|
The main reason that QF pilots want to management to buy some new airplanes is to stop the continuous shrinking of the airline since the bullying Irishman started running the company.
|
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
(Post 10593086)
The main reason that QF pilots want to management to buy some new airplanes is to stop the continuous shrinking of the airline since the bullying Irishman started running the company.
|
Originally Posted by V-Jet
(Post 10593099)
I thought you wrote ruining the company, or is that what you meant?
|
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 10592836)
"I'm curious why you think that Qantas should have ordered more aircraft by now"
1. Pilots love new aeroplanes - just like spotters (and aircraft manufacturers) 2. New types mean retraining - which adds interest & skills 3. New types means you can try and extort extra cash 4. You can hold up your head with those who have shiny new new types rather the being the girl/guy at the BBQ who has to admit they're flying an airframe that's older than they are....... I agree with PF (new) - if you are making money why would you take on more debt etc just to have a shiny out of the box fleet? Pay yourself more, retire the debt you have , pay the shareholders and even throw a bone to the whining mob who fly the things New aeroplanes mean 6 months offline, away from the family holed up in a room somewhere cramming, probing, being examined and scored. You become a broken man at some point during the process. It also becomes harder and harder the older you get. 2. See above. 3. Yep. B scales tend to do that. Or the company can hold your conditions to ransom and threaten any chance of a career or promotion if you don’t play nicely with their train set. 4. Most pilots would prefer to say they fly the 747 classic or a Mad dog at a BBQ. It’s much more purist and interesting to fly. 5. You’re obviously not a pilot. |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 10592836)
"I'm curious why you think that Qantas should have ordered more aircraft by now"
1. Pilots love new aeroplanes - just like spotters (and aircraft manufacturers) 2. New types mean retraining - which adds interest & skills 3. New types means you can try and extort extra cash 4. You can hold up your head with those who have shiny new new types rather the being the girl/guy at the BBQ who has to admit they're flying an airframe that's older than they are....... I agree with PF (new) - if you are making money why would you take on more debt etc just to have a shiny out of the box fleet? Pay yourself more, retire the debt you have , pay the shareholders and even throw a bone to the whining mob who fly the things its not that hard and blue sky- great posts |
Interesting.... most of the responses to my post are saying pilots prefer older aeroplanes
But the bulk of the thread is about the need for QF to buy a new fleet......... hard to have it both ways..................... |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 10594795)
Interesting.... most of the responses to my post are saying pilots prefer older aeroplanes
But the bulk of the thread is about the need for QF to buy a new fleet......... hard to have it both ways..................... |
That an airline generates operating revenue from flying RTK from A to B ought to be self-evident.Doing so efficiently ought to mean that the cost to the shareholder and indeed the environment is minimised. After all Qantas have made a big noise about bio-fuel purchases, removing plastic cutlery and optimised flight plans. The total “savings” in fuel consumption, expense and CO2 the cost of a few weeks’ transits across the Pacific.The rest of the year Qantas burn more fuel per seat, per passenger than their competitors. Fortunately, fuel is, at the present time, relatively cheap. However, all airlines benefit from cheap fuel. Such that the question ought to be asked whether the fuel spend per passenger RPK is higher or lower than competitors: It is substantially higher. As is the output of CO2, fortunately for the likes of Qantas there is no price on excess emission. As the ICCT reported Qantas spend 64% more generating their RPK across the Pacific than their competitors. That is some “transformation”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...-study/9333616 The original statements made by the long retired and almost completely forgotten relic, Leigh Clifford claimed that the QSA 1992 made re-equipment hard. Around AUD$2.5 billion and counting was spent buying back shares. Strange that no better use for capital could be found than enriching insiders like CEO and top 20 shareholder, Alan Joseph Joyce. It is the fleet metrics that start to tell a story of waste. This is the point UBS referred to and the fund manager, Mr Montgomery highlighted. Just to keep the fleet age where it is (and provision for increasing maintenance and ageing aircraft issues) requires a capital expenditure of AUD $1.7 billion per year. Reducing the fleet age back to what the taxpayer gifted them at privatisation will require a very large capital expenditure. In addition to benefitting from cheaper fuel, cash flows have also been boosted by a strategy that has allowed the fleet to age. The most expensive part of running an airline is replacing old cheap planes with newer and more expensive models. Airlines cannot escape this capital expenditure lest passengers jump to competing airlines with fancier entertainment offerings and more comfortable seats, bars and beds. You can call it a disciplined approach to capital spending or you could say the board might prefer to see the share price go up now, maximise share price-related incentives for current management and leave the reality of replacing planes to the next guy. So:
How big is the required CAP EX? $15-$20 billion? How long does it take to scope, order and find a slot then take delivery of a new fleet? Does the company issue new equity or continue to gear the company? Are there production slots? That Little Napoleon spend his time with social discourse and social engineering while the fleet over which he has presided for 11 years continues to burn more hydrocarbon fuel than necessary, emitting more CO2 than competitors while costing the shareholders more per flight than the competitors is hardly transformative. It is at best negligent. Someone is going to have to spend the money, Qantas need a fuel efficient and lower emitting fleet. |
Any further update on what is going to replace the B744 on JNB?
With the B789 starting SFO in December 19 and SCL in June 20 are we likely to see a SYD B789 base open anytime soon? |
Rumour has it.... ...that the 787 SYD base will be announced with the next round of vacancies. Available for bidding in Apr-May (approx) to open in July. Timed to coincide with the 744 RIN. |
See what happens when you have fleet...
Once again Fort Fumble, lacking fleet capacity and strategy drift ever closer to the lee shore. Little Napoleon resplendent in his dress uniform, stands proudly on the poop deck holding the tiller of the rudderless ship...
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...23-p533bl.html |
Alan gives the ‘thumbs up’ to the A220. ‘Even the toilets are big’ he quotes...
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...the-thumbs-up/ |
Originally Posted by T-Vasis
(Post 10606414)
Alan gives the ‘thumbs up’ to the A220. ‘Even the toilets are big’ he quotes...
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...the-thumbs-up/ |
Originally Posted by davidclarke
(Post 10606422)
lol “even the toilets are big” is code for let’s throw in another row of seats. |
Oh dear, how does the domestic ASK count look like with a few airframes grounded..
One might posit they need a new fleet.. https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...30-p535xo.html |
With all the revelations in the media lately of under payments in wages by many respected companies , what’s the chance Qantas will have to defend their position reference this trending allegation ?
|
This trending allegation should be of great concern to them!
|
Qantas urged to ground all of its 737s after second aircraft crack discovered
Well, Well, well, maybe fort fumble needs some more "research flights" With the fix for this being rather substantive, one might posit where it will be done and how long it will take. Qantas need new management. Qantas' head of engineering Chris Snook said calls for a grounding were "completely irresponsible." Then you can stand proudly on the poop deck next to Little Napoleon and both chime simultaneously, "safety before executive remuneration" https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...31-p5360y.html |
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of #####. The only spare capacity they have is 747, so 330 back to domestic and 747 to Honolulu again maybe. |
Huh?
What did the A330 crews ever do to you?:};):O |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.