Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Pitches Long-range A340 To Qantas  
User currently offlineSq212 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 272 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 18999 times:

Will it sell?

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=2872

Cheers

229 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 18972 times:

120 seat aircraft for this route. They must be betting that only premium pax want to fly the route non-stop. They would have to charge a pretty penny for those seats!! The 777-200LR makes more sense for the ultra-super-long-haul but that is just a small percentage of QANTAS' routes. Maybe Airbus might surprise everyone and win this order.

User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 18876 times:

Good Luck Leahy, because you will need a lot of it to win this one!!!

User currently offlineLordHowe From Finland, joined Jan 2003, 728 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18809 times:

How long (how many hours) would the nonstop LHR-SYD flight be - and SYD-LHR?

Regards,
LordHowe



Lord Howe Island - The Last Paradise
User currently offlineAnxebla From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18807 times:

Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 1):
The 777-200LR makes more sense for the ultra-super-long-haul

That's your opinion, but QF seems are not agree with you.

From the article this is written:

>""Both the A340-500 and the 777-200LR can perform the London-Sydney leg with a good payload --240 passengers for the 777-200LR-- but Qantas apparently is not keen on a one-stop or one-way service""<


I wonder if a PER-LHR non-stop flight could be successful


User currently offlinePlaneDane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18767 times:

Quoting Sq212 (Thread starter):
Will it sell?

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=2872

Cheers

This was a very strangely written article that should have received more critical review prior to publishment, in my opinion.

It really comes off as an editorial more than anything else informative. Essentially, advice is being given to Qantas to just accept a technical stop as the best solution. Unamed "analysts" are given credit for this supposedly useful bit of guidance.

These so-called sources then go on to advise Qantas on joining Oneworld alliance because seemingly Qantas is being unrealistic to expect profitable non-stop service capabilities from Sydney to London.

No mention of whether the 777LR will be capable of meeting Qantas' requirements is made, which would make the premise of this article a moot point.

Who really wrote this thing anyway?


User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18762 times:

it is a given that QF will not order the A345 or A346 or A346HGW or any version of the A340 for that matter.

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18731 times:

Sadly, the article doesn't indicate what modification would be made to the A340-500 to give it the needed range boost. Presumably, it would be an application of A350 developments and updated engines.

Quoting Anxebla (Reply 4):
I wonder if a PER-LHR non-stop flight could be successful

Technically, yes, of course, PER-LHR would be successful. Economically, the market is dubious. PER-LHR is mostly a leisure market.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25563 posts, RR: 86
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18710 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
it is a given that QF will not order the A345 or A346 or A346HGW or any version of the A340 for that matter.

That may be true, but are you suggesting that Airbus should not even try?

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSthPacific787 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18689 times:

How about that Leahy huh? Must be spending a lot of time, pulling his hair out and running around chasing Boeing's initiatives and coming up with half baked alternatives.

I liked Airbus better when they were the innovators but the A380 has seemingly rendered them infertile... much the same as Boeing was not that long ago.


User currently offlineAnxebla From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18672 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 5):
Essentially, advice is being given to Qantas to just accept a technical stop as the best solution

QF wants to make the SYD-LHR-SYD non stop. Period!!!

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 7):
PER-LHR is mostly a leisure market

Agree, but it seems the best solution to link UK with Australia in a non-stop flight and with a decent pay load; only 120 pax could be a joke unless they be top premium pax.


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 857 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18655 times:

If QF´s to buy all 777/787 what about the 747ADV?

Curius.

Micke//SE  Confused



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2302 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18615 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 2):
Good Luck Leahy, because you will need a lot of it to win this one!!!

Or an extremely good price, like 50 million dollars per plane! One possibility is that Airbus is doing this only to try to pressure Boeing into lower its price in this deal.

Another possibility, which is also important to take into account, is that QF might be interested in buying an airplane mainly for flights to South America and South Africa. With ETOPS possibly being an issue on such flights, QF might decide to buy a plane which will enable them to both fly on these routes as well as to North America.

If QF decides that the 772 anyway doesn't have the range to do SYD-LHR nonstop, then they could possibly agree to get the A345, if the price is significantly lower.

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 5):
Unamed "analysts" are given credit

Maybe some of those "analysts" are comments taken from a.net forums???

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 5):
These so-called sources then go on to advise Qantas on joining Oneworld alliance because seemingly Qantas is being unrealistic to expect profitable non-stop service capabilities from Sydney to London.

??? Qantas is already in Oneworld!



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 3135 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18601 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 5):
It really comes off as an editorial more than anything else informative. Essentially, advice is being given to Qantas to just accept a technical stop as the best solution. Unamed "analysts" are given credit for this supposedly useful bit of guidance.

These so-called sources then go on to advise Qantas on joining Oneworld alliance because seemingly Qantas is being unrealistic to expect profitable non-stop service capabilities from Sydney to London.

I'd actually gathered it was an Airbus "analyst" who gave this to who-ever wrote the article as it has been their consistent line throughout this aircraft competition that Qantas would have to settle for one-stop service due to winds on one of the legs. Boeing effectively eliminated Airbus from the ULR aircraft part of the order by promising non-stop service on both legs.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 8):
That may be true, but are you suggesting that Airbus should not even try?

They may as well just concede and focus on selling A350's and A320's to Qantas. The A350/787 decision will most likely be the biggest part of the order in any case and a large A350 order would do wonders for Airbus at the moment given the 787's momentum in the market.

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 11):
If QF´s to buy all 777/787 what about the 747ADV?


With 12 A380's coming on board I don't think QF will be a 747ADV customer for quite some time. Not unless the A380 turns out to be a spectacular failure in any case but I can't see that happening.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25563 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18556 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 13):
They may as well just concede and focus on selling A350's and A320's to Qantas.

Why?

Since neither plane - A345 or 777LR - is dead set capable of doing what Qantas supposedly wants, it is all fair game.

I assume the order will go to Boeing, but I don't sneer at Airbus for trying.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 28
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18554 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
it is a given that QF will not order the A345 or A346 or A346HGW or any version of the A340 for that matter.

Why?

Are you Geoff Dixon?

Incidently Qantas had a press release the other day, AND two months ago AND late last year stating they were evaluating both the 777 and A340 variants.



It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
User currently offline'Longreach' From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 505 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18430 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
it is a given that QF will not order the A345 or A346 or A346HGW or any version of the A340 for that matter.

I have been reading your posts for the last few years, and the 777 love affair is becoming increasingly more obvious in your postings, you used to hide it well  Smile

If QF for some reason do not order the 777, I fear what actions you might take  Smile


User currently offlineLordHowe From Finland, joined Jan 2003, 728 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18384 times:

Quoting LordHowe (Reply 3):
How long (how many hours) would the nonstop LHR-SYD flight be - and SYD-LHR?

Doesn't anybody know - or is this a stupid question? Sorry if that is the case ...

LordHowe



Lord Howe Island - The Last Paradise
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18223 times:

I feel the huge wide body QF order will go to the Boeing basket.
What Leahy says , is the very last try for Airbus to be the winner........but surely they will not be.


User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2696 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18185 times:

Quoting Anxebla (Reply 10):
Agree, but it seems the best solution to link UK with Australia in a non-stop flight and with a decent pay load; only 120 pax could be a joke unless they be top premium pax.

So what your saying is the 772LR is the best option then?
For it will carry 240 pax on the Kangaroo route, as opposed to the A345's 120?

Quoting FCKC (Reply 18):
I feel the huge wide body QF order will go to the Boeing basket.
What Leahy says , is the very last try for Airbus to be the winner........but surely they will not be.

For efficiency the 772LR is by far the best option when pitched against the A345.

The only thing I see that could swing this order towards the Airbus is QF's stance on ETOPS. Does anyone know what QF's current policy is on ETOPS?



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1308 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18145 times:

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 15):
Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
it is a given that QF will not order the A345 or A346 or A346HGW or any version of the A340 for that matter.
Why?
Are you Geoff Dixon?

You've beat me with this question Monteycarlos. That is a very ignorant statement Dalecary!

Leahy's suggestion isn't that stupid. Obviously QF is not impressed by the current capabilities of both 777LR and A345. If Airbus could do the non-stop flight in both directions this would make the difference. And don't forget that flights this long will not be sold as Economy class anyway so this Business and First only concept is probably feasible.



There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineSq212 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 272 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18095 times:

Quoting LordHowe (Reply 17):
Doesn't anybody know - or is this a stupid question? Sorry if that is the case ...

LordHowe

As much as I would like to know the numbers myself, unfortunately nobody has yet step forward for an answer. AFIK, Singapore Airlines still hold the record of 18+ hours non-stop flight time on a A340-500. my guess is LHR-SYD flight time will be more than 18 hours. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Cheers.


User currently offlineAirxLiban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4514 posts, RR: 53
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17990 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 5):
Who really wrote this thing anyway?

Geoff Thomas...ATW editor who I have met personally. I didn't think it was slanted but clearly the 772LR is the aircraft with the better performance for the super long haul routes.



PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17891 times:

Odd article - firstly, I thought that QF had advised Airbus that it was not interested in the A340, wasnt there just a thread about that here a couple of days ago? It seems that in the ULR category, QF will go with the 777LR, but a lot still depends on doing the LHR-SYD route.

The techincial stop issue is nonstarter: QF wants an aircraft that can do LHR-SYD in both directions year round with a reasonable payload.....QF may or may not opt for a lower density F/J class service to get the route launched....that is still unclear. The A345, clearly is not going to make this goal.....now we have to see if the 777LR will be capable, thus far Boeing is not committing and QF is not making a final decision.

As for LHR-PER - we have discussed that so many times here, its not going to happen......this is all about the ability to operate nonstop flights between LHR and SYD/MEL, the routes where there is premium demand, business demand and some money to be made. LHR-PER does not have demand or premium traffic - and QF is not going to invest hundred of millions in a new type to launch this at-best marginal route. The next point is that someone will say why not LHR-PER-SYD.....answer: there is little to no benefit of flying that route over the existing LHR-SIN-SYD services.


User currently offlineJasond From Australia, joined Jul 2009, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 17720 times:

Quoting Anxebla (Reply 4):

I wonder if a PER-LHR non-stop flight could be successful

Oooohhh, I hope so, be nice to see more heavies in Perth!!!


25 OzGlobal : Re: flight time LHR-SYD / SYD-LHR, there is a lot of data on the other QF order threads, so see there. From memory the non-stop can be done in roughl
26 Manni : Boeing is proposing the 777ULR with 240 seats, obviously that's not going to be an all Business configuration. Anyone knows how many F/C/Y seats they
27 Jasond : Whoa, hold up there DutchJet, I know PER can be a sleepy town but every international heavy out of here (MAL, SIA, QF, SAA, THAI, EK) every day is pa
28 Lufthansa : I don't! PER-LHR is full of tourists... backpackers and wealthy babyboomers. The babyboomers are up the front, the 20 and 30 somethings up the back...
29 Post contains images Keesje : One would almost forget Boeing has been trying to sell the 772LR for 5 years now and Airbus has since then become a clear market leader. Don't some o
30 Joshdean : I wouldn't want to be in the air for 18 hours or more. A stop over is a welcome break to most people, especially for me (and I'm guessing most us on a
31 Gemuser : Nobody really knows, yet. The proposed aircraft the B777-200ULR does not even exist, yet. The QF advance planning group probabley has a pretty fair i
32 DAYflyer : Agreed. Right now he appears to have the "hampster-syndrome"; running around without really going anywhere. And the A-380 is a time consuming item. B
33 N79969 : It is an odd article but it makes sense that Airbus would keep trying if for nothing else to squeeze Boeing on it pricing. How deluded can you be. The
34 Keesje : Back to earth: - A has the biggest back log (& the number of aircraft is only half the story..) - A upped its forecast to 360 aircraft deliveries thi
35 Post contains links Keesje : The easiest forgotten piece of boeing 777-200LR history on a.net. Farnborough International 2000, Day 2 Boeing celebrated the launch of the longer ra
36 Glareskin : Interesting research Keesje! How many were sold after these initial orders? And how many A345 in the same period? This would give a more accurate pic
37 EI747SYDNEY : Hi all.....If there was a non stop from SYD-LHR. How much time would the pax actually save? also would the existing seat pitch used on most carriers 3
38 N79969 : Keesje, If you would bother to read your own "sources" you would clearly and easily see that aeroworldnet use "777LR" for both the -300ER/200LR. ANA a
39 ClassicLover : The delivery flight of the first Qantas Boeing 747-400, which had 30 people on board and no luggage had a flight duration LHR-SYD non-stop of 17 hour
40 Post contains links NAV20 : On another thread Astuteman said that he had heard from a friend in Airbus that they are planning a quick weight-saving upgrade of the A340 - and, in
41 EI747SYDNEY : Thanks for the reply ClassicLover. But if the 777LR was aquired by Qantas how would this be operated.
42 ClassicLover : Do you mean from a configuation standpoint or what? From what I've heard on here (always reliable - err - hehe!) it'll be 200 odd passengers as a pre
43 Rj111 : Whilst i realise that the LHR-SYD attempt would only be 120 seats, are Airbus planning on doing anything to increase the range of the A345 at normal p
44 Startknob : Let's face it: Qantas wants SYD-LHR and back. The 772LR can do that better than the A345 (both todays versions). All rumors about an improved A345 or
45 Post contains images CRJ900 : Why can't QF just accept that SYD-LHR are half a world away from each other and just continue with one-stop services... they are making money on them,
46 Post contains images Glareskin : That's nonsense! The 772LR cannot do it both directions. So, please explain what's better about that...   Edit: typo[Edited 2005-10-27 16:40:02]
47 NAV20 : E1747SYDNEY, the route that is getting the press attention is SYD-LHR nonstop. But my guess is that Qantas are also considering nonstops to Dallas and
48 MEA : Isn't Geoffrey Thomas, the journalist who wrote the atwonline article a pro-Boeing journalist anyway? Most of his articles in the Australian newspaper
49 EI747SYDNEY : yes basically if I was to book a flight with Qantas from Sydney if they aqquire the 777LR Would I have to pay the equivalent of a biz class fare? Tha
50 RedFlyer : Assuming the source is in fact reliable, I thought Airbus had all but conceeded that "4 engines 4 long-haul" was all but dead given the advent of the
51 ClassicLover : ... and they'll continue to do so. There is a market for a non-stop service between the two cities, and if they can make money off that too, then why
52 YULWinterSkies : Come on!!! A 772LR is NOT an A380. With the same seating configuration as a 120-seat 345, it will seat barely 130 pax. And this is the configuration
53 Glareskin : This is taking a long time. Too long for QF anyway. Further, is the 787 capable of doing LHR - SYD non-stop both directions? I don't think so... Mayb
54 NAV20 : Of course I agree entirely, Redflyer - but they should have started on that three or four years ago. Now the only available options are half-measures
55 Post contains images Airbazar : I heard the same before they bought the A330. In fact, given that QF already operates the A330, I'd give the A340 a slight advantage over the 777. Bu
56 Post contains images Boeing767-300 : Only 120 passengers (240 for 777LR) and this if AFTER improvements. The A345 is VERY sad in comparison with 777LR and the only contest it has won wit
57 PHXinterrupted : Wrong again, Keesje. The program was put on hold after 9/11.
58 LordHowe : Who the hell wants to stay onboard an aircraft that long?!!! - Even if they could offer the best seats in the whole world. Anything over 12 hours is
59 Post contains links RedChili : And what's wrong with that? Even Boeing does the same: "Launched in February 2000, the new longer-range 777-200 and 777-300 airplanes bring the comfo
60 NAV20 : Odd how these ULH threads always seem to come down to large numbers of Australians saying that they can't wait for nonstop services, and almost equal
61 Post contains images Jacobin777 : right, but at the time, the full picture of the 777-200LR wasn't around and air carriers were waiting to see how it can perform.. now that it ahs bee
62 Post contains links and images Keesje : A: an aircraft type isn't sold because it isn't available B: an aircraft type isn't made available because there's no taker. The 777-200X/LR has defi
63 ClassicLover : Have you ever had to travel from Australia to Europe? After 8 or 9 hours to HKG or SIN, you get off the plane, wait an hour or so (often at stupid ho
64 Post contains links B2707SST : Boeing is reportedly offering QF a 777-200ULR with additional belly fuel tanks and a lightened interior that can do SYD-LHR both ways non-stop. The c
65 Post contains images Keesje : Then I've to make an extra transfer at LHR.. a less convenient hub Alternative: non-stop AMS-SYD.. 2018 (?), doubt w'll still be on a.net
66 N79969 : RedChili, I did not say anything was wrong with the first article. Rather I stated that Keesje did not even understand what he was using as a referenc
67 Glareskin : The article is stating 'close to finalizing' which is not the same... Besides, why is QF not satisfied with capabilities of both 772LR and A345? If y
68 Sq212 : I like that. But one thing I hated most is delay due to waiting passengers from other flights. Cheers
69 Post contains images BoogyJay : ROFL You made my day CRJ900! Thanks for that. It reminded me of a FRA-CDG I flew on SQ back in the days. When I entered the cabin, it was smelling li
70 TEAtheB : No no no. That's not what the article is saying. Both the 772LR and the A345 can operate LHR to SYD in that direction with an payload that justifies
71 Karan69 : that is Virgin Atlantics logo and not Airuses. As much as i hate to admit it, it does seem like Boeing are favourites for the order, however i am exp
72 BlueSky1976 : Try 737NG. A warmed-over product, that sold... how many frames??? Seriously, people thinking that a warmed-over A330 might not perform might need a r
73 B2707SST : Clearly, QF is not satisfied with the current 772LR or the A345 because they cannot do SYD-LHR both ways non-stop year-round. The 772LR is closer tha
74 Zeke : How would QF bypass the current CASA rules preventing flights being rostered over 16 hours in turbojet aircraft ?
75 Post contains images Hamlet69 : Glareskin, before you shout out the ignorance of someone else, I suggest you check your own in at the door. In fact, that would apply to everyone on
76 Atmx2000 : If it is too narrow on the A340, would it fit in the A350 with whatever interior wall modifications that have been made?
77 Post contains images Glareskin : Hamlet69 I'm not perfect, I'm biased, and sometimes I'm telling things as a fact that are not checked or not partly or completely true. I'll take the
78 TEAtheB : Even an A345 with only 120 seats?
79 M27 : Not to hijack the thread, but has anyone heard(Hamlet maybe) anything about the record flight Boeing planned with the 200LR? Is that still in the plan
80 Hamlet69 : I don't believe so, but QFA001 can correct me if I'm wrong. Then again, I don't know if they are planning on putting these seats into the 787/A350 fl
81 N79969 : Assuming that Hamlet69 speaks the truth (which I do assume), this is a last minute shot from half court and also a way to pressure Boeing's pricing.
82 RedChili : Roger. A sensible post, BoogyJay. Personally, I give Boeing an 80 percent chance of winning this battle, but I would not rule out totally an Airbus o
83 Zvezda : How would increasing the MTOW help (especially in combination with a reduced OEW)? The B777-200LR is fuel limited, not weight limited. Even with the
84 TEAtheB : What do you mean by "fuel limited, not weight limited".
85 Post contains images Hamlet69 : Thank you. To be honest, my pet-peeve is not someone who is mis-informed, because that can be corrected. My biggest pet-peeve is someone who loudly a
86 TEAtheB : True, but if you have less seats to fit in the same width, they can be bigger. Can they be big enough?
87 Post contains images Glareskin : Thank you! Btw, there is no need to Sir, you can call me Glare OK, I'm not such an insider to know that you and your friend have this kind of inside
88 Post contains links N60659 : Zvezda, hope you don't me fielding this one. I can attempt to answer this, but I think you would benefit more by reading this thread: RE: QF Moving To
89 Hamlet69 : True, but as I said before, it creates unused space that, in a competitive aircraft, can be used for revenue generation. Regards, Hamlet69
90 Post contains images Sabenapilot : Which is exactly what AIRBUS did not do... -) within about a year of the 787 launch, they responded with the A350; a plane which was laughed with at
91 RedFlyer : Keesje, have you ever flown really long-haul? I do a few times a year. And I've flown the same routes with one-stop and non-stop (e.g., SQ's LAX-SIN)
92 OldAeroGuy : Carry two flight crews? Seems to work for SQ on the SIN-EWR route. Do you really think this will be an issue if adequate crew rest facilities are pro
93 Zvezda : RedFlyer, whatever do you mean? Long-haul? Remember, some people have never flown at all. I'm sure there are some people who have never seen an airpl
94 TEAtheB : Thanks for that. Please clarify this though: Is Widebodyphotog saying that the range of the 772LR cannot be increased because no more fuel can fit in
95 B2707SST : The articles I've seen mentioned up to six belly tanks, which might shift the MTOW portion of the payload-range curve out enough that it begins to ma
96 N79969 : I guess travelers were distraught when they lost the opportunity to enjoy the high life at airports in the middle of the night in such places like Ga
97 Zvezda : Yes. Where would one put an additional tank? The B777-200LR is already offered with up to 3 supplemental belly tanks. Boeing is reportedly considerin
98 B2707SST : Yes. At its design payload and range (300 pax, 9,420 nm), the 777-200LR's tanks are completely full, including three auxiliary tanks in the cargo hol
99 Keesje : Not really, 40 intercontinental trips max, certainly not more. E.g. I´ve never been to S.America & haven´t flown with all major airlines, not with
100 Cloudyapple : If Qantas chose the LR it will be the biggest gamble they'll have ever made. If the LR can't make it nonstop OZ/UK both ways it will be a complete was
101 Zvezda : Wrong. In addition to SYD-LHR and MEL-LHR, the B777-200LR is important to QF for SYD-JFK and SYD-DFW. Of course there will be a clause for performanc
102 TEAtheB : Thanks Zvezda, N60659 and B2707SST for the "B772LR fuel limited" stuff. Sounds like the A345 could be improved far more easily than the 772LR (you mig
103 Zvezda : You're welcome. Adding thrust to the A340 is easy, but it won't help the range. The A340 needs a weight reduction more than anything else, though a r
104 TEAtheB : Ah, I think I'm beginning to grasp it (I'll get there in the end, eh?). I was thinking that the fuel tanks could not be fully filled (is that right?
105 RedFlyer : That is rich! I had to wipe away the tears from my eyes I was laughing so hard! A classic response if I ever saw one. Puts the argument in true persp
106 Sllevin : As much as I love the MH lounge at KUL (the picture Keeje included above is from the F side, which is fantastic, I agree), I'd much rather crank out t
107 Antares : For all of the circularity of these posts I'm beginning to doubt that there is much by way of real inside knowledge being shared. My group did a bit o
108 Lemurs : Oh man, I laughed so hard when I read this that I snorted Pepsi through my nose. You are an evil man. Funny, but evil. Thanks for putting in perspect
109 Zvezda : The B787-3 has an OEW of 223,100 lbs, fuel capacity of 220,698 lbs, and a MTOW of 361,000 lbs. That means with full fuel and no payload, the B787-3 w
110 Ikramerica : Not the only way. Also lightening interior components. B is scrambling to do both. One more belly tank combined with lighter seats and carts and gall
111 Keesje : Most of the issues you mention have been dismissed as Boeing bashing during the last year. thnx for sharing.
112 N60659 : My understanding is that currently all the belly tanks are removable. The PK aircraft are being configured without the belly tanks. -N60659
113 Zvezda : Actually, I have. I suggested a solution. Far more fuel is needed for take-off thrust than for cruise thrust. Therefore, during cruise, far more fuel
114 Antares : Keesje, I don't think they pay any attention to you, me or airliners.net at Qantas. They'll dismiss any issues when they are good and ready, and proba
115 FlyingHippo : 100% agree with this statement. I fly with CI JFK-TPE/HKG yearly, and hate having to make a stop at ANC at 2AM local time in January... For a couple
116 Zvezda : I could never sleep all the way through a 20 hour flight, though I had one girlfriend once who regularly slept 16 hours at a time once or twice a wee
117 FlyingHippo : When I first read your post... I sorta mis-understood your post... Almost send you an e-mail to ask where that exotic location might be...[Edited 200
118 Antares : Zvezda, Understood. Apparently this in no longer quite good enough. And the situation is expected to deteriorate as the upper cruise levels experience
119 Zvezda : This is simple physics. There is ample heat at the engines that could be used to warm the fuel. It's just a matter of flowing more fuel past the engi
120 Ikramerica : That is key. It is why I despise NY-EU red-eyes. Not enough time to sleep, getting up when you should be asleep. i far prefer west coast-EU red-eyes
121 Post contains links and images Boeing747_600 : While there is some semblence of rationale behind a nonstop to ORD, even a one-stop flight to DFW is hard to comprehend. They already codeshare to DF
122 Antares : Zvezda, Sounds compelling to me. I love simplicity too. But why then is this starting to cause concern in those places where airliners and operations
123 Zvezda : While it seems unlikely, there is one possible additional complexity that might be needed. It could be that the warm fuel return needs to be split an
124 Amy : I find it rather amusing that Airbus and Boeing are trying to sell an aircraft to QF that they clearly don't want!
125 Ikramerica : All I've seen is it is all based on some claim that SQ has to fly the 345 at FL290 or something. Yet CO flies it's 772s on very long routes, as do QF
126 SthPacific787 : My point Keesje. Boeing WAS the impotent one and hence Airbus is now in market leadership. However, it is now becoming apparent that the tables have
127 Post contains links and images B2707SST : By definition, the size of the tanks dictates the amount of fuel that can be carried; I assume you are asking why design an aircraft that cannot lift
128 Antares : Zvezda and Ikramerica, Second grandson has told me you could start with the readily professionally available FAST bulletin from Airbus, number 36, dat
129 Ikramerica : Don't forget that these charts are not current. They are from JUNE 2004. That is pre-flight testing of 772LR, but after EIS of the 773ER. In other wo
130 Post contains links SunriseValley : The link does not work Try http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/acaps/777_2lr3er.pdf and go to Section 3.0
131 Jasond : You are correct to an extent on your socio-economic breakdown in Western Australia however with one notable difference. More business (less price sen
132 Slarty : LOL. Ditto for what is happening in Canada's resource industry, particularly Alberta.
133 Zvezda : The B787-3 with full fuel tanks and no payload is 82,000 lbs over MTOW. I'm not an airline professional. I'm an enthusiast. My work is about as far f
134 Post contains links Zeke : Thought SQ used 3 sets of crews for that flight. They are the Australian rules for three or more pilots. "tour of duty means the period between the t
135 Zvezda : I just read it. It does not support your assertion that temperatures at high altitude have been dropping. It also does not support your assertion tha
136 NAV20 : Have to query that, Zeke - your own quoted passages (under 'B744 aircraft') refer to 8.5 hrs. flightdeck duty and 16.5 hrs. duty time? Those figures
137 Antares : Zvezda, There is voluminous documented evidence of upper atmosphere temperatures falling. I'm rather surprised that if you are able to correct me on t
138 Post contains images NAV20 : Don't disagree with you that there may be a developing problem, Antares. But I'm equally sure that the fuel technology to deal with it already exists;
139 RedFlyer : Antares, I mean no disrespect whatsoever by injecting myself into your debate with Zvesda so I hope you will take it as a polite observation and oppo
140 Antares : NAV20 and RedFlyer, You both make important points. But military jets at least only fly at those altitudes, even higher than Concorde used to, for sho
141 Zeke : True this is for pacific or europe trips, however this only applies to the 744, not even the 743 can use that clause. EBA7 is up for vote now, I am t
142 Post contains images QFA001 : I hope not. The B772LR would be too marginal as it is; the A345 pretty much needs a KC-135 flying behind it for refueling. Ooooow. Sir, I believe tha
143 Jasond : I think what most of us are seeing is that the commercial aviation business is going through one of its most dynamic periods in history. New markets
144 Dalecary : Specifically regarding the A340, though. It has no chance at QF. As you have said before, it is a different matter with the A350 and that appears to
145 Shenzhen : I recall seeing on a Boeing webpage that Qantas had ordered the 744ER and 767-4, but had to pull it quite quickly when Qantas anounced the A380/744ER
146 Antares : Whether by accident or clever intention QFA001 and Dalecarey have either hinted at or blundered into a minor scandal concerning wives that our fearles
147 Post contains images QFA001 : I know what you're saying. However, consider this: Leahy is renowned for coming in late with sweeteners to get a deal through. If QF bought A340s, it
148 Dalecary : Off on a tangent here aren't we. Not quite sure what your point(s) are here!!! Where does crikey.com fit into anything I or QFA001 have said???
149 Dalecary : True, but you would hope QF may have learned that the best aircraft is the way to go. To pull off another A330 type coup with the A340 is just about
150 Zvezda : This may be off-topic, but there is significant but inconclusive evidence for global warming. The greenhouse gas theory is just one theory and it has
151 Jasond : I read it on the Internet so it must be true...
152 Antares : Zvezda, We are having a civilised disagreement. I'm not sure how much more serious climate change has to get before we need to take steps to deal with
153 Zvezda : Like everyone else in the former Soviet Union and growing numbers in the west, I don't believe there have ever been fossil fuels. The biogenic theory
154 Post contains images Iwok : ... ... Your post reminds me of some sort of advertisement for a cruise ship. Listen: when you have to take a trip across the world that will take ei
155 Antares : Zvezda, Whether that is true or not, and it is controversial and interesting, it makes no difference to the problem we have in burning oil, natural ga
156 Astuteman : Good caution, Redflyer. A "thinking about" A350'ing the A340 was put to me purely in terms of being 1 of a whole range of options under scrutiny (muc
157 Baw716 : Well, I can see there has been a lot of discussion on this topic. I have spoken on this point before and got splattered on by a number of folks. I'll
158 Boeing nut : I'm betting extra tanks as it doesn't currently have them. God, I'll bet C'boy doesn't have any hair left. Well, maybe that the A345 can't do it in a
159 Glareskin : Exactamundo! That is why Leahy offered the special version. If Airbus can do it this will be the ultimate USP for QF. And what if he's bluffing? Migh
160 Zvezda : I'll take you up on that bet for any amount of money at any odds -- as long as you don't mean new larger wings. The A340-500 can't take off with a fu
161 Post contains images Aerosol : I find it hard to believe that engines that lift a 346 with full tanks can not lift a 345 with full tanks! If you show me the math I will clearly adm
162 Boeing Nut : According to A.net's a/c data page, both the -500 and -600 have the same MTOW of 804,675 lbs.
163 Zvezda : A340-500: MTOW: 366t Max fuel: 174t OEW: 171t So, an A340-500 with full fuel and zero payload weighs 345t. The crew will add about 2t. That leaves 19t
164 Zeke : Dont believe 0.84, espically at the start of the flight. Dont think they will get away with less than 6 pilots, cabin crew looks too few for the best
165 Zvezda : I also don't buy 4 pilots for SYD-LHR, though I could imagine 5 being acceptable. The important thing is that the pilots at the controls during landi
166 WINGS : Good point Zeke. It does seem too few flight crew for such a long journey. This may imply a lack of quality on behalf of the flight attendants toward
167 RedChili : This is a crucial question concerning nonstop flights between SYD-LHR. If Zeke is correct in his estimates, then this question alone will make the fl
168 SunriseValley : RedChili and others who are second guessing all these issues are overlooking the fact that QF are well aware of all the issues. Why would they have a
169 Unicorn : The article in question is written by Geoff Thomas, who is so notoriously pro-Boeing and pro-777 that he has been confidently predicting the Qantas wo
170 Post contains images Jacobin777 : well...I guess you would have to disagree with Dixon: "- Qantas commencing Auckland-Dallas-Auckland non-stop services when the new, long range Boeing
171 Post contains images Zvezda : Read it again! You agreed with me, but claimed to disagree. I wrote that entropy is the process of things becoming less well ordered. You argued, no,
172 Monteycarlos : The way I understand it NAV (or at least the way duty time limitations are being taught to us through CRM and HR) is that they are fixed at 10 or 11
173 Post contains images QFA001 : There is no provision for a 21-hr flight in the current Australian regulations. However, based on the rules for duty periods up to 16-hr, QF would req
174 NAV20 : Hi, Montey, good to see you. The 'four-hour watch' system is in use by Singapore at the present time. However, I agree with everyone who has said that
175 Monteycarlos : Haha thank you. Indeed, so I am thinking that perhaps if the order is big enough then some of the QF 'leverage' will be drawn by apparent "interest"
176 Post contains images Boeing747_600 : 2002 did he say?! Just checking. Looks like Dixon himself would have to disagree with Dixon DFW is a singularly unattractive airport for foreign airl
177 Zeke : True, not possible under current regulations, if QF gained the regulatory approval via a CAO 48 exemption for the service, having pilots basically wo
178 Zvezda : Since when is LAX slot restricted?
179 Antares : Zvezda, The slots may not be restricted but the access of carriers to the unrestricted slots is anything but unrestricted. Sort of Kafka meets the jet
180 Zvezda : Antares, I understand that all government is kafka-esque. The problem you describe is inherent to government ownership of airports. I would, of course
181 Antares : Zvezda, That is decidedly the right formula. Unfortunately we didn't get suggestion Number 1 right everywhere in Australia, since the Sydney Airport c
182 Post contains images Sebolino : You may have had good grades, but your definition is still wrong. Entropy is not an increase, it's a value measuring the degree of disorder. The stat
183 RedChili : There's a big difference between asking for a proposal for the airplane, and saying that we are 100 percent sure that we can have flights between SYD
184 Post contains images NAV20 : Boeing and Qantas have been talking about this possibility for at least a year, RedChili. I don't think the idea would have progressed from 'fond hope
185 Post contains images QFA001 : The A350, right? Airbus now has a 2-engine airplane with enough range to benefit the Oceania carriers. FWIW, it wasn't a guess. QFA001
186 Zvezda : If the nonstop flights are all business class (as rumored), then I could see QF offering operational or cash upgrades from the one-stop business clas
187 Antares : The wild card for non-stops both ways to London would have to be SQ's 49% owned VS. There is a militant free market tendency clique in feral cabinet t
188 Zvezda : That would require a fleet of 8 (6 flying the missions plus 2 in MX or flying short-haul so that the pilots get enough landings to keep current). Why
189 Ikramerica : According to other reports, B was only proposing 5 772ULR to QF. The frequency you describe would need 7 or 8. Assuming a fleet of 10 772ULR/345LR, wh
190 Antares : If I knew more about the calculations I'd throw them into the ring. As I understand it QF see a need for three units to assure daily capacity between
191 Dalecary : Antares, I'm very happy to say the A345 has no chance at QF. It's as plain as you pretend to be all-knowing that it's 772LR for QF or nothing, if they
192 Zvezda : I had been figuring a six day rotation for SYD-LHR-MEL-LHR-SYD-JFK-SYD. That would work with the B777-200LR, but the slower A340-500 might not be abl
193 SunriseValley : No doubt you heard correctly. From their timetable they give a time of 18hrs 10min SIN-EWR and 18hr 35min EWR-SIN. Clearly they are flying both legs
194 Antares : DaleCarey, Even if you are right, and I've been of broadly similar views right up until a few weeks ago about the Qantas order, why rant and rave like
195 ODwyerPW : glancing through I'm seeing terms like Tribalism and Surface Temperatures of Mars. A clear indication that everyone needs a time-out from this topic!
196 Post contains images Monteycarlos : Possibly or maybe some kind of deal on A388's to stifle any 747ADV interest? I meant about the possible reduction to 5 crew. I hear you can buy t-shi
197 RedChili : Yes, I know that, and I also acknowledge that there's a good chance that QF in the end will end up getting the 772LR, and that they might use it on S
198 Glareskin : What about BA or Virgin? Did they ever consider flying this route non-stop?
199 Zvezda : Even if allowed to, I don't think EK could effectively compete against QF's home advantage unless we have all underestimated demand. I know EK are do
200 Antares : Glareskin, My guess is that BA will vanish totally into the QF codeshare once the A380 frequencies build up, although guesses are hostage to the unfor
201 Zeke : Considering GSRB has taken mileage from many others for flying twins long haul, and his motto is "4 engines for long haul", and SQ owns around 50%, c
202 Post contains links Antares : Zeke, Thanks for an interesting snippet of information on VS plans down under. Zvezda, EK has about 7 per cent of the high yield market to Europe, or
203 Zvezda : The A340-500s that SQ have could not fly SYD-LHR nonstop. For QF, Airbus are proposing a reduced OEW version of the A340-500 that takes technology fr
204 Zeke : Dont know, was mooted it is feasible to operate the 345 eastbound (europe-south west pacific-north east america-europe) and use the existing equipmen
205 Zvezda : It is technically feasible for SQ's A340-500s to fly LHR-SYD nonstop and SYD-LHR one-stop, however, the demand for that is not nearly as high as the
206 Dalecary : Fair Dinkum who is the ranter and raver Antares. Yes, at least I can get your username correct. My attitudes are well sourced in this matter, it's ju
207 NAV20 : Zeke, I think Qantas are playing their cards very cleverly - saying "Nonstop both ways or no deal." And my guess is that they'll win the hand - and,
208 Zeke : Dale To be fair to Antares, I have asked you about the status of A340s with QF for SYD-LHR, your reply was I know you love the 777, and I firmly belie
209 Zeke : I don’t believe it is presently possible both directions with a commercial payload, if you were to use a Boeing/Airbus product line I know one way
210 NAV20 : Thanks, Zeke. I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's surprising how quickly things can move in aviation sometimes - as little as three months a
211 Antares : NAV20, I don't have any problem with you at all. Unlike others you don't perform the equivalent of barging into my living room, grabbing the Grange, f
212 SunriseValley : Ah, I knew there was a reason why I must visit Canberra next time in Aus. Seriously one of the best investments I ever made was the buying of 2 cases
213 RedFlyer : Antares, I read a news article by Teal's Aboulafia around the same time; (I did a Google search but, unfortunately, can't find it right now). What I
214 Antares : RedFlyer, Valid points. But note, I was only pointing at what Mr Aboulafia said, not annointing it with holy oil so to speak. There is a tendency, no
215 Jasond : What utter nonsense!!! Why no JQ in PER then??? Jetstar fills the gaps the mainline can't and so will the international version too.
216 Antares : Jasond, In that case it QF's utter nonsense, not mine. Did I not read somewhere that JQ will be on the Perth route in the very near future? Antares
217 Jasond : Yes I read that too!!! I read it at the JQ launch last year and was slated for introduction for early to mid 2005. The only significant (westwards) a
218 Antares : Jasond, Maybe the board should speak to Mr Dixon more forcefully, as he keeps giving interviews about Jetstar being unconstrained. But your comments s
219 Dalecary : Not true at all Antares. Am still expecting pretty much what I have been told for the last several months. This order is basically 787 v 350 with bot
220 Antares : DaleCarey, I'm never happy with any Qantas sources, apart from the one that prints the cheques. There could be a race going on between the expansion p
221 Post contains images NAV20 : The feeling's mutual, Antares - two old fogies together Must admit, I've been waiting or some real 'diehard' Airbus fan (not you!) to bring up Aboula
222 Jasond : Just to put this back on topic to a degree I don't think the next order will see the A340 figure significantly. The topic title was in fact about Airb
223 Antares : NAV20, Yeah. I can't just imagine a cement truck frozen through. Blimey, that must have been a very timely exercise in detecting and avoiding risk. Ja
224 Jasond : You have eluded in part to what my understanding of the Sky Bed issue was. My understanding was that they could not be fitted to some A330's which ca
225 Antares : Jasond, Misunderstood your reference. Yes the A332's were ordered with the wrong floor to take Skybeds, and for one, I'm uncertain what is being done,
226 Jasond : My main complaint was really with the crew, everything else was as per expectations. I took the family to BNE (via MEL) recently and found out that i
227 Dalecary : Additionally, the A330/340 x-section is not wide enough for the std QF Skybed and a modified narrower version is fitted. Antares will no doubt pooh-ho
228 Antares : DaleCarey, I don’t think I’ve ever claimed to know how Qantas will configure whatever it is that it buys, other than recently repeating info about
229 Dalecary : Well check back. I have mentioned the standardisation of the international product on this forum before and you have basically said they will pack 78
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...
Big LH Long Range Order To Be Announced In March posted Tue Feb 28 2006 00:44:04 by Bolu340
Airbus 321 Long Range posted Mon Jan 26 2004 17:37:15 by Flyboyaz
Swiss A340 To Cairo - For How Long? posted Sun Aug 15 2004 00:54:01 by Oliver
Seattle PI: Airbus Vs. Boeing Long Range Jets posted Wed Feb 4 2004 12:20:33 by United777
A340-200 Ultra Long Range posted Tue Jan 20 2004 13:59:25 by Ryder10uk
Airbus A330-300ER Powerfull Long Range Variant posted Tue Dec 9 2003 22:15:03 by Keesje
Why No Long Range Airbus For BA? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 13:45:40 by EGFFbmi
AF To Start A319 Long-Range & Winter News posted Thu Oct 9 2003 23:06:23 by FLYSSC
Airbus Looks At Long Term Options To Counter 7E7 posted Thu Mar 13 2003 00:41:59 by AvObserver
What Is Better For Long Range 747, 777 Or A340? posted Mon Dec 3 2001 06:53:22 by Airbus_330_340