misfortune once of being shunted off QF 2 onto QF 302 ex BKK to SYD. What a disaster of a trip - hot cabin temperature, only 2 beers - lukewarm - for the whole trip, food tray almost thrown on the tray table. Since that trip, I ensured I was NOT booked on the BA/QF code share flight ever again.

Ultimately I switched to TG as even the QF flights lacked any warmth in cabin service. I have not regretted making the switch some 8 years ago. Even the mainline service within Oz is falling in standard leaving DJ as a viable option.

Still, one cannot really blame the cabin crew for not putting their heart into the service given the leadership (????) being shown by management.

VB

Bollocks
 

Is it any wonder the place is collapsing?? Look at the 'leaders' for want of a better word. Actualy f:mad:ds comes to mind!
Including the Board you have - Accountants, bankers, miners, fat army generals, consultants, has-beens and suckholes...Did I mention aviation experience?? Whoops, maybe Jimmy Bowtie, thats about it.

And don't forget thislittle gem from the QF website, it always gives me that warm fuzzy feeling. (My bolding in places becasue I f:mad:ing well feel like it)
I am sure this policy was retrieved from an S-Bend somewhere.

Yes.

Yes.

To be honest I'm surprised they even suggested Qantas, as an aircraft operator, will exist by 2021. I suspect they have few plans for Qantas to be other than the umbrella organisation (to comply with the Qantas Sale Act) for a series of offshoots, perhaps even as early as 2015-16.

One part of former Asian culture they appear to have adopted accurately. There'll be no 'loss of face' that would be displayed in backing away from a concept that appeared flawed from the outset. (And obviously no subordinate 'crew member' willing to tell them they are making an error. It won't matter. They're not listening.)

Is it true that future 737-8's are all tagged as ZK-... registrations?? ie. lots of ZK's doing Aussie domestic sectors......
Would the 787 also fit this agenda as Ben Sandilands suggests??

Short Haul EBA up for "negotiation" !!

Role on... downhill..

If Dixon's old gem 'Jetstar will never have anymore than 8 aircraft' is anything to go by, this is still probably an understatement of the future.

If I was QF mainline, I wouldn't be worried anymore, I'd be getting the hell out.

AH HELLO,

Can someone please remind remind Qantas Management that AIRBUS the makers of the aircraft have told Qantas on numerous ocassions that a330's aren't designed for short sectors.

But hey who gives a :mad: about Qantas when you have ****star.

I see no 737 -800 in International either. Does that mean ****star will takeover Jetconnect services as well ?

I love the way there has not been a peep from our esteemed leaders to the troops about this monumental destruction of our futures.

I wonder if they will perhaps mention the fact there will be no career for us in mainline?

Edit: there has been a peep

I hear AJ is writing a book, 'How to be successful in small business'.

I also found an interesting snippet in the brief.
Mention of changes to the Personal Property Securities Act 2009.
THE PLOT THICKENS.

OLDMATE,
Have a look at p116, CFO'S Group Funding Strategy.

Blown; what page of the brief was this on?

I know this is a naive question, but if the A380s are running at say 85-100% pax load and making money on key, but basic routes ( Mel/Syd-lhr and Hkg and LAX) then how is that a bad thing? I'm not **** stirring, I'm just curious. Personally I think Oneworld is irrelevant, so code share partners will be an unfortunate choice, but the 3 cities are good feed routes. I've been working on the 380 lately and it's like working for a different airline. The product is good, the crew are motivated and the pax are happy. VA only flies to 2 ports.... thoughts?

Ticking time bomb
 

How would you know what Airbus says to QF?

More bull**** rumors.

Do you think Airbus cares what QF uses them for?

If you want a 300 seat jet for domestic ops, would you chose a -200 or a -300?

Tell me why?

What sector length was the 767 designed for? Hint, it can carry over 70,000 kgs of fuel from memory at 5 to 6,000kgs an hour.... What does QF use it for?

Perhaps it would appear that Qantas is trying to become just a seller of tickets - airlines don't actually WANT to operate aircraft, they just want to sell tickets and market themselves.

Darkness:

This is the failed American "Internet Bubble" business model. We sit around our Board table drinking Scotch or wine. We own a brand. We own a website that sells stuff. We contract out delivery of what we sell to "fulfilment companies" who package and deliver the stuff our website sells.....

The only trouble with this model is that a brand and website don't add value to anything at all. All the value adding is done by the contractors - and after a while they decide to keep the value for themselves, if they create any value at all.

To put it another way, outsourced businesses don't ever go that "extra mile" for the consumer. There will be no more stories about wonderful Qantas staff.

Perhaps AJ is heading for the "petrol station" business model, where you operate a high revenue/minute margin business in order to make money from the foot traffic in your shop (selling high margin items like milk and lollies). After all, isn't AJ a student of MoL, who has stated that his aim is to run his airline at break-even so he can make money from the other money spinners; add-ons such as hotels and car hire (maybe add-ons means muffins and pay-for-bags, too) etc.?

Petrol is what is known as a "grudge purchase" market - you have to have it, but you hate having to pay for it and there is nothing the service station owner can do to make it a "pleasant buying experience". The high margin overpriced food and drink sales are for time pressured people to buy.

It is a vicious market with lots of lying, cheating, and stealing because Petrol is "negotiable" like cash - and I speak as someone who spent a few years in the industry.

God help Qantas if that is the Alan Joyce business model.

Running the sums on the Qantas fleet
 

I received this via email, so I can't validate the figures, but whether true or rumour it does open the door for further discussion.

Our aviation guru Ben Sandilands has often commented on the lack of 777 aircraft in the Qantas fleet. An anonymous Qantas 747 captain has supposedly lobbed in with some stats that reveal the answer:

"........Last week I flew to LAX on a 747 and spoke to the Delta 777 behind me. For the same sector Sydney/LAX these are the comparable fuel figures: 747s burn off 136,400kg; 777s burn 95,500kg. Fuel flow in cruise: 747s do 11,800kg per hour; 777s do 7700kg per hour. Pax on board: 747s have 260; 777s have 232. I didnt get the actual payload carried by the 777 but on pax numbers they carried roughly 10% less paxs for 30% less fuel used. We are provided with a cost figure by Qantas for additional uplift of every 1000kgs in dollar terms. On that figure the extra 28 paxs cost $27,000. You don't need to be Einstein to know why we are in such trouble......."

From a friend of a friend of a .........

Any analysis on fuel burn alone should come with a health warning as cost per ATK more relevant which includes staff, maintenance, over flight etc. The capital cost also needs to be looked at as well. However I doubt whether this would improve the A380 case vv B777-300ER (the only model that one should compare due long range capability). In fact it would probably be worse. CX looked at the A380 years ago and decided from our analysis that it would not fit our routes as a B744 replacement. The decision then was to wait for a Mark 2 version and concentrate on the economics of the LR twin B777-300ER. It was not good enough to replace the B744 with a new aircraft which by our analysis would have same issues as the B744 across the Pacific (particularly westbound in winter 15+ hours) from west coast. Dumping payload to make it direct would be the norm by our calculation and we were mystified why QF would launch the A380 on the Pacific for that reason. Also weight and volume left for cargo after full pax is woeful. The other issue is that the Engine Out Critical Point requires extra fuel due suitable airports. At the time while we waited for B777 delivery the decision was made to get a bunch of cheap second-hand B744s as an interim which we could write off in 2 years after fitting out in our BFE. Today we can park these if we have to. The B777-300ER is a star. We got the first one in 2009 and will have 30 by end of 2012. With approx 300 seats 3 class this aircraft flies direct New York and back (15-16 hours) with full load and 10-20T cargo all year round with 2 engine fuel economy which is remarkable. It now has saturation of all our North America routes and is slowly migrating to Europe as well. The other issue to consider is that the A380 has great passenger appeal. It is super quiet and very spacious. I would think that if you just sexed it to just Sydney / Melbourne - Hong Kong / Singapore - London with very careful seat mix you might make money. Other concerns are, disappearing slots at London which in future needs a big aircraft to compensate. For this reason it is rumoured we might get a few if the price is right. I doubt it somehow. We have just taken delivery of 4 of our new B747-8F aircraft. There are ten firm on the way. This aircraft has a new wing which is very impressive and lots of other new technology. While it looks the same it is not a B744. We are commonly carrying 120 to 128 tons of cargo Hong Kong to Anchorage (10+ hours). The pax version which could be the one for us called the Intercontinental. It do direct New York with full pax and some cargo with about 50-60 less seats than the A380 on fuel burns per seat near the B777. "If it ain't a Boeing I ain't going" How often have I heard that from Boeing pilots! Frankly its bull. If you ask our revenue men the A330 is the best money making machine. You cannot beat it on short and medium haul. We have been buying them since the first delivery in Feb 1995 and we are still buying them till the A350 comes in 2016. They just keep getting better as Airbus make incremental improvements in weight, systems and fuel burn. They say they only want two aircraft theA330 and B777-300ER. The 5 B777-200 we have are orphans and the 26 B777-300 regional aircraft work well with 398 seats 2 class. We have some B777-200Fs on order. If Airbus deliver on the A350-800/900/1000 performance it looks very impressive. In fact Australia is the only place not to order them to date. Eight other world regions have gone for this 60% / 40% over the B787 bar 2. Those are about 50/50. We are getting 32 x A350-900s. With the push to 4 class aircraft on very long haul the B787 looks a bit small (about -40 pax less on small version and -80+ pax on bigger version). Airbus are touting the A350-1000 to beat the B777-300ER on fuel burn (-25%) with small increase in payload due to the lighter structure. I think Boeing want to offset this with new B777 version. Not being in HK anymore leaves me a bit out of the loop but I do talk with our Fleet people on how things are panning out. No doubt making poor decisions on fleets can be very costly and hard to reverse. It needs a very robust process involving every section of the airline. We left those days where engineering relationships with manufacturers and influential bosses heavily weighted into the process back in the nineties. (thanks to Rod Eddington). Today I must say knowing what is involved it is quite robust.

260 pax on a 744? If the 744 was full then the figures would be different. Also need to take in to account freight and revenue. Then its about operating costs - lease payments and maintenance.

Based on these figures a full 744 is possible a better earner than a full 772