It was supposed to be end of this year, but that forecast was made very early on in the pandemic, May last year I think. And that was assuming basically no income going ahead. Since then there’s been income from the IFAM and repatriation flying, domestic government backed flying, a profitable resource sector, and quite profitable domestic flying whenever it is going. As well as international and domestic employee wage subsidies from the government and the raising of cash by the selling of land. A big part of losses last year were redundancies which won’t happen again this year.

Qantas Group HY21 Appendix 4D and Interim Financial Report

Domestic was profitable at only 30% capacity to December (I believe they’re 40-50% for the upcoming months) and International’s position will be bolstered by more repatriation flights and government assistance.

Investors are seeing the same thing as the share price is the same as it was in mid May before the latest round of domestic border closures started and well above the March 2020 level.

To put it in context the share price is down 5% compared to the start of the year when we were a bit more optimistic with the vaccine on the way. If there was someone to be worried about it would be the Australian airline group who’s shares are down 42% compared to the start of the year that recently grounded all their domestic jets.......

Thanks Dr Dre.

MCD

I always knew Network would be our saviour! Thank goodness they’ve been flying the whole time with no stand downs :}

Yep, they are.
They are even recruiting whilst JQ and SH pilots are stood down.
Amazing business.

has this been posted anywhere

disturbing

Disturbing for our jobs? Sure.

Disturbing for safety? It’s no more disturbing than controlled rest.

Just can't see FAA or CASA approving it. The DC-9 in 1965 DoT back then took a lot of convincing to operate the aircraft in
Australian skies. They never wanted an Ansett 767 operated by 2 crew either.
One crew in a A350 can't see it happening, not even AJ and his sunrise project would think it's safe (-a F/O cost ).

He did what he did in a two crew operation…

That is correct. However, I can’t imagine spending hours alone in the middle of the night would be conducive to good mental health.

Depends who the person next to you is…

Haha, but even the bad ones give you something to talk about with the next bloke.

It could be the one time having multiple personalities is useful, someone to talk to.

Oh please, 20mins of controlled rest Vs potentially 4 hours single pilot in the middle of the night. One is never in a deep sleep during controlled rest so the recovery time is much shorter.

Additionally, with controlled rest, the pilot is already in the seat.
Handling a complex failure (QF30 oxy bottle explosion, QF72 ADIRU failure, QF44 multiple electrical failure) while having to additionally call the other pilot back from the crew rest, wait for them to get dressed, make their way back from the crew rest that’s above the cabin, comply with cockpit access protocols and return to the seat, while they are in a fog from waking from a deep sleep, is not the same as controlled rest.

Let alone the chance the single pilot has also now slipped into uncontrolled rest due to the shear boredom of being alone on a flight deck for hours in the middle of the night. Gonna be tough to react well now.

Why not? I've done it for a decade driving trains under Driver Only Operation and I'm fine. I think. Put your music on, make a cuppa and get comfy and enjoy the trip. The difficult part is if you haven't got a good rest the day prior. Wonder if they'll have a Vigilance system installed to keep the pilot awake? Push a button every 5 minutes of an alarm goes off...

For CAsA or the FAA to deny it's certification, they're going to have to have hard data to support their position. Airbus and Cathay only have to argue there's an equivalent level of safety in single pilot operations as there is in two-pilot operations to get the approval I'd imagine. How they'll manage the concept of pilot incapacitation will be interesting, but given Rio Tinto have got approval for autonomous heavy haul trains, I wouldn't say this concept will never get approved! And yes, I'm well aware of the difference between planes, trains and automobiles, thank you very much, but for those thinking the second pilot is indispensable, think again, is all I'm saying...

I didnt watch the video. Australian governments have made life depressing enough.

what if you are the single pilot and you need to take a dump?

You go drive trains, obviously.

Shouldn't it be on the manufacturers to show no decrease in risk profile? Straight up I can think of numerous things that make this option 'less safe'.

I don't see it as ever being one single pilot alone even though it's do-able. I do see the FO being a self contained robot. The hardest part of robotics is mobility, since it will be permanently seated that's not an issue. The rest has already been done, it just needs to evolve to the specific task. Because data is sharable from the Captains perspective it'll be like flying with the same robot every time.

10 years away I think and we'll start to see that as a happening thing.

The other issue regarding this great leap forward from Airbus is that Lufthansa has already said it won't be going down that path as it doesn't meet their safety criteria. One issue they identified was the issue BB addressed and that was the time taken for the other pilot to get back into the flight deck and up to speed on a possible emergency. So I don't think Qantas is going to go down the Cathay path but more than likely align itself with Lufthansa.