|
...current 777 is a brilliant and incredibly reliable machine - Boeing certainly got it right, but I hope the new ones are quieter inside and get up a bit higher than the current one, which is the turboprop of the jet world when operating at gross weight. I know Cathay 777s out of the US are carrying the "excess" of their Airbuses out of that region currently :-) (here we go... I'm running for cover) I agree with your 777X comment and am also interested in the revamped Hyundai330, which is proving a winner too. |
Originally Posted by Keg
(Post 10316999)
Long term that probably means the 777X is the likely Sunrise aeroplane given the ability to rapidly transition crews between those types. I'm not sure if the 777/ 787 do common fleet flying though so perhaps that is a fly in the ointment.
Of course that could still go either way. If CASA say 'no' to 787/ 777X Common fleet flying but say 'yes' to the A350ULR/ A330 common fleet flying then that could swing things back towards the A350 option. It depends a bit on whether Airbus want to come to the party and offer up A330NEO/ A350s at a cost that doesn't exceed what Qantas has paid for the 787s. So my heart wants the A350 as it'd be great to do domestic one week and then head over to NYC or LHR the next week as part of A330/A350 CFF but my head says long term QF is headed back towards being an all Boeing fleet. With regard to CFF on the A330 and A350. When Delta Air Lines asked the FAA about the possibility, they were told; ‘of course you can, but let’s discuss recency of experience and currency requirements’. Long story short; the requirements were onerous enough, the solution complex enough, and most importantly the training cost high enough; the idea was binned. United Airlines operates separate 787 and 777 fleets for a number of reasons. One of which is the recency on each type. Being long haul aircraft, with heavy crew makes the issue more complex. The 777X and 787 is an interesting question. Boeing will have to keep it similar enough to the legacy 777 in order to allow crew to move seamlessly between both aircraft. If they can achieve that and enough similarity to the 787, perhaps the picture will be different. All of this presupposes that CASA will behave in a similar fashion to the FAA. Interestingly, the ever malleable Hong Kong CAA allow CFF on the A330/A350 at Cathay. However, I don’t think that’s a perfect model to predict CASA response. Maybe. Cheers |
I know Cathay 777s out of the US are carrying the "excess" of their Airbuses out of that region currently :-) (here we go... I'm running for cover) |
Originally Posted by dragon man
(Post 10320475)
Firstly, it should be referred to by its correct Qantas name ‘ the game changer 787’ ( tounge firmly in cheek). There are lots of rumours around regarding the A380s, ranging from no contractor appointed yet to do the D checks/ refurbishment, the time for this blowing out from 60 days to 150 days and lastly the cost been very much over budget. Yes, there are also rumours that more cracks have been found in at least two of the 380s. All round just a typical circus that Qantas management excel at. |
Tomorrow marks ten years for the man in charge. What a decade of success it’s been. How many aircraft orders again? And let’s not forget the transformation, followed by the soon to be announced transformation 2.0 Good to know the security guards that are employed to escort him through the terminals have enjoyed the journey. |
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ump-a-lot-more More moderate Oil prices may perhaps become a slightly unexpected fixture over the next couple of years. The higher fuel bills might not be as drastic as currently expected, even if the Aus Dollar shows a little further weakness. Maybe some breathing space for those hoping to have the 747s serve those southern Polar(ish) routes just a little longer before the fleets inevitable retirement? Unlikely? Well, maybe some extra cash for a few additional 787s for some fleet/network growth instead of just replacements, here’s hoping. It would certainly be another lucky break, especially after pouring so much Into Mangament bonuses and Share buybacks. Let’s hope if sustained lower Oil prices are the case, that it’s not an opportunity wasted... |
Interesting article recently about US shale oil and the US being close to totally oil independence: Texas Is About to Create OPEC's Worst Nightmare.
The long term pressure will be rapidly increasing US supply, with lower prices from here is the gist of the article. |
More moderate Oil prices may perhaps become a slightly unexpected fixture over the next couple of years. The higher fuel bills might not be as drastic as currently expected, even if the Aus Dollar shows a little further weakness. I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist, but could there be some correlation between the US being nice over one of their journalists becoming careless with his limbs and power tools in a Saudi Embassy and the price of oil just as the US economy seems to be picking up a little? Or has Napoleon worked his magic again over world markets?? |
You are right V-jet, The Australian Economy is stuffed. We are coming to the end of a dream run of growth (29 years or so now?) and what do we have to show for it? A decimated manufacturing base, crippling electricity costs, vastly overinflated housing prices, massive debt on almost every measure, corruption and incompetence throughout many levels of government and business, and increasing evidence to show that the dream run of growth has largely been due to Chinese demand for our minerals and a Migration scheme that has been run largely as a Ponzi to keep retail figures up and real estate prices growing, while keeping wage growth at record low levels; and I could go on. I despair that the opportunity may have been missed for QF to raise Capex a little during some more or less fortunate good times (rather than spend so many hundreds of millions on useless share buybacks) and buy more ‘gamechangers’, so that the fleet and network were a little more resilient running into a recession. If oil prices were to unexpectedly lower for a sustained period once again (as they appear to be doing), it would once again present an opportunity to order a few additional frames, while keeping a solid lid on debt levels. Or just buyback some more shares, because how many of the present Management will be there in 5 years time!? |
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
(Post 10321364)
Interesting article recently about US shale oil and the US being close to totally oil independence: Texas Is About to Create OPEC's Worst Nightmare.
The long term pressure will be rapidly increasing US supply, with lower prices from here is the gist of the article. The really interesting part the shale play is well head pressure. Recently declines in the Permian basin and Eagle Ford (two big fields) are of concern, but of more concern to the industry is the relationship between well head pressure, temperature and flow rate. The shale model is predicated on highish flow rates that are not persistent. This has many oil people concerned. A brief respite this may well be. |
Why would you consider buying long term hardware for the company when you can ramp up the debt and enrich yourself? You aren't a company man are you ES? HR re-education for you over the Christmas Break!
I trust you do know what a Christmas Break is? |
I despair that the opportunity may have been missed for QF to raise Capex a little during some more or less fortunate good times (rather than spend so many hundreds of millions on useless share buybacks) and buy more ‘gamechangers’, so that the fleet and network were a little more resilient running into a recession. Qantas isn't resilient. The fossil Leigh Clifford mouthed off that the QSA 1992 was the problem. It never was. Qantas remains vulnerable. They have had ample opportunity to re-equip. Instead virtue signalling and self enrichment was the play these robber barons undertook. Nearly every airline (and you can check their fleet) has moved away from quad aircraft. It isn't even capital that held QF back it was ideology. A lazy, inept and self serving board, with aviation lightweights and T-shirt wearing directors, listened to the stories Little Napoleon told them, like kids transfixed at story time. To have decided to re-equip JQ with a much younger fleet and a scale problem is poor strategy. Little Napoleon didn't choose the A380, but he did lots of other things. He executed an 'alliance' with EK that delivered precisely zero dollars to QF. Conceptually killing off QFI didn't work, despite their protests of 'terminal' so off he rushed to Dubai. Sir Tim saw the idiot a mile away. A well timed write off and huge decline in the oil price the whole reason for 'transformation' . The bonuses were baked in. In 2012 when millions of options were written for those on the inside, the fix was in. With a impotent regulator looking the other way, the self riches flowed. The new guy as stupid as the old guy, bankers are like that. At some point, the tide will continue receding, in the mean time, maybe under a new Chair less inclined to fight the last war, perhaps someone in Coward street will ask the obvious: Why haven't you reduced your fuel included CASK? All your peer airlines have. Qantas need a new fleet. |
I think Allan is very smart. He had pocketed $millions and will be gone as soon as the gravy train becomes derailed. You will then be asking where did he go? |
Originally Posted by virgindriver
(Post 10321443)
I think Allan is very smart. He had pocketed $millions and will be gone as soon as the gravy train becomes derailed. You will then be asking where did he go? "The true measure of a man's stature is not the size of his wallet."- Anon |
Observers of the oil market may be interested in the difference between the types of oil. WTI is different to Brent and includes things like density or (weight) and things like sulfur. There is often a split between prices and where aviation analysts focus their interest is on the middle distillates.
Different oil requires different refining and an interesting situation as referenced earlier in the year (in this thread) may be playing out: A shortage of middle distillate. As shale became the play, many of the refineries during their maintenance cycles altered the refining towards producing shale oil. Shale is lighter (in comparison to WTI for example) with the result being less middle distillates being manufactured. Middle distillates include things like LPG, diesel and heating oil. Jet fuel is also a middle distillate. Well positioned airlines, with fuel efficient fleets have less to worry about. Little Napoleon MAY need another distraction. Qantas need a new fleet. |
Thanks for that summary RD. I’ve half heartedly looked for that type of info online and not found it before I lost interest! Oils ain’t oils like they were in Clampett’s time! |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10323411)
Little Napoleon MAY need another distraction.
Jet-lag tips from Qantas' Alan Joyce: don PJs, eat light and set the body clock :rolleyes: |
Now the more punters that do that the less food we have to load therefore save money and a bigger bonus for little Napoleon. |
https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bi...nticache=67168Wonder where the Close Personal Protection sit? |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10323411)
As shale became the play, many of the refineries during their maintenance cycles altered the refining towards producing shale oil. Shale is lighter (in comparison to WTI for example) with the result being less middle distillates being manufactured.
Middle distillates include things like LPG, diesel and heating oil. Jet fuel is also a middle distillate. . LONDON (Reuters) - New rules coming into force from 2020 to curb pollution produced by the world’s ships are worrying everyone from OPEC oil producers to bunker fuel sellers and shipping companies. The regulations will slash emissions of sulfur, which is blamed for causing respiratory diseases and is a component of acid rain that damages vegetation and wildlife. But the energy and shipping industries are ill-prepared, say analysts, with refiners likely to struggle to meet higher demand for cleaner fuel and few ships fitted with equipment to reduce sulfur emissions. This raises the risk of a chaotic shift when the new rules are implemented, alongside more volatility in the oil market. “The reality is that the industry has already passed the date beyond the smooth transition,” Neil Atkinson, head of the oil industry and market division at the International Energy Agency (IEA), said in April. Sounds like Qantas need a new fleet , sooner rather than later. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 17:26. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.