Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QF Looking 'very Seriously' At A3XX  
User currently offlineAF-A319 From France, joined Oct 1999, 603 posts, RR: 4
Posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1664 times:

Hello  

I've just found this piece of information in the online edition of "Business Time", the largest Business newspaper from Singapore

Any comments?

---------
Qantas looking 'very seriously' at Airbus A3XX


HONG KONG - Qantas Airways Ltd, Australia's biggest airline, is ""looking very seriously'' at Airbus Industrie's planned super-jumbo jet, an executive said on Tuesday, giving the European planemaker another likely customer as a May 26 decision on whether to sell the 550-seat plane approaches.

The expression of interest comes a week after Emirates Airlines announced plans to buy as many as 12 A3XXs and other airlines, including Singapore Airlines Ltd, have said they are likely to commit to the plane.

"The very fact that there are some launch customers who compete against us in our part of the world'' means ""that we will have to look at it very seriously,'' said Geoff Dixon, Qantas's deputy chief executive.

Airbus chief executive Noel Forgeard and commercial director John Leahy have said they believe interest in the A3XX will multiply as airlines see competitors signing up. That will drive them to consider similar purchases lest they get left behind in the contest to offer amenities such as conference centres, gyms and on-board shops, they say.

------


18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNavion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1550 times:

I think QF is logically and predictably using good A3XX pressure to get Boeing "off of the dime" developing the 747X. It also helps 777 pricing if they threaten to buy fewer 777's (if that is their intent) for some larger aircraft. QF has wanted a higher gross weight 747 for a few years now, and I'm sure they are getting Boeing's attention.

User currently offlineF4N From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1535 times:

To all: I agree 100% with Avion...Mr. Dixon and his team would not be worth the paper their paychecks are printed on if they were not using A3XX pressure to leverage an extraordinary deal for 747X/777/737NG out of Boeing, if indeed those are the a/c they are interested in.

Best wishes,

F4N


User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1519 times:

Nice.... cheaper planes = cheaper ticket`s, at leat for a while  

User currently offlineChieftain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1515 times:

Harvard economist are you?  

User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1512 times:

Just Detective

User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1478 times:

This article makes me a little curious. I just got done reading an online article (can be found at Yahoo!) that took another angle to this story, that is, that Mr. Dixon would feel pressured into buying the A3XX because of what other airlines do, not because they were seriously interested in the plane. I'm not trying to start something here, I just thought it worth noting the difference of jounalistic point-of-view.
BTW, unless I've completely lost my head, Emirates announced intentions for 5 firm, 5 option aircraft, which equals 10. Now it's 12?!? I'm going to have to go back to school again!  

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineTeahan From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 5294 posts, RR: 61
Reply 7, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1462 times:

10 passenger + 2 Cargo 

Jeremiah Teahan



Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1439 times:

Teahan,

The reports I read said that 2 of the options would be A3XX-100F. So its still only 10.

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineNavion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1420 times:

Just a quick question. Why has QF not had widebody freighters? I know they have a couple of 742 Combi's, but I don't know if they're still used as such etc.... It seems like a natural to me they would order dedicated freighters.

User currently offlinePerthWA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1389 times:

Why should they order freighters?
Isnt there more money in people transporting?

Besides, they dont have to worry about freighting because there subsidary Australian Air Express are responsible for that. Last time I checked, they had BAE146s and maybe some 727s, and probably more, but they slip my mind.

I dont think Qantas has ever had 742 combis.....but If they do or did, I stand corrected!


User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10736 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1384 times:

Qantas indeed has 747-238B-Combis. I think there are two of them flying.

User currently offlineBrissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1380 times:

When EK introduces the A3XX, one of the first routes the plane will be put into service on, is Australia-Europe. For QF not to consider purchasing the A3XX would be a bad business decision. If the A3XX turns out to be all that is promised, they will be left behind in a major way. Hell, they have only just now started to fit seat-back videos, after no-doubt losing revenue to airlines like SQ, MH, CX and others that offer this service.

Also, as far as I am aware QF has never operated Combis. They do *employ* airlines like Polar Air Cargo, Atlas Air, etc, to fly freighter services, such as SYD-LAX. Like Perth_WA, if I am wrong, I stand corrected (if wrong, can you supply VH registration please)

Perth_WA: Australian Air Express is 50% owned each by QF and Australia Post, and operates only on Australian domestic services.

I suppose the reason that QF have never operated freighter services in their own right, is that there is already more than enough cargo capacity into/out of Australia, and why enter a market, when if they were to do so, revenue would not be all that great anyway.


User currently offlinePerthWA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1360 times:

QF has 4 742s flying, I know for sure 2 of them are not combis because Ive been on them recently.

VH-EBQ
VH-EBS
VH-ECB
VH-ECC

God knows which 2 I was on, I only remember the city names  

But If they did have combis, youd think they would show that in there various seat maps. But like I said, I stand for correction!

If Qantas are to purchase the 777 because they were on the design team, which everyone keeps telling me, the same thing should be said for the A3XX because they also have a design team working on that project.
Someones probably already said that  

Later Peoples  

PS. Brissie Lions.......what happened on Anzac Day at Subi, I thought you said Freo were gonna kop a hiding  


User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10736 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1355 times:

VH-ECB and -ECC are Combis. They even had a third one, VH-ECA, but that plane was PW-powered and sold quite fast to Air Canada (now retired).
Maybe they don´t use them as Combis right now, so they don´t have a different seat map as the all-passenger 742s...


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1342 times:

I really don't get why QF has to have a certain type just because MH or their other competitors get that type. You don't see Everyone in the US jumping to get 330s and 340s to fly to Zurich just because Swissair flies them. The type, to the passenger (with the obvious exception of the members of this forum), is possibly the least important thing when choosing a carrier to fly with. What is important is how comfortable the plane is; what kind of in-seat ammenities does the plane serve; how well does the flight staff treat the passengers; and above all, price.

If QF does a me-too and gets the 3XX when it doesn't fit in with their fleet, then they are commiting a mistake.

If QF is simply trying to get Boeing to put the 747X on the market (with favorable prices) then QF is being quite shrewd.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineAvion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1343 times:

But if the A3XX will bring significant comfort improvements they surly must think about the A3XX.

Avion

P.S. DLX have you read my post at the "US Airways A330 cargo space thread"?


User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

Why does everyone seem to think that shops, gyms, and other entertainment venues would only fit in an A3XX. 747s are pretty damn big as it is. Any airline could've done this over the past 30 years and some have tried. It doesn't work. The added amenities Airbus talks about only serve to destroy the seat/mile cost advantages they claim. Where there are no seats or paid cargo containers, there is only waste.

User currently offlineUal757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 806 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (14 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1328 times:

i have to agree with wingman here, with the exception of us, the plane is just another mode of transportation.

why would airlines sacrafice customer service for so many years over-booking flights only to do a 180 for the A3XX? no.

we all know the "empty seat" code of airlines. the only good seat is one with a passenger on it.

BTW, excuse my ignorance, but when is the supposed release date for the first production model?


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...
QF Looking At 747 Replacements posted Mon Oct 25 2004 17:28:11 by ANstar
Gallois: Airbus's Very Future At Stake posted Wed Oct 18 2006 13:59:15 by Leelaw
QF, AI And CX At ARN? posted Mon Aug 21 2006 22:55:13 by Robbie86
QF 744 VH-OJD At PRG posted Tue Aug 15 2006 13:55:10 by PRGLY
QF 744 Clips Fence At JFK posted Tue May 30 2006 06:03:26 by Halophila
Sorry Looking US Aircraft At DCA posted Mon May 8 2006 03:17:16 by NRTfan
BA And QF Will Share T5 At LHR! posted Fri Oct 21 2005 12:52:01 by Concorde001
Something Very Loud At BHX/CVT Yesterday posted Wed Jun 8 2005 14:15:00 by FLYtoEGCC
Aer Lingus Looking To Look At Asian Option? posted Tue Apr 26 2005 06:37:30 by Kaitak
QF 744 This Morning At Vce posted Thu Jul 15 2004 18:58:43 by Hydargos