The drive belts and components on the so called magic carpet fail on a regular basis where most of the assembly requires removal to gain access for repair so not so magic in the end after all.

JQ carries a full fit or nearly full fit on nearly all bus flights, including empties. That can't be good. JQ also still has and uses Aluminium AKHs, which are a lot heavier than the canvas ones everyone else seems to use. Can't recall the exact weight of the aluminium ones, (it's somewhere in th vicinity of 80kg) but the canvas ones are 67kg

Wrong. Jetstar doesn't carry full fit AKHs. On Sydney flights it is not unusual to only have 2 AKHs.

They do in NZ...or at least they used to. May have changed, been a while since I dealt with JQ

Wrong again. They don't in NZ either. They were carrying full fit for a little while while an issue with the uplocks was being resolved but that was a couple of years ago... You are fake news.

Like I said, it's been a while since I dealt with JQ. You confirmed what I said though, a couple of years ago they were carrying a full fit. So while I accept they don't NOW, they have in the past.
How exactly am I fake news?

My experience on both the B738 and A320's was a few years ago, but it seems still valid.

The magic carpet in the B738 is a great assistance, but it's only the best solution available for a B738. If the magic carpet goes U/S there is often a loading restriction put on that hold, so the full capacity can't be used. If the magic carpet is serviceable then the whole capacity of the hold is still not used, as you can't totally fill the hold to the contour of the aircraft and there is unused space.

The A320 with an IHS does lose some space because of the containers being used, but if the IHS is U/S the full capacity of the hold can still be utilised. Also, if for some reason you're going to a port which does not have the equipment to unload containers, then the A320 can also be loaded manually. At least that was the case when I worked on them.

For the A320 there is an additional cost to have the ground handling equipment in each port, but this is offset by only needing 3 people to do the ramp turn around. For a B738 turnaround 5 people are required if both the forward and aft holds are full.

The main injuries on the ramp are backs, shoulders, necks and knees and while the magic carpet and other ground services improvements have been introduced, these are still the main injuries. While working in a confined space and lifting etc. then these injuries will continue. While injuries will still continue with the A320 from pushing and pulling a stuck AKH for example I can see that the A320 is better for managing these costs.

While I like both the B738 and the A320, I don't know about the actual aircraft running, maintenance costs and performance figures. It seems that the A320 has evolved over the years, even though it started after the B737. Now it seems that the B737 may have reached the peak of it's evolution and perhaps a new design is required. If I was running an airline and all of the running and maintenance costs and performance figures for an A320 or B737 were equal, I'd be going for the A320 as then I could perhaps lessen the manpower costs at airports around the network (staff and cost cutting are another topic entirely).

Try bulk-loading the B757 to capacity. Now that's an 'experience'.:hmm:

A measly 757 is childs play.

Try unloading 26 tons of freight with 2 (two) people. 12 deck pallets, a JCPL, tug + dollies and both belly holds full of loose freight.......... and just to make it that little bit more fun......2 horse boxes with 6 horses total....at 1am.

Fun days.

Childs play. Try offloading 30 odd pallets plus bulk. then onloading the same in two hours. Containers are useful, speeds up turn around time plus you don't get silly stuations where you are offloading hundreds of bulk loaded little boxes. QF would be mad to go the 737 route.

Only 30 pallets......Luxury, back when I was a lad we would have dreamed of that.......

You see, this is why I joined the PAA. (People Against Acronyms!)

I thought you meant PanAm for a micro-second! :}