Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Qantas And The 777  
User currently offlineRazza74 From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 107 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11800 times:

Why is QF of of the few majors that never ordered the 777?

They use the 744 on a select number of routes, would not the 777 allow them to open new routes out of Australia to Europe via Asia.

It works for SQ why not QF


Ahh the joy of living under a flightpath
63 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11758 times:

Quite simple - they seem to think that they don't have anything to gain from operating it.

And it's not like there are only a handfull of major airlines out there not operating T7s... there are quite a number of non-T7 operators.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineSpeedbird2155 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 879 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11716 times:

why do people think that because it works for one airline, then everyone else must follow?? Airlines do what is right for each.

User currently offlineThe777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6675 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 11489 times:

From what I have heard, Qantas is currently reviewing an order for either A340-600 or 777-300ER. I think they said they would not get the 777-200LR or A340-500 but you never know....

So it's still possible that Qantas gets 777s. A decision will follow in a few months (by May?).

The777Man



Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....CI, MU, LX and LH 777s
User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11251 times:

A 777 or 330 can't fly the corridor across Tibet, even if it carried enough oxygen to sustain passengers during several hours of cabin decompression.

Nor can they fly the high polar latitude routes to South Africa or South America without detours that would eat into available payload.

However I still find it hard to believe they couldn't gainfully employ a big twin on routes to Asia, India, Japan, Hawaii and so forth.


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26169 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11226 times:

Its interesting to note that Qantas was the only airline on the 777 Advisory team during the types developement that never ordered the aircraft.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12341 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 10889 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 5):
Its interesting to note that Qantas was the only airline on the 777 Advisory team during the types developement that never ordered the aircraft.

QF helped build and design the aircraft, so you would think that it would suite their needs considering they helped design it


User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 10782 times:

The winner of the 773ER/346 competition will be known later this year. I believe the May planned decision has been deferred until 2nd half this year.
Dixon has made some comments lately about QF embracing the "hub-busting" ideology. I take this to mean that possibly the 772LR/345 are again being looked at. But you never really know with QF; they have a habit of changing their minds......frequently.


User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 10744 times:

Dale,

Dixon in fact said the decision was off until the 744 fleet had aged beyond its optimal utility. This confounded most of us at the investor briefing, since that could be interpreted as 2013. As you say, they tend to change their mind an awful lot, but the underlying fear factor in management is that for whatever reason, including those outside their control, they may not be able to generate enough returns to service spending committments they officially put at $A 18 billion in the next 10 years.

This is very awkward for Qantas. Better funded carriers including EK,SQ and on current performance CX are in a position to deploy new fleet that is not really a prudent option for Qantas.

It will therefore continue to rely on the poor-little-Qantas strategy, bitching about nasty government controlled airlines or bankrupty protected airlines, or wickedly smart and innovative airlines, invading its divinely decreed turf and bringing the (Qantas) world to an end. And so forth.


User currently offlineClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4660 posts, RR: 23
Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10650 times:

As long as the poor-little-Qantas strategy continues to work and we have a national airline, I don't really care. You've got to do something well, don't you?  Smile

Trent.



I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10646 times:

Antares,

my mail is that a 346/773ER order is imminent but announcement will be delayed until 2nd half this year as Dixon doesn't want to announce a large expenditure program to the market in the next few months.
I personally feel that QF will survive long-term and in fact continue to flourish. I have faith that they will eventually end up with a more optimum fleet structure(787/350, 777/340),allowing them to fly to more ports and expand frequencies to existing ones. The wheel is slowly turning in that direction.
9 of the 744/744ER fleet are 2000+ vintage, so they could easily be still around in 2013. I don't think many/any of the 1989-1992 build 744s will survive until then.


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12341 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10633 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 7):
QF embracing the "hub-busting" ideology. I take this to mean that possibly the 772LR/345 are again being looked at.

Then add the B787 and A350 to that list.


User currently offlineAirgeek12 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10599 times:

Most of the time.. If a major airline dosen't have a T7 it's most likely because they have an A340/A330. Like VS has A340s, not 777s. That seems to be just the way it is. The only airline I've ever heard of that has both the 777 and the A330 and/or A340 is Emirates.

User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10563 times:

Quoting Airgeek12 (Reply 12):
The only airline I've ever heard of that has both the 777 and the A330 and/or A340 is Emirates.

Try SQ, AF, CX, also....with KLM adding the 330's to their fleet..



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10553 times:

....KE, EY, KU, OZ, MH, various Chinese airlines, and more.

The 777 and A330 are a great combo. They complement each other very well.


User currently offlineAhdharia From United States of America, joined May 2004, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10428 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I dont think Qantas will order any Boing 777. They seem to be quite happy with their A330 and Boeing 747 especially since they now have the 747-400ER. And since they do plan on adding the A380 to their fleet.

Although giving that their an Australian company, I would suggest they should look in to the 777-200LR...it would give them better non-stop choices.


User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10347 times:

ClassicLover,

It's not that I don't want to see Qantas thrive, but not at the greater cost to the Australian economy of shutting out innovation and competition.

Qantas needs to do more FOR its customers, rather than TO them.

You might find it interesting to talk to some of the people involved in QBT or Qantas Business Travel. One of their goals in going after the corporate contracts is to reduce or eliminate 'the contamination' of the valuable frequent business traveller through exposure to the product standards of EK and SQ.

Why not try lifting standards instead?


User currently offlineNoMoreRJs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10310 times:

777-200ER and 787 would allow SYD-ORD, SYD-JFK, and SYD-DFW nonstop service. We shall see what happens in the next few years.

User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10265 times:

Quoting NoMoreRJs (Reply 17):
777-200ER and 787 would allow SYD-ORD, SYD-JFK, and SYD-DFW nonstop service. We shall see what happens in the next few years.

Is that the 777LR you're talking about?


User currently offlineMoose1226 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 250 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10216 times:

Quoting NoMoreRJs (Reply 17):
777-200ER and 787 would allow SYD-ORD, SYD-JFK, and SYD-DFW nonstop service. We shall see what happens in the next few years.

The -LR is probably able to do those routes, but the 200ER isn't on a reasonable payload, and I'm not sure about the 787.


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10113 times:

With the article in the Australian today regarding the Sydney Airport Corporation supporting SQ's attempts to run the SYD-LAX / KLAX), USA - California">LAX route, Qantas will have to be more inventive and competitive. I think it is just a matter of time before more competition is introduced on this route so why not establish some other services, the perfect aircraft for this being the 777 family (A few A330 help out as well, I also agree they are a good fit together).
I still can't see Qantas ordering the 777 though, as much as I want it to happen. I know Randy Besslar (I think that is how you spell it), the Boeing Sales guy, is coming down here in a 4-5 weeks, most likely with the 777LR when it arrives. Surely there will not be any decision before Qantas has a look at the aircraft which would be part of the order.

[Edited 2005-03-16 04:18:40]

User currently offlineQF744ER From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10079 times:

Hi Folks,

WOW yet ANOTHER topic about QF acquiring B777's or A345's!

"From what I have heard, Qantas is currently reviewing an order for either A340-600 or 777-300ER. I think they said they would not get the 777-200LR or A340-500 but you never know...."

QF have 'supposedly' been reviewing the 777 ever since the project was launched in the first place, c'mon they even had some input into the design project. I can't believe how often this topic keeps coming up. NW's DC-9's blah blah blah.......

QF need to pull those B763's off Internationals as soon as they can, and replace them with god knows what. The early OG*'s are getting extremely long in teeth, they are rancid inside and they lack any 'decent' form of IFE, compared to competitors and YES we still get B763's on SIN flights here in PER. Put the damn things on domestics.

I think we'll find that ALL the B744's will be around a lot longer than 2013, they are just in the process of completing their last life-extension upgrade on their 743's, (EBU is still at AVV), and some of them have just had D checks so count them in for the next 4-5 years that takes up to 2010!

QF need to do something with the 4 A332's as they just aren't ecomonical to operate them on domestic were they required 90 minutes turnaround time as compared to 60 mins for a 763. They are a big burden in the QF fleet at present.

Tom's solution:

a) Trade them into Airbus against new International A330-300's not the cheap crap with the flimsy, thin cabin floors like their A330-201's have that can't even take Skybeds.

b) Send the 4 A332 back to Airbus for extensive strengthening mods on the floors, meal storage areas to increase them to 2 meals per passenger, per flight.

c) Brush them off to AO.

It just insn't ecomonical to operate 4 of the one type in the QF fleet.

I maybe wrong but I doubt we'll see QF either B777's or A345's, as they just don't have the HUGE cash reserves that EK, SQ, CX etc have. They only made after taxes enough last financial year to fund 2 new B747-400ER's from memory.

The 7 ex BA B763's are heading back to Britain sometime in the coming future and I wouldn't be suprised if we see QF lease B772's from part owner BA in the next few years. They seem to have a surplus, I have a feeling some of the early builds non ER's have already left the fleet. Perfect for QF!

Just my 2 cents worth.

rgds

Tom/PERTH


User currently offlineAA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2544 posts, RR: 28
Reply 22, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9820 times:

I think QF of all airlines shoul be exploring the 772LR, since it does have the longest range, and flights to Anywhere in australia are generally need lots of range capabilities. Even if they couldnt make SYD-LHR, they could make it LHR-SYD.... thats worth something. Its worth having no landing fees at X airport. Besides all that, its a great performer, and it would look reallly good in QF Livery  Smile

-AA777


User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 23, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9614 times:

AA777,

The trouble is that it isn't performing yet, and Qantas is on the record as saying it costs to much to operate and can't do viable loads under its operational requirements. Needless to say I'm sure they think the same about the A345.

I like 777s, but for many of the routes Qantas uses the A333 the Boeing with its extra range capability (not needed on say SYD-HKG) was just too damn heavy.

However assuming all goes well with the 787 I'd be astonished if they didn't order both the the dash 3 and dash 8 and then a later version combining high payload and very long range.


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9534 times:

Quoting Antares (Reply 23):
However assuming all goes well with the 787 I'd be astonished if they didn't order both the the dash 3 and dash 8 and then a later version combining high payload and very long range.

I agree completely, this is a plane that Qantas will have to have!


25 QFA001 : Don't be ridiculous, Antares. You of all people should know all too well that QF isn't playing on a level playing field. If it was, then the Federal
26 Antares : QFA001, The foreign equity issue is even more complex. Qantas can't operate its existing bilaterals without having a majority of shareholders on its A
27 PM : Didn't BA recently sell their stake? I doubt if BA have any surplus 772ERs. They've returned two baseline -200s (which are now with Varig) but that's
28 Bill142 : The more pressing issue for Qantas is the 767 fleet. At present the oldest one in the fleet is VH-OGB which was delivered in 1988 making it about 16 y
29 QF744ER : Hi QFA001, OF COURSE I'm aware that QF have 10- A333's in their fleet, actually if you want to be technical it only stands at 7 as QPG is the highest
30 Sydscott : "We have to take in account that the high cycles that these a/c are doing e.g. Cityflyers between MEL-SYD-BNE" Actually most of these Cityflyer runs a
31 RichardJF : Why aren't they using them on the tasman to WLG and CHC. A NZ320 in the morning and a QF332 in the afternoon would be a great for NZ and QF. QF using
32 RJ111 : Comparing the QF A332's and A333's is like comparing chalk and cheese about the only thing they have is common is that they came out of the same facto
33 Antares : Sydscott, I'm shocked! You said you agree with the Australian Taxation Office about something. Even if you agree with the ATO you must never, ever, sa
34 QF744ER : RJ111, The point i'm trying to get across here is that the -200's are the cheap base model and can't be retrofiited for International duties without
35 QFA001 : There is some mild truth to this statement, but I won't reflect on it. Do you really believe that Government cannot renegotiate bilaterals if it deci
36 Antares : QFA001, Well you've explained why Qantas is stuck half way to a decent return on investment. It's everybody else's fault. That means your stuck for go
37 Post contains images Rj111 : Apologies QF744ER, All would have made sense if i'd actually read the next line
38 Post contains images QFA001 : Define kicking and screaming. AFAIK, QF doesn't kick up a stink about any of the money-losing routes that it flies within Australia that it does for
39 QFA001 : If that is what you read, then I didn't do a very good job of explaining. There is noone else who can help QF besides QF. That includes redefining it
40 Antares : QFA001, I agree with much of what you have said. Personally, I'd be putting more emphasis on internal reform, and I'm conscious of the difficulties of
41 ClassicLover : This thread makes for some interesting reading people, well done! Trent.
42 Gigneil : This is the first time I've ever heard someone on this board say exactly what the MTOW of the A330s QF ordered are. I'm confused by it, greatly, and
43 Ken777 : I think that QF is going to be fairly open in making their next purchase decision. Re the original post, as I recall, QF got a very sweet deal on the
44 Sydscott : QF said; Nice conclusion. However, beware of logic: "CX doesn't regularly operate its B777As to Australia, yet they are used on much shorter routes th
45 RJ111 : Don't forget CX have those crumby SCD's on their 777A's, i'm pretty certain they can't utilise the 777's cargo capability as well as they'd like, i'm
46 QF744ER : Hi Gigneil, I think your spot on mate with your info. As far as I'm aware the MTOW of the A332's is 202t and the A333's is 212t which makes them no wh
47 Post contains links and images Raggi : the one and only -303X operator I know of is QR. According to QR's website the MTOW is 233.000 kgs. http://www.qatarairways.com/0.1862.0.0.1.0.htm Vie
48 QF744ER : CX, Air Canada and Thai (HS-TEM) all operate (X) versions of the A333 just to name a few. Tom/PER
49 Stirling : Just wondering....... How much Australian content is in the B777? The B787? I've never understood the A333 and B772 operating side by side; someone me
50 Raggi : QF744ER, yes, but we're talking about GE powered A330-300s here. CX, AC 330s are RR birds, TG uses Pratt. I think the only operator of the GE powered
51 Gigneil : Its totally possible, which is why the A330-200's range is much greater. The 333 carries more payload, but because of the heavier airframe and more p
52 Post contains links Raggi : On QF's website, the 333's MTOW is listed as 212.000 kgs, and thrust at 64.500. Surely this would decrease payload capability on routes like SYD-HKG!
53 Gigneil : All I can confirm is that QF has received new 333s with 72,000 pounds of thrust. I don't know if they've retrofitted older ones, and I don't know if t
54 Post contains links and images QFA001 : If you mean internal as in Australia, then I agree. If you mean internal as in QF, then I slightly disagree. QF has had an amazing amount of internal
55 Post contains images DIA : Well, any further news on the A340/777 decision? I think Qantas will order the 777LR and start the LHR-SYD nonstop route that'll shave about 4 hours o
56 RJ111 : Qantas have stressed they have no interest in operating ULR aircraft or routes.
57 QFA001 : IIRC, it was Geoff Thomas who claimed in an article that the B772LR would shave about 4-hrs off the one-stop timing. That is not correct. Including t
58 Ruscoe : IMO the situation that QF finds itself in currently is the direct result of incorrectly ordering the 380/330 rather than 380/777/764. the 764 would op
59 RichardJF : Good point. 764 while it is too late now would have appeared to have been an ideal plane for QF for trunk domestics as well as to Perth, the tasman a
60 Bill142 : QF considered 764, but went with A330 instead.
61 SunriseValley : I was told by an insider that the A330 was acquired quickly to render the final knock out punch to Ansett. As it turned out that was not necessary as
62 Zeekiel : It just so happens that I've got a copy of the January 2001 Australian Aviation magazine with me now. Maybe the reason is embedded within the article
63 Miami1 : Down Under test for Boeing 'hub-buster' Geoffrey Thomas March 11, 2005 SYDNEY will be the focal point of some spectacular flight tests for the world's
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Qantas And The 777 posted Tue Mar 15 2005 14:02:21 by Razza74
Qantas And The 777 posted Fri Feb 20 2004 02:47:40 by QF744
Lufthansa And The 777 posted Sat Nov 18 2006 15:16:06 by LHStarAlliance
Qantas And The 787 posted Tue Aug 29 2006 04:52:07 by Boston92
BA And The 777 To SYD posted Mon Jul 24 2006 00:24:41 by Etuk380
Qantas And The 772LR posted Mon Nov 14 2005 15:05:26 by Aussieindc
PDX And The 777 posted Mon Oct 10 2005 06:26:47 by Leneld
Have Qantas Ordered The 777-200LR? posted Sat Aug 13 2005 13:48:22 by EZYAirbus
Aeromexico And The 777 posted Fri Jul 15 2005 17:32:12 by Henpol747
Air Canada Union Infighting And The 777 Defeat posted Fri Jun 24 2005 13:47:47 by Lawgman