Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Qantas And The 777, How Soon?  
User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 577 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 24458 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If Qantas were to order the 777-20LR or 777-300ER how long before they would receive first aircraft? Just a bit off topic is Qantas a potential 787 customer?

207 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSthPacific787 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 24414 times:

Really soon I hope for both the 787 and the 777. I know this is not what you need to know. I just wanted to express my hopes that QF will get on board with the duo.

User currently offlineQFA001 From Australia, joined May 2000, 673 posts, RR: 54
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 24388 times:

Quoting Georgiabill (Thread starter):
If Qantas were to order the 777-20LR or 777-300ER how long before they would receive first aircraft?

Depending on if or when QF places their order, first B777 would be 1H'07.

Quoting Georgiabill (Thread starter):
Just a bit off topic is Qantas a potential 787 customer?

Indeed! Whether QF chooses the A350 or B787, they will be one of the largest initial customers for either type.

A decision is due next month.

 airplane QFA001


User currently offlineAirNZ777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 24272 times:

wow that going to meen a HUGEfleet for them ....gee that

744...
777's...
787...
Airbus330
Airbus380.?
737-& (800-winglets)
dash...

what have i missed?

are they planning to retiere some aircraft?


User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 24266 times:

QFA001 is correct.

The order is expected to be ratified by the Board at the October meeting with public announcement possibly due around QF's 85th birthday in mid Nov.

I think it's 783/8/9, 772LR, 773ER v A345/6HGW, A358/9.
No 747Adv but extra A380 orders are possible(exercising some of the 12 options).


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 24241 times:

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 2):
A decision is due next month.

QFA001, you don't happen to have heard any rumours on which way the decision is leaning, have you?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 24164 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
QFA001, you don't happen to have heard any rumours on which way the decision is leaning, have you?

I won't speak for QFA001 but all indications are that a 777/787 order is clearly favoured. But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.


User currently offlineDalavia From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 543 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 24107 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 4):
I think it's 783/8/9, 772LR, 773ER v A345/6HGW, A358/9.
No 747Adv but extra A380 orders are possible(exercising some of the 12 options).

I understand the 787 is favoured for the 767 replacement over the A350. However, I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

I think it is fairly certain that Qantas will not go for a mixed 787/A340 choice, which means the competition is open.

Despite these points, the rumours I hear are also for a 787/777/380 fleet pattern, or perhaps 787-domestic/380 and 350-international.

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.

Correct. Speculation may be fun but it is very hard to be accurate with predicting QF. Things can change very quickly at the last minute.


User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 24076 times:

How much are they affected by the ETOPS regulations? I know those South Pacific routes are pesky -- but how much of a detour are we talking in order to meet ETOPS?

User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24048 times:

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

if it wasn't, Dixon wouldn't have been harping about the merits of the 777 for a reason..like AC's milton, he's a huge fan of the 777......I don't think ETOPS will be a problem for QF, especially if there is an ETOPS extension...

while the decision can go either way, my intuition is tells me its going to be for a Boeing order....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineHZ747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24034 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
and 350-international

Would that not have ETOPS concerns as well? Also, hasn't the reliability of twin engined trans-Atlantic performance and trans-Pacific performance aleviated conerns against ETOPS? I would think that with the only major threats to transoceanic travel having been sabotage (Shoe Bomber), or human error (Air Transat) in recent years--2001 onward--that airlines would have seen that reliability of twins is well above acceptable and nearly perfect.

Anyhoo, Geoff Dixon recently spoke at the American Society of Australia in Sydney, did anyone catch the speech? Did he give any clues?



Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineSthPacific787 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24025 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 9):
it wasn't, Dixon wouldn't have been harping about the merits of the 777 for a reason..like AC's milton, he's a huge fan of the 777......I don't think ETOPS will be a problem for QF, especially if there is an ETOPS extension...

With Air NZ going the 777 way, therefore one would expect the same or similar ETOPS challenges as QF. Does this mean it is not a huge issue?


User currently offlineQANTASforever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24011 times:

What are you all talking about? QF have been flying the 777 for years now!

 Wink


Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Jason Z. Lee
Template © Gerry Soejatman



User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 23953 times:

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 8):
How much are they affected by the ETOPS regulations? I know those South Pacific routes are pesky -- but how much of a detour are we talking in order to meet ETOPS?

Actually its the Indian Ocean routes that are real ETOPS problems!

Look at:
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=b...GE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=180

You can see that East Coast Oz - LAX is not a problem, AKL-LAX is a small detour, but SYD-DFW is a problem, the detour could make the whole route not viable.

BUT SYD-JNB & PER-JNB would require real detours, up to about half the route for SYD-JNB, so B777/A350 are not viable there.

There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins, similar but not exactley the same as ETOPS. I do not know how the B777/A350 would be affected by these.


Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineHalophila From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 646 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 23937 times:

Here's hoping that if QF does purchase the 787/777 combo, they lease one to FJ - their 767 (plural?) were looking a little dogeared last time I flew on one.

Does QF-link have any plans to replace their fleet of 146's?

Any chance that AO might pick up a 787 to replace their 763 should they be ordered?



Flown on 707, 717, 727, 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 743 744 74SP 757 753 762 763 772 773 77W D10 DC9 M11 M80 M87
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 23914 times:

Quoting Halophila (Reply 14):
Does QF-link have any plans to replace their fleet of 146's?

Any chance that AO might pick up a 787 to replace their 763 should they be ordered?

The 146s are being replaced at the moment by ex Impluse/Jetstar B717s (still operated by NJS, as the 146 are, but subleased from Qantas Group).

It is unlikely that AO will get new anything, certainly for a while anyway. Only rumor I hear consistantly is for the B743s, but thats a belive when you see it!

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineSunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4874 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 23888 times:

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 13):
There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins,

There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23858 times:

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 12):
What are you all talking about? QF have been flying the 777 for years now!

damn does the 777 look awsome in QF colours..thanks for the link.. Wink

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 13):
There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins, similar but not exactley the same as ETOPS. I do not know how the B777/A350 would be affected by these.



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 16):
There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.

correct, no carriers fly over the Himalayan Plateau with any aircraft..so this shouldn't be a problem..

regarding the SYD-JNB route, if ETOPS can be extened to 330 minutes, then it won't be a problem.....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineNZ1 From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 2249 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23831 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

I beg to differ. NZ are in exactly the same boat. While yes, the 777's will fly a lot to Asia, they will also be deployed to SFO, LAX and a couple of other places I won't name yet. I can't see ETOPS being the main reason for NOT going with the 777/787.

NZ1


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23702 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
I won't speak for QFA001 but all indications are that a 777/787 order is clearly favoured. But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.

Dale,

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2924 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 23619 times:

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
However, I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

You wont see 777's or A340's operating to LAX or SFO in any case. They will be combination 744 & A380 runs. The only potential 777 destination in North America is Honolulu depending on wether that stays as QF mainline or goes to AO or another subsidiary. I think it highly unlikely you will see an A340 order from Qantas however.


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 23512 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting AirNZ777 (Reply 3):
744...
777's...
787...
Airbus330
Airbus380.?
737-& (800-winglets)
dash...

Better make a few adjustments. I will also include the whole QF group fleet
B743/4/4ERs
B777s/A340s
B787s/A350s
B763s (AO)
A332/3
A320s (JQ)
B734/8s
B717s
Dash-8 Q300/Q400

I do doubt an A340/A350 order thou due to QFs very keen interest in the B777/B787

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

NZ doesn't think so, thats why B777s and B787s will join the fleet over the next 6 years

Quoting Halophila (Reply 14):
Here's hoping that if QF does purchase the 787/777 combo, they lease one to FJ - their 767 (plural?) were looking a little dogeared last time I flew on one.

FJ were interested in 1 or 2 B772ERs and were talking to SQ, havn't heard anything more about that thou.

[Edited 2005-09-19 08:10:00]

User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2815 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22906 times:

The problem with the Himalayan Plateau is to do with pressurisation. In the event of the loss of it, an aircraft must descend with all haste to 13,000' where the air is legally safe for the passengers. The Himalayas are above 25,000' elevation so you see the problem. Loss of pressurisation can be caused by things independent of the engines, most obviously a window blowing out. This means that it affects all aircraft regardless of the number of engines.

User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22215 times:

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 16):
There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.

Dont tell the QF B767/747 Captians I sometimes drink & fly with. One made a convincing case last time I flew to/from LHR with him that we were over the Himalayas. QF uses corridors that are just west of the western Nepalese N/S border and over eastern Tibet. I been on them, in the cockpit (pre 9/11)

Quoting Glom (Reply 22):
The problem with the Himalayan Plateau is to do with pressurisation. In the event of the loss of it, an aircraft must descend with all haste to 13,000' where the air is legally safe for the passengers. The Himalayas are above 25,000' elevation so you see the problem. Loss of pressurisation can be caused by things independent of the engines, most obviously a window blowing out. This means that it affects all aircraft regardless of the number of engines.

The engine related problem is MEA or Minimum Enroute Altitude that the aircraft can maintain on one engine, if its not 1,000 feet above the terrian, you have problems! As a GENERAL statement quads generally have a higher MEA than twins with an engine out.

Also the size of the O2 system is relevent, it may not have the capacity to serve every person on board untill the aircraft can get to a place where it can safely get down to a low enough alitude. This is why, according to the Captians mentioned above QF cannot operate their B763 to Europe (without a detour) as they have the small O2 system. Lets face it, where QF usually operate their B763s, 13000' is a very safe terrain clearing altitude!


Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineAussieA346 From Australia, joined Sep 2005, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22123 times:

Hi everyone! This is my first post and would just like to know what ETOPS means...thanks

Andrew


25 FriendlySkies : Extended Twin-engine OPerationS. It's basically a set of rules that defines how far a twin-engine aircraft can fly over water or a certain range from
26 LACA773 : What do the cockpit and cabin crews think of the 330 they are flying now versus the boeing products (763, 744, 743 etc..)? LACA773
27 7of9 : ETOPS = ENGINES TURN OR PASSENGERS SWIM...... hahaha
28 AussieA346 : Thanks guys... I hope Qantas buy a variety of A/C...would be great for a SYD spotter like myself.
29 Post contains links Revelation : Wikipedia's take on ETOPS...
30 Post contains links Zeke : The depressurised issue is a little further spread. On the L888 route in China, there are procedure for diversions. Around PEXUN and SANLI the procedu
31 Georgiabill : Thanks all! However I am sorry I didnot properly word my question. If Qantas were to order the 777-200LR or 777-300ER today when could Qantas expect d
32 Dalecary : I think QF are looking at getting their 777/340s from 2007.
33 Post contains images QFA001 : Yes. The A350 & B777/787 are the only serious contenders remaining. I believe that the company is leaning Boeing, but Airbus was Down Under last week
34 ClassicLover : Would the EIS date for the A350 be a disadvantage for QF? Interesting... I am still putting my bets on 777/787. The only thing that would change it i
35 Post contains links and images Keesje : I wouldn't ignore the Airbus more efficient cabin configuration. The 330/340/787 cabin size allows 4/6/8 abreast F/C/M cabins. A Qantas 777 would pro
36 Cruiser : Which were a total disaster for QF right from the beginning. I wouldn't harp on this point for too long. James
37 Post contains images Keesje : Perhaps it is not the only alternative. PER-BNE falls easily within the A321´s range and weighs 48k kg empty. I would not be surprised if the 787 we
38 Post contains images Hamlet69 : QFA001, what are your thoughts/impressions/knowledge on the aircraft QF is specifically evaluating? Since the A340 is out of the running (no real sur
39 Airnewzealand : As A flight attendant for Qantas i recently had the boeing representative onboard, on his way to a presentation to Managers in SYD. He didnot let on a
40 NYC777 : Do you know when next month?
41 Keesje : It becomes clear you´ve never been involved in a cabin specification. Turn their back? The required ETOPS is just not there after all those years. I
42 Revelation : Damn, our best sources these days on A.net seem to be FAs and CSRs!
43 Post contains links N60659 : You may want to read Randy Baselar's blog: http://www.boeing.com/randy/ "For instance, even though it may look a little different, the 787 flight dec
44 Hamlet69 : Huh? I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about. Thankfully, the industry doesn't rely on what you think and don't. In this case, though
45 Post contains links and images Keesje : Let say this : It´s great to hear Randy say how very important cockpit commonality is for an airline.   There will be additional 330-minute ETOPS te
46 Hamlet69 : And it received it's ETOPS rating on schedule, with normal delivery to Air France soon after. What's your point? Hamlet69
47 Keesje : No. Still not ETOPS 330. Perhaps Qantas wants to pick up the chalenge. BTW I expected you guys to fall over the provocative a321 vs 787-3 reply 37, I
48 Post contains images QFA001 : Hamlet mentioned QF's interest in the B787-9, which is on a similar timeline to the A350. So, Airbus shouldn't be too disadvantaged. And, Airbus is t
49 Atmx2000 : Is this a higher MTOW variant of the original -9 proposal, or are you just referring to it being heavier than the -8? If it is the former, what is th
50 Post contains links and images QFA001 : You can read about it here. As Boeing has declined to comment on details, I will, too. QFA001
51 Dalecary : Beautifully explained QFA001. I too wish Keesje would shut-up re cabin configurations. As you pointed out the QF A330s have to have narrower Skybed fi
52 Cruiser : You are right, they were pleased after they sunk millions of dollars strengthening the floors. The domestic floors were not capable of holding the bu
53 Hamlet69 : Didn't need to check the numbers, we all already know you are full of **** Hmmmm. . . . that's interesting, as I had heard previously that the -300ER
54 Sydscott : As far as I was aware the bulk of the order was always going to for a 767 replacement as that is the more pressing need at the moment. QF has to comm
55 Post contains images QFA001 : Thank you, sir. FWIW, QF hasn't altered any of their A330-200s. Yet. Various figures are floating around. However, I can verify that the cost of upgr
56 Post contains images Iwok : QF, come on mate. Such characters are what makes this such a fun place to visit. I love Keesje's "business middle" seat arguement... Instead of focus
57 Post contains images Keesje : What a statements, full of .... & you know it. Of each seat type you usually have 6 -7 sub types per aircraft type & you specify them different for e
58 777ER : Out of you Keesje and QFA001, QFA001 is a QF employee so obviously he knows more. Keesje can you stop the drabble.
59 Post contains links Keesje : Just because someone works for an airline doesn't make him/her obviously know more. http://www.airliners.net/discussions...neral_aviation/read.main/2
60 Onedude : All, John Borghetti no-showed to a business breakfast in Sydney today due to "the Airbus tender". Anyone care to shed any light on this?
61 Post contains images N60659 : And I don't hear of any major carriers banging down the door at the FAA or any other regulatory agency worldwide clamoring for ETOPS 330 either. I me
62 Kaitak : By all accounts, it's going to be a Boeing deal; Qantas has never liked the A330s. There is (or was) talk of the -200s going to Jetstar and I understa
63 Post contains images NYC777 : That's priceless!! I'm laughing myself silly at the thought!
64 Jacobin777 : maybe he had to go see what Airbus had to offer them......obviously all offers have to be looked at seriously....... until the orders are announced..
65 Post contains images Keesje : oh no, I'm exposed..
66 Post contains images Hamlet69 : QFA001, having been both in-directly and directly involved with the industry for nearly a decade now, and I recognize that the knowledge level on a f
67 Dalecary : What is full of .......Keesje? Do you deny that the A330 uses a narrower Skybed than the 744s? Well it does and that's a fact my friend. The narrowne
68 Post contains links and images Keesje : Lets me say determining, negotiating a seat/cabin spec & implementing it on several types is no theory for me.. But that aside the 787/350/340 cabins
69 Post contains links and images QFA001 : You obviously don't understand what QF is aiming to achieve with their new fleet. They are looking to standardise their product offered to that on th
70 777ER : B747-412s, leased from SQ
71 Keesje : As you could have read I was talking about the 772. That it must have been a different QFA001 that claimed the 777 was ordered (however "a" QFA001 di
72 777ER : On the 27th, 1 day after QFA001 said he joined a.net.
73 Post contains images QFA001 : Rubbish. Not only did you not mention the B772, but the A346 is 37' longer than a B772, not 14'. But let's not let facts ruin a good Keesje story...
74 Post contains images Keesje : Again: you could have read I was talking about the 772 QFA001 From Australia, joined May 2000, 565 posts, RR: 11 Reply 24, posted Sat May 27 2000 00:
75 Post contains images QFA001 : Keesje, one of the strongest points against you is that you seem to be the only one who "knows" what you are talking about. Typically, if someone is
76 Zeke : You always seem to compare a 550 seat aircraft (773ER) to a 440 seat (A346). They are not in the same market, you cannot do the full 773ER load with
77 Blsbls99 : Why are Qantas and CX evaluating the A340-600 and 777-300ER as if they are competing airframes then? As did Lufthansa, Virgin Atlantic and Singapore A
78 Post contains images Adam T. : A few clarifications if I may so request: The 787's are being looked at as a possible 763 replacement, right? Does this include intl. routes that the
79 Zeke : Because 350 passengers don’t magically book flights with you if you have 350 empty seats. For CX the 773ER is too small for Taiwan, and too big for
80 Blsbls99 : And the A340-600 is certified for how many passengers?
81 Zeke : 440 as per my pervious post
82 777ER : What happened to the rumor of QF giving some of its B734s to Jetconnect (Qantas New Zealand) as B733 replacements B737s don't have Skybeds. I know B7
83 Zeke : The majority of the Jetconnect business is a labor hire company for long haul cabin crew, last I heard it had about 1000 cabin crew used on QF long h
84 Post contains links and images 777ER : Nope. QF long haul FAs based in NZ are not Jetconnect employees. As Part of QFs plans for extending the life of the B743s, Skybeds were installed on
85 VirginFlyer : Negative. No Skybeds on the 747-300s, they have the older Dreamtime seat. V/F
86 Post contains images Adam T. : Is the 777LR also being considered for possible expansion into other areas of North America and Europe? Also, what are the A330s at QF being primarily
87 777ER : Asian routes Do the B743s have a new cabin
88 OldAeroGuy : Well, Airbus seems to think they compete and are in the same market as they have gone head-to-head with Boeing at Singapore, Air India, Air Canada, J
89 Onedude : As stated above, no Skybeds on the 743s, but the cabin has been "refreshed" with the international economy seating and in seat AV (a huge improvement
90 NumberTwelve : I highly doubt that QF will buy the T7 because of optical reasons (T7 looking great in QF colours) - when they need that plane, they will buy. Very si
91 Zeke : This is factually incorrect. An Australian registered and operated 773ER cannot plan to depart or use an alternate whereby the maximum PCN/ACN for th
92 Antares : After other distractions in recent days I tried to read all of this thread. It seems to me that some people are painting themselves into a difficult c
93 SunriseValley : A question for Antares...... are there any indications from your contacts that QF could be talking to CASA about ETOPS 330 in respect of the -300ER an
94 Georgiabill : Then should Boeing go ahead with the 747ADV wouldn't Qantas be eyed as a potential customer?
95 Antares : SunriseValley, Hi. We don't make any inquiries with CASA. If we have a question we ask one of a very few technical media people to find out. The last
96 RichardJF : The A380's are of course uniquely suited to what Emirates is trying to do. The knock on effect on SQ,TG,MH will make non economic ideas such as QF fl
97 Antares : RichardJF, I think that had merit before the yields on the top end of the market fell apart. At the moment Qantas will try to sell you first class ret
98 OldAeroGuy : What did I say that was factually incorrect? I was talking about airplane efficiency. Where did I say anything about pavement loading? But since we'r
99 RichardJF : Antares - You made a point a while back that 787's could fly CBR-LAX and CBR-HGK and got dumped on by somebody. The way of the future is CBR-LAX-Salzb
100 Antares : RichardJF, Being dumped on here is nothing like being dumped on in the real world, no disrespect to any members either. This is quite a civilised plac
101 RichardJF : My examples are probably not that good. Lets take as an example if you said AO should run SYD-SIN-ATH 3x per week thats probably a low/no profit idea.
102 Zeke : Considering this thread is about Qantas 777's, the numbers would only be factually correct if your operating over continental USA LAX-JFK. The number
103 Dalecary : Zeke, so now you have QF and CX lined up to operate 773ER/346HGW in the same fleet??? Just won't happen. It will be one or the other. At QF it won't b
104 SthPacific787 : Well said Dalecary. That 'rambling' was becoming tiresome. It seemed that whatever anyone said (in particular OldAeroGuy) was discounted in favour of
105 Antares : Dalecarey, You've gone and done it now. They're sure to order 60 of them just to grind us into the carpet. Antares
106 Dalecary : I sincerely hope not Antares. There appears to be little doubt that the A340 has been overlooked at QF. However, I give the A350 some chance, but it'
107 Iwok : Zeke, what are some of these "real considerations." I do understand the lack of ETOPS 330 for SYD-JNB. I assume this is one of the "real consideratio
108 Zeke : Read my post again, I said I think QF will go 773/772, just not sure about the 773ER. I never said it was a race between the 346 and 773ER, 744's, 77
109 Dalecary : Oh la di da di da. We all have our sources and I reckon mine are better than yours in this instance.
110 Zeke : What childish immature reply. My sources are saying no final decisions have been made yet, and will not be made until the results of the pilot EBA ge
111 Post contains images QFA001 : Both airplanes are in the long-range 3-class 350-seat market. Even if you don't want to compare them, airlines do. End of story. He was talking about
112 Zeke : Also is the number QF has the some 744 and 744ER configured to. Is anyone actually operating a 773ER on the same sort of long sector lengths that the
113 Gemuser : Sorry, there WILL NOT be ETOPS 330 operation between Australia and Sth Africa/America, by Australian carriers, in the foreseeale future (say 10-15 ye
114 Post contains images QFA001 : If I may, I think you are confusing a generic market node with various airline configurations that may not match that node. For example, the A340-300
115 Gemuser : Your'e on! But we will probabley never be able to settle it! It WILL go to ministerial and most likely cabniet level, but the public is most unlikley
116 Zeke : I don't see that happening for some time, with no 773ER/772LR operators in the USA. Any of those power plants on US registered aircraft in airline se
117 Post contains links and images QFA001 : Only if expanded ETOPS is made into law will it go to Cabinet. Even if so, it'll be signed off just like every other thing CASA recommends. There are
118 Dalecary : within the next 2 months, as this is a direct quote from today's AGM; "Qantas ".... are considering proposals for further new aircraft purchases, incl
119 Gemuser : What I'm hearing, this week, is dont be suprised if the Board decides to order nothing, at the moment. Dont vouch for its correctness, but it was fro
120 Zeke : I know this VERY well. Gave some technical advice to a friend that was doing Check and Training on a C208, espically how this relates to the CAO 80 s
121 NYC777 : Ok so is QF deferring a decision till the middle-end of December? Am I reading that correctly?
122 N60659 : Can't speak to the rest of your post, but QFA001 is correct about this: $250m - $200m = $50m. $50m/$250m = 0.2 or 20%. -N60659
123 Scbriml : While your calculation may be correct, your logic is wrong. You're doing the calculation the wrong way round. 250 -> 200 = a 20% reduction (because 5
124 Spink : Not to be a nit but... 250 * .2 = 50. 250 * .25 = 62.5. QFA001 is correct. the equation 250/1.25 = 200 is actually saying that 250 is 25% greater tha
125 Dalecary : That does appear correct. Dixon has been quoted in today's press as saying he hopes to take a proposal to the board in December. I'm still almost cer
126 Dalecary : here is someof an article from today's "Australian" newspaper: "However, he said operations for expanding low-cost offshoot Jetstar would be discussed
127 Miami1 : Zeke - Jetconnect cabin crew will operate the ex-NZ Jetstar flights under the Australian AOC with Australian-based Jetstar pilots, similar to the Auck
128 Post contains images QFA001 : However, the A350 is very much in contention. The Board has been active on this since May. Even for QF that might be a bit unusual but they are consi
129 Zeke : You are correct, 18/13, public comments from SQ Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, in a Sept. 7 interview at Airshow China. Not really, thats how the t
130 Dalecary : At JQ international, QF mainline, or both? My understanding is the 787 is heavily favoured at QF mainline(they are looking at a 763 replacement) and
131 Post contains images Hamlet69 : Does "everyone else" know that SQ secretly took out more options than they made public, or even told Boeing? Does "everyone else" also know they conv
132 Scbriml : Then either they, or you, need to go back to school and learn some basic maths. How many more people do you need to tell you that you're wrong?
133 FCKC : Referring to Air&Cosmos , QF has chosen the 777-200LR over the A340-500 , and the 787 family over the A350 family. So Boeing can expect a huge order c
134 Post contains links Zeke : Nope, thats news to me. Thanks. What I knew came from Airshow China which was widely reported in the press in the region. Plug it into your calculato
135 NYC777 : If true it's not a terribly huge surprise. But as Dixon himself has already said that the Board will be making a final decision in December. Perhaps
136 Hamlet69 : Your quote, sir. How was I not being accurate? And I will be the first to admit that. I know nothing about Australian licensing. Nor did I say that Q
137 Zvezda : Zeke, 5 is 25% more than 4. (5-4)/4 = 25%. However, 4 is 20% less than 5. (5-4)/5 = 20%. See the difference? With percentage differences, the denomina
138 Antares : It is hard to type if you are flat on your back etc, but now that I'm sitting up I'm struck by several things. First. The decision pushback to Decembe
139 SunriseValley : Antares, sorry to hear that you have been laid up again. I hope you are on a permanent mend. If the foreign equity cap is lifted what are the likely
140 Post contains links and images QFA001 : I sincerely hope that you are not referring to this article from the Airshow China website. In that article, $3.6bn is mentioned but only as an edito
141 Antares : SunriseValley, Thanks I'm fine, just unable to gain altitude for a while. Yes equity is the key but No I don't think any airlines if that is what you
142 777ER : Thanks for that Miami1 From what I read a few hours in the October issue of Australian Aviation, I wouldn't be surprised if QF orders more A350s then
143 Dalecary : I would be....very surprised if this was the case. The main type being replaced here is the 763,for domestic, trans-Tasman and medium haul internatio
144 Zeke : Think I saw it in the "Straights Times" or whatever the Singapore paper is called, Interavia, and flight international, basically the same info as on
145 Post contains images QFA001 : Did I read this correctly!? Antares, you have a sense of optimism? FWIW, QF doesn't have 35+ options on the A330. QF only ever had 3 options + 23 pur
146 Post contains images F4N : Zeke: Give it up, already. You have ruined what was hitherto an absolutely delightful thread and turned it into a pedantic and self-righteous little b
147 FCKC : If QF don't exercise the options they have for additionnal A330s , can they transforme them in a new A380 purchase , thus to save the deposit they pro
148 Zeke : You haven’t been able to show that he didn’t say that, that web site reference you provided says the same. I have not seen anything elsewhere onl
149 Post contains images QFA001 : Zeke, go to hell. You're a blubbering fool and not worth the time. Technically speaking, QF's A330 options aren't convertible to A380s. However, that
150 Zeke : I see you not capable of a rational articulated response, I think you lost the plot. QF1 seems to be an apt name you bestowed upon yourself. So what
151 Post contains images Iwok : Well then, you must be familiar with the Mitsubishi A6M "Zero" fighter of WWII, aka "Zeke"? It was a maneuverable little fighter but under-powered, u
152 N60659 : Zeke, you stated this on the thread "QF moving toward 787/777 buy" not too long ago. You have tried to discredit several outstanding members of this f
153 Zeke : Interesting comments today... Makes you wonder about the much hyped direct ULH service to LHR, is this saying its will not happen to LHR ? or are they
154 Post contains links Jacobin777 : According to this article, it says it will have a "tender offer" by the end of this month.. "Qantas has hinted it could move a large chunk of maintena
155 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : What! Zeke, you just won't admit that you had made a gross error, will you? It's in black and white that was what you said: 200m is 20% below 250m. A
156 Post contains links Zeke : I agree totally, and I think you know exactly what I was getting at, so does QF1.... You have come closest to answering the actual question asked, th
157 Post contains images QFA001 : If JQ Int'l expands to that level, that is going to be one interesting business model. Arguably, the longer a sector is, the more difficult it is for
158 SunriseValley : I am missing your point, I would appreciate if you would kindly expand on it. Thanks
159 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : We all do, and we all know you got it wrong. Not a single person came to your defense. Why do you think that's the case. You either need to polish yo
160 Antares : The Qantas plan to expand Jetstar to long haul deals with a number of issues. Firstly. It is a response to a serious decline in the proportion of pass
161 SunriseValley : I would think NZ would be watching the expansion of Jetstar as you outline with interest. It would not be too difficult to imagine a siphoning off of
162 Zeke : I have never claimed I buy aircraft for a living, I operate them. If you or anyone else who claim to know about buying aircraft could indicate the or
163 Post contains images QFA001 : I will illustrate using arbitrary numbers and LHR. Let's say that the LHR market as it is currently served (ie. as a hub) grows at 5% per annum. Howe
164 Antares : I think I should clarify my thoughts on Jetstar long haul concern what the papers began by calling Jetstar 'heavy'. This is 'heavy' as in wide bodied
165 Zeke : You mentioned possible international flights out of Canberra earlier, can the 787 or 350 take a good payload out of the Gold Coast to Japan ?
166 Dynkrisolo : Which part of the two previous statements relisted below that you don't understand: That's obviously, isn't it? The 787 won't be available until 2008
167 Antares : Zeke, It has been graciously suggested by others that I was calling Canberra a few decades too soon, but since the airport can handle 744s on hot days
168 Hamlet69 : Yes it was. The maximum certified passenger capacity of the 777-300ER is 550 passengers in a single, economy class. The maximum certified passenger c
169 N79969 : Why not? Will she be offended?
170 Antares : There are stories in the business sections of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian today on the possibility of an all business class 777-200LR
171 Post contains links Zeke : It has 2042m, you can get a 767 out of there, just not with a fuel load for NRT. Just thought you might have know if you could get a 787/350 out of t
172 Dalecary : Oh come on let's be fair and open about this. Others are clearly talking about 773ER v A346/HGW. Do you know that CX has an RFP put at the moment com
173 Dynkrisolo : I guess you're just clueless. The reason the 346 has lower certified capacity than the 773er is not because it's a much smaller airplane than the 773
174 Post contains links STT757 : http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au.../0,5744,16950166%255E23349,00.html
175 Zeke : Dynkrisolo, would you by chance know what the average number of seats on A346 currently in service compared to 773/773ER ? Every airline I could thin
176 Post contains images Hamlet69 : Then your error might originate in the fact you are confusing a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one, as I hope to God you are not ignorant as t
177 Hamlet69 : If he'll allow me, I'll gladly answer your question. Afterall, you're "willing to learn" right? Of the 5 airlines that currently have the A340-600 in
178 Zeke : Well the company does operate the two types over some of the same routes, I will let scheduling know that people on A.net think they are confused usi
179 N79969 : Zeke, By arguing against the blindingly obvious fact that the 773ER and 346 are indeed head-to-head to competitors based on seat counts, all you are d
180 Zeke : That’s exactly what I am saying, I agree totally, they are not in the same league. The A346 in my view is a smaller less capable aircraft. People a
181 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : Absolute nonsense. Go and check how many seats IB, LH and VS are configuring their 346s, and see to where they fly their 346s. You absolutely have no
182 Zeke : Two class - LH, SA, IB Three class - VS-309, MU-320, CX-268, TG-267 - average 291, sorry I was wrong with 275, still not 350.
183 Post contains images Hamlet69 : No airline likes their aircraft to sit around. Therefore, when the A340-600 is not operating the HKG-US routes due to scheduling, I'm sure CX is goin
184 FlyingHippo : Spent over an hour reading this thread... and I just had to jump in. Zeke, I really hope you're not a pilot for CX, CX is one of my favorite airlines
185 Dynkrisolo : Zeke, you're a tireless a$$. Lemme see, JL's 773er has 292 triclass seats. NH's 773er has 269 triclass seats. AF's 773er has 310 triclass seats. And
186 Post contains links Zeke : I thought the reason was to still keep a three class aircraft on routes to Australia at off peak times. SQ apparently operated recently a 773 SIN-EWR
187 FlyingHippo : OK Zeke,... First I thought you just can't explain yourself too well, sometimes I find some smart people (especially programmers I work with) know wha
188 Zeke : I do know what your saying, 340s are also used for TPE. I was actually thinking more of the medium haul Asian/Australian routes which the 777's are u
189 Post contains images FlyingHippo : When your "facts" and credibility is under so much attack (for valid reasons, like SQ flying a 773 SIN-EWR   , you cannot efford not to be specif
190 Zeke : Yep I do, I was told 773 with the 345 passengers numbers (I assumed around 200 pax), so I said 773 simple as that. The conversation was not centered
191 FlyingHippo : If you're really a pilot, you'd question the validity of the statment... If you fly an A346, you should know the range and capability of 773. I'm not
192 Post contains links Luisca : I found the airline zeke works for http://www.cpavirtual.org/ they are recruting if you are interested
193 Zeke : Nah, im just an easy target, and I have a thick skin. I dont care if a poster here is a 12 yr old kid with zits or the 56 yr old CFO of an airline ca
194 Zeke : Well believe it or not, we dont normally talk 773 range/payload over a beer, prangs, pay, and holidays are a much more intersting points of discussio
195 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : You are still clueless. Airbus and Boeing clearly stated their seating configuration rules. With their seating configuration rules, they arrived at t
196 FlyingHippo : Nice try Zeke... you're so full of sh*t, you're beginning to stink up a.net... Well, believe it or not, the closest thing any one of my friends and f
197 Zeke : Another cheap shot...this is how the article starts... Now was that the same article you were referring to ? Would you like to change your comments c
198 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : Lemme see what you said before you mentioned Jetstar: The article that made a reference to the 777, the 772lr to be exact, was about SYD-LHR which wo
199 Post contains images QFA001 : OTOH, CX might buy both the A340-600 and B777-300ER. They might be prone to make that kind of decision because of their current split A340/B777 fleet
200 Post contains links Sq212 : Geoff Dixon of Qantas set December date for fleet decision. More details at atwonline: http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=2778 Cheers
201 Post contains images QFA001 : Well, how about that ... the A340 isn't in contention. Now that the CEO has mentioned it, I guess it will be harder for Keesje or Zeke to disagree wi
202 Zeke : From the same article Was this the one you were talking about ? Nothing wrong with me saying the QF order is not going to be what I thought it would.
203 Dalecary : My take on the order is: QF mainline will order 787 or 350 and/or 777(772LR or 773ER or both) JQ will order 787 or 350. Roughies appear to be more A38
204 Antares : Dalecarey, A fairly good call I think. However the 767 replacement being sought is more likely to be sized up to the rather attractive 787-10 concept
205 Iwok : Looks like there's another "source malfunction". 0-2 iwok
206 Dynkrisolo : You're still clueless. The only place that the 777 was mentioned was about hub-busting 772lr. Do you realistically think JQ International will fly SY
207 Dalecary : That appears to be very true, with this week's FI saying that FJ are likely to decide b/w 789/359 in December. You would have to think this decision
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
Flybe And The E-95 ,Coming Soon! posted Fri Aug 25 2006 10:43:48 by Ba757gla
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