Change from my previous. No new jet announcement tomorrow is my guess.

They won't want the market distracted from what an awesome job they've done turning things around. I suspect the announcement of new jets at a time when the market is a bit quieter or perhaps when VOZ have just made a decent announcement about something. I don't reckon they'll want any distractions again for the full year results either.

Oh no keg, what have you heard :uhoh:

Keg is correct, no announcement on new type tomorrow.

New type proposal will go to board second half of this year. Don't get too excited though, the numbers are disappointing and no more than replacements or even less.

Haven't heard anything specific goodonyamate. Just nutting it through from e messaging point of view. They'll want the market to bask in the full glow of their success at 'turning it around' whilst still keeping up the mantra of 'more to do'. New aeroplanes tomorrow don't fit into that narrative. They will fit into the narrative later on in the year though.

Besides which, I suspect they've got Airbus sharpening their pencils on the A350. It's no secret that we have the 789s at a bargain basement price and so any counter offer from Airbus needs to be in that context.

I suspect that these will be expansion airframes- at least in part. The 789s are not a 744 replacement- though I suspect a number of them will eventually be A330 replacements given the oldest of those will be 15 or so once we get the first 787 deliver. Expect to see 787s on routes such as SYD-SFO and perhaps even MEL-SFO, BNE-LAX, PER- DBX- Europe (perhaps a couple of ports if it does BNE-DXB as well), maybe MEL-DFW if it has the legs.

Anyway, it's going to be a few months yet until we hear the news. The question is when the time comes whether they just announce the 789s or get ahead of the game and announce a 744 replacement for delivery (777X or A350-1000) from 2020 or thereabouts. Maybe that's where Airbus can get a win and avoid us taking 789s if they come up with the right deal for 70+ aeroplanes in the medium to long term.

Qantas and the 787-900
 

I asked Alan a direct question about the 787's in late December. His response was that his priority was to pay down debt.
I don't expect any announcement on a new type soon.

Interesting Keg, if they went the A350 route, every long haul pilot could fly each aircraft, A350/A380 CCQ/MFF, and common type rating for those already A330 endorsed.

A colleague asked Joyce a few weeks ago about the 789. His words" we can't afford not to get them". Perth Europe is possible and being looked at.

If QF gets a new type, maybe Keg will get his wish and A380 S/O's will get a pay cut as part of the 'offset' package to secure the flying.

I have to say I was surprised to see him taking on the S/O's on Qrewroom recently, but a friend advised that Keg is now gunning for a management job (base manager SIT or SDT I believe) and so any calls for pay / condition cuts need to be understood in that context.

Back to the thread theme, news from the middle east is that QF has been canvassing options for returnees to crew the new type. Multiple sources in EK have confirmed this.

It'll be announced tomorrow.

The training slots are already booked with Boeing in singapore. The only question is who, where and how much.

"It'll be announced tomorrow"

Are you ready to come back here in 12 hours or so and admit you were wrong?

I'm sure Keg can speak up for himself but as a long time reader on Qrewroom I have seen him discuss / argue consistently on various issues over many years. In my opinion he has demonstrated integrity.

The SIT / SDT base manager positions were announced over a week ago....

If you saw my burst on qrewroom 'recently' in the last week then you'll know how false both of those statements are.

The question is why would you yet again peddle a falsehood Mohikan? This is becoming a bit of a habit for you to grossly misrepresent state,ents that I've put my name to. Given your form it doesn't surprise me but it is irritating having yo continually correct your falsehoods. Your attempts to bully people are pitiful.

Your' friend' is out of touch. Was gunning is the term and it was no real secret from November when I first threw my hat in the ring. As Cloudbuster points out the positions were announced a couple of weeks back. Whilst I don't feel the need to justify the decision to apply, personally I saw an opportunity to make a positive contribution to the Qantas pilot community. I didn't get it. Ce la vie.

Puh-leese. :ugh: :rolleyes: I've already taken a pay/ condition cut in the last few months under the current award as have a number of my colleagues. You'll need to come armed with more than that if you want to score some points.

What's this make it now Mohikan? None for three? Four? Your obsession is unhealthy. Get help.

Anyway, back to the thread. I guess we'll know in the next 15 minutes.

Yeah,
How did Jetstar Hong Kong go?:E

Qantas and the 787-900
 

Goblin was wrong.

Yes, I was wrong, but I'll be right at some point in the near future.

And a broken clock is right two times a day...

Keg, this statement probably explains why you didn't get the job.

August maybe
 

Seems thats a bit presumptuous.

Hot rumour doing the rounds is 8 X 789's to replace 3 X 747's & 3 X 330's or equivalent capacity but it hasn't been run past the board yet so an announcement is someway off yet.

.....its might be just a just a rumour though....or it might not.:)


....and while we're at it...
Keg said:
The base management positions are an attempt at resurrecting or replacing that oh-so successful 'Connections' campaign. Keg, in my opinion, would be a worthy applicant for such a role as I suspect he is well respected by his colleagues. I'm just saddened that it's even necessary.

8 is too few airframes to be financially viable. Even when you take into accounts the orange ones, you're still borderline on costs I imagine.

And my favourite line in the financial statements is
" The positive impact of reduced depreciation expense".
Creative accounting rears its ugly head as predicted considering how this expense was loaded up on last years P&L