Qantas domestic fleet: A320neo vs B737MAX
 

Apparently the 'domestic contest' which was suspended due to Covid is back on for the end of this year, AJ says now is the best time to be talking turkey with Airbus and Boeing and hammer out the best deal.

Airbus A320neo, Boeing 737 MAX battle for billion-dollar Qantas order: https://www.executivetraveller.com/n...r-qantas-order

110 A32N won’t be going to Jetstar way too heavy. Asian affiliates are leasing their own machines also which was not part of the original plan, creating further excess. With the inability to scale specifically this long-standing French order back it’s pretty clear some will replace the NGs.

The 321 would let QF go up against Virgin’s new toy the MAX10.

However I would expect a small order of MAXs at prices just too good to refuse. Perhaps 30-40

From a product and customer comfort standpoint the 320 is a clear winner. However Boeing will probably give the Max away at half price so everyone can keep shoehorning themselves into a 737 for another 25 years. End of the day the actual product is irrelevant in airlines, it's all about the bottom line regardless.

If the rumours are true about how cheap MAXs are selling, then QF would be silly not to.

It would make sense to get about that number of MAXs, you could dual crew the NG and the MAX considering about half the 737s are only about 10 years old, will have 10-15 years of service left and even the oldest A/C still have some life left in them til the middle of the decade.

Nothing stopping them also getting a few A321LRs, maybe convert some of the 330 crew over and fly more point to point to secondary ports in Asia like Seoul, Osaka, Shenzen?

So is Qantas going to pay their stood down crew before or after they order new jets..? :hmm:

Ive heard all 737 crews are stood up, so I would guess yes.

If it is the 737 max I won't be paxing on it, wonder how it will go if I refuse. The thing is just straight up dangerous.

Did you hold the same standards after the 737 Rudder PCU issues in the 90s? After the necessary fixes were completed?

That’s pretty funny. Good luck with that.

And suddenly , without any prompting , a poster outs themselves as knowing nothing.

Oh wow, and you’re a pilot?

Yep, a very experienced pilot swell :-) As long as MCAS remains installed on the Max with software patches then the aircraft is always going to be at risk. I prefer the solution suggested by one of the outgoing FAA certification engineers who simply said the 'only' safe solution for the max was the total removal of the MCAS system as it was only ever installed to meet FAA certificaton with all required manoeuvres being able to be achieved without the system albeit with some slackness in the controls. Boeing also hasn't addressed the Autothrust issue which could have been addressed by simply incorporating an auto disconnect function. I hope that the recertification goes smoothly but I for one don't want to fly on one for a few years to see how it pans out and that is my choice I guess.

Zero training costs vs the A350 steak knives.
Pretty tough to call this one.

Damn I was hoping to make some $$ selling the Bose A20

Says a Jetstar pilot with a few years of HAL9000 time tucked under his belt.

Right.

I’d fly a max in a heartbeat over a 10+ year old Airbus that’s been flogged out in a LCC.

What difference does it being in a LCC make?

Give me an Airbus over the 1960's designed 737.

Simple...pax on your own airline! Oh that’s right, it doesn’t have Business Class.

Qantas to operate a handful of cheap Max’s’ and Network to operate the 100+ Neos.

This is hilarious watching the I won’t get on this or fly on that!

The MAX will surely be one of the safest aircraft and crew more than trained by the time it ends up with you strapped into it. As a passenger it is a lovely aircraft to fly on, J class seemed a lot more spread out compared to the 800, or that could be airline specific. Even Y class seemed better. That was the Silk MAX now SQ.

The MAX can fly 6+ hours and Silk used it for SIN CNS direct.

The A321NEO long range or whatever it’s called, has an impressive range and what is it 240 pax? I suppose if it has more lavs/ galleys less seats.

Either way its chalk and cheese, way too much fuel in the tanks for my liking on a narrow body (ie it goes too far)!

I don’t have any safety fears wrt the B737 Max but there are a few things in favour of the A320 series and the big one is the cabin width. For pax, the middle seat on a B737 is not a nice place to be whereas the extra 50mm seat width on the A320 is reasonably comfortable. Airline management are continually looking at passenger feedback and this issue always comes up.

Additionally, Joyce has stated that some of the A321 LR’s & XLR’s that have been ordered could end up in mainline, effectively filling a mid sized seating & range capacity that has been missing since the B767 was retired. Management have been after an aircraft to fit between the B737-800 & the A330-200 for quite some time and this is the only aircraft available now that meets this requirement. If these are flown by mainline domestic crew then it would make sense to replace the B737-800’s with a mix of A320 & A321’s thus having a single endorsement for the domestic pilots (after the B737 has been completely replaced which will take many years due to the varying ages of that fleet).

The cost of maintenance and spare parts inventory would be lower for the A320/321 as it would be able to be pooled with the large Jetstar fleet’s needs. You could also surmise that EFA fleet could end up operating a larger A321P2F fleet (replacing the elderly B737 freighters) which would also benefit from lower maintenance/spares costs.

The A320/321 has containerised baggage handling which assists greatly in minimising turn around times as well as keeping bags dry in wet weather & permitting freight to be carried more regularly. Currently, freight will not be carried on the B737’s if there is a risk that the time to load it manually will cause the turn around time to be exceeded.

Basically, the A320 is superior to the B737 in so many areas that I think it’s the obvious choice for Qantas. Boeing should have designed a brand new aircraft instead of developing the Max as there is nothing they can do with such an old fuselage design to make it a better aircraft than their rival’s.

As my handle indicates, I am firmly entrenched in the pro Boeing lobby but, after analysing all the information, there’s no way that I think the B737 Max would be the right aircraft for Qantas.

I think sanity will prevail, but it’s a great carrot/stick for the IR muppets to play with!

Agree with this. A320
would be the better choice all around.

Not sure they are. I’m not an expert on the Max but I assume the cabin space on the -8 is roughly the same as the -800, and qantas fit 174 seats, 12 of those business, with galleys that provide a ‘full’ (ish) meal service, and while the economy class has a relatively uncomfortable 30inch pitch I don’t think A320s can quite fit that. Jetstar I think squeeze in 180 to 189 seats at a much tighter pitch. The extra row or two after you put in 12 premium seats make a significant difference to the cost equation, and airlines care more about that than having to touch shoulders with the person next to you. I’m told qantas practically print money when those 737s run around on the transcontinental routes with decent loads, as much as the pax dislike them on the longer flights.

If it’s A321s vs the larger Max types then you’re potentially introducing something completely different however.

I remember one flight on a QF B737, sitting in the rear row of seats, all three of us couldn't sit back at the same time. I was in the middle and had to lean forward slightly due to lack of shoulder space. Thankfully it was only BNE - SYD.

The B737 has a narrower cabin than the A320 which means that each economy seat is approx 50mm narrower than the seats on an A320 - this makes a significant difference to passenger comfort, especially in the middle seat and manageement are very aware of this through normal pax feedback. The ceiling of the A320 is higher, and thus allows the overhead bins to be mounted higher giving a more spacious appeal, not the sardine can effect on the B737.

Most of your discussion is about seat pitch where the B737-800 (& Max equivlent) has a slight advantage over the A320 in cabin length resulting in probably one more row of seats in a mainline Premium configuration but this can be easily countered by deploying A321's on higher capacity routes (& peak times). In general, they would deploy the appropriate sized aircraft to suit the demand so one less row of seats may not be as significant a factor.

Seattle will want a QF order/replacement for whatever follows the MAX so if they need to lose cash on this order then so be it. Otherwise they have lost a narrow body customer for a very long time.

I can’t see the A320N getting a series 2, so when 2050 rolls around and Airbus and Boeing are rolling out the next gen narrow body, bit hard for QF to swing back Boeing if they have a sole fleet 200 A32X machines. I’d expect very little in the way of crew conversion training for A320 to whatever replaces it, however can’t say the same about Boeing.

Actually I think it’s more like 3-4 rows extra than any A320 that I can find that has 12 business seats, and with galley space that can support service for a 5-odd hour sector. Thats 18-24 extra passengers for practically the same operating cost. AND the discounts on the MAX are likely to be huge.

Again, your shoulder space will hardly come in to the equation, because the competition is going to be flying exactly the same equipment - 737s...

The MAX is a very likely choice, though I wouldn’t be surprised at some longer range 321s being included as well.

Actually, the difference in seat width between an A320 series and a 737 is about half that - roughly an inch or 25mm (varies slightly depending on the seat vendor). I agree the extra width is significant and noticeable, but don't make it greater than it is.
But since 90% of the flying public only pays attention to ticket price - not comfort - the aircraft that's cheaper to buy and operate that will get the nod.

The B737 MAX 10 & A321XLR do have interesting comparisons.

https://mentourpilot.com/comparisons...vs-737-max-10/

4700nm in a narrow body ???
Good grief.
Time to retire.

MEL-DPS-MEL in one shift! The Sunrise to Sunset shift.

Although the distances were shorter but before the 747 came along, everyone travelled in what we call today a 'narrow-body'. I've absolutely no recollection of anyone ever comparing about the lack of comfort in a B707 or DC8. I think people are much softer and more spoit in 2021 than they were 40 or 50+ years ago! Our ancestors, wherever they are, must be laughing at us.

I was thinking more of the crew.
Flying the B737NG Brisbane Perth in winter was my absolute limit.
Thats 1951nm.
Hope its got a crew rest.

Well, you can’t do much of what is being thrown around here on the SH EA...such issues were raised which help sink the first company/association proposal.

Surely KB's comments are just as relevant for the crew as they were for the pax?

That goes for the pilots as well apparently.

The mob I work for used to do Perth - Jakarta return , 2 crew , B737NG ,back of the clock , departing late evening , landing at dawn. They gave it up after too many ASIRs and too much sick leave.
Not about being soft.
There are limits.
4700nm at 450kts is 10 hours.
No Longhaul Pilot sits in the seat for 10 hours.
Like I said , time to retire if thats the future.

About 2012 Virgin tried on PER - DPS - (BNE SYD MEL ADL) departing PER around 8 pm. Didn't last long of course when crew would get off fatigued in DPS at midnight.:}

Geez that’s a bad one. I recall Jetstar doing something similar with Asian based CC on the widebody.

40 or 50 years ago flying was a huge adventure and you were so awed by the experience that seat comfort was a minor consideration. Now even bogans fly relatively frequently.

People are increasingly knowledgeable and may choose to avoid certain seating arrangements such as 10 across on a B777 unless the price is very favourable.