A bunch of years back I remember one of our crew (and a top bloke as well) summed it up thus:

:E :ok:

In a normal config, I believe max payload range is 5500nm.

Wouldn't the Jetstar config of 335 be payload restricted to Europe?

I wouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself (like the A330) & JQ redeploy the 787 to fly out of Asia.

A config of 335 and shorter hops around Asia might be the grand plan.

It will be interesting after 12 months to see all the different shades of silver after all the mix and matching of parts and repairs undertaken after the Rampies have dented a few cargo doors and panels! Yep I can sure see that you beaut composite material copping a workout. I just hope somebody told Joyce that although these aircraft don't need maintenance and can even fly themselves, they will still need panel beating :=

well keg, of all the cars i've ever owned, its the metallic jobbies that've held their lustre better. its the solid colours that need a cut from time to time.

cant speak for airplane paint tho

I can't really see jetstar ever being a long haul low cost airline with 10+hr sectors. I don't think I have even heard of a low cost carrier making a profit on long haul.

Then again, we'd never heard of a legacy carrier successfully launching a profitable low cost carrier of their own, without caniballising the carrier's business, had we?!

If you've got a seemingly impossible/improbable problem, come and ask the QF B team... They'll 'leverage their experience' for you :ok:

Qantas to go firm on the -9?
 

From Australian Business Traveller a couple of days ago.... .???

Qantas sets its sights on Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller

All part of the narrative. I reckon they'll announce the 787 for mainline about mid next year..... when they announce that their magical transformation is on track to break even and return to profit and the 787 is the vehicle which will bring about that improved profitability.

Mainline crew might crew the B787, but you will have no choice but to do it on Jetstar T&Cs.

Ask yourself the all important question!

Q. If you were running the business(ie if it was YOUR business), why would you pay one lot of employees more than the other to do exactly the same job?
A. You wouldn't!


You blokes are dreaming if you think you will crew it under your present conditions.

It aint eva going to happen!

A senior manager recently said. The mainline fleet age is commercial in confidence. Hence they report the "groups" fleet age.

Whilst one part of the group has a relatively young average fleet age, another part of the group has a distinctly older fleet age.

What the investment community has failed to realise due reporting a "group" fleet age is over investment in one part of the business & under investment in another.

MC.

They are now so why wouldn't they in the future? Further, there are transmission of business issues to cross here as well.

QF are after efficiencies when it comes to the 787. Despite the general belief to the contrary, we've been prepared to look at efficiencies for quite some time now. EG: currently 767 crew are cheaper per ASK than mainline 737 crew. I reckon that would put us very, very close to the cost per ASK for a J* A320 or J* A330. We don't need to be too much more efficient to be 'on the mark' to get to fly the 787. It may be a set of conditions slightly different to the current ones but will certainly be acceptable.

Further, many crew look at the current conditions- designed for 707s and extrapolated to the 744 when aeroplanes flew for max 14 hours- and realise that it's not a situation that can continue into perpetuity. Again, it's an issue that crew have been open to for some time.

I think part of the issue with many people on PPRUNE is that they see what AJ tells the media about pilots (normally the max earners on the A380) and then project that across all fleets. Many PPRUNE contributors don't actually realise the reality. That doesn't bother me overly much but it does amuse me when I read comments that talk about how over priced I am despite the fact that I'm in part of the group that has contributed to massive profits over the past bunch of years- more than J* anyway! :ok: It also amuses me when people tell me I'm dreaming if I think I'll get the 787 on current terms and conditions when they're not entirely authorities on current terms and conditions as it is let alone the negotiations that have taken place to reach a mutually acceptable outcome. At the end of the day, agreeing to a deal for the 787 is a ****e load cheaper than 400+ redundancies. :ugh: :rolleyes:

Keg,

The big efficiencies are achieved in the aircraft that Mainline operate.

It was reported last week that as the 767 retires & are replaced by A330's domestically.

Rationalising the domestic operation to two fleets types, the operating cost would reduce by around 10% and would be within (If my memory serves me correctly) about 5% of Virgins.

These efficiency gains were achieved without ANY changes to the Long or Short Haul EBA.

Considering crew costs are only about 3% of the airlines operating costs, it pales into insignificance compared to operating fuel efficient jets.

Mstr Caution, I'm not going to go into detail here but until we actually DO sort our some of the inefficiencies that actually do exist in our award then we continue to give the company the opportunity to go to other entities.

Amen.:D:D:D

i think we'd have to play the game smarter if we want to argue the transfer of business issue. jetstar has been around a while now. precedent set. and aipa got spanked in the jetconnect court case for equivalent terms

i doubt mgmnt will have any trouble at all putting those 787s on any au aoc they want

I agree with you Keg, but you also have to recall the previous form of the organisation your dealing with.

I recall LH pilots accepting a pay freeze with the promise they would be looked after later.

The company still went elsewhere to crew aircraft.

The problem the company has is they have played the industrial hard ball for too long & the pilots no longer trust anything they are told by management.

So management have responded with group love in's in an attempt to engage the pilots that they actually disengaged.

Dont forget, not only the massive cost of making long haul pilots redundant but also the down training costs in reverse seniority.

afaik thats yet to be tested/enforced.

regardless of any agreement, if the company pleads hardship in court, it'll be a battle to get

What do you base this on specifically?

And if you blokes hadn't signed up for such crap conditions none of us would have to be on these conditions .

The senior manager should check out the interweb where fleet ages of any fleet are readily available.

This examples puts the QF mainline fleet at 10.3 years.

Fleet age Qantas | Airfleets aviation

Funnily enough, Alan's recent claims about the group fleet age and the fleet age graph published on p4 of the ASX statement don't quite stack up unless you take out the 'amaaazing' business.