Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Qantas Happy With Their A330s?  
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2682 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 12539 times:

I would like to know if Qantas is happy with their A330s.Will Qantas withdraw them when the 787s arrive?
Sacha


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
57 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNzrich From New Zealand, joined Dec 2005, 1522 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 12516 times:

Well they will be going to Jetstar international for use prior to them getting their 787's ... When they get the 787's who knows what will happen to the A330


"Pride of the pacific"
User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 12482 times:

I don't know any airline that is not happy with their A330, whether they are -300 or -200.

User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4328 posts, RR: 35
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 12402 times:

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 2):
I don't know any airline that is not happy with their A330, whether they are -300 or -200.

One of the few critisizms I heared on the A-330 indeed came from Qantas who was disappointed in the turn around times of them on short flights. Not sure though if that's to blame on the aircraft, or just having one jetway etc. Also not sure if the 787 will be better suited for the short high density flights like between SYD, MEL and BNE. I think it's been discussed a lot here, but don't remember.

For the rest indeed all Airlines seem to like them, after 12 years of service almost all original buyers have no plans to replace them yet. Few exceptions are like Air Inter for whom the aircraft was too big with the new TGV trains, and Swiss ditching some overcapacity after 2001.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9097 posts, RR: 75
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 12256 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 3):
One of the few critisizms I heared on the A-330 indeed came from Qantas who was disappointed in the turn around times of them on short flights. Not sure though if that's to blame on the aircraft, or just having one jetway etc. Also not sure if the 787 will be better suited for the short high density flights like between SYD, MEL and BNE. I think it's been discussed a lot here, but don't remember.

It was their first FBW Airbus, everyone had to learn Frenglish. Now that its in service for a while now I think it all has settled down.

Many operators turn 330s around way quicker than QF, so I dont think its actually a problem with the aircraft, just the process they used was not optimised for the type.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineAussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 12178 times:

The A332's that are with QF on domestic routes will go to JQ international when they start they start ops. 2 new A332's will be delivered around MAY 2007 for them as well.

I think QF are happy with the A333 in operations, although I wish they could get extra range out of them so they could ops SYD - BOM non stop instead of the tech stop in DRW (they operate non stop on the return).

These A333's will stay with QF for quite a while until they build up their 787 fleet (they will be replacing older 767's before the A333's) so they can start replacing them. QF is due not to get their first 787 until JUL 2009 (JQ gets theirs in AUG 2008)

So apart from international connecting flights on the A330 their should be no domestic A330 operations soon on QF.


User currently offlineMaddog From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 12166 times:

The QF ones are very uncomfortable to travel on. The IFE system rarely works, and they have cabin temperature control problems. I was recently on a 10hour flight and they couldnt get the temp below 27 degrees in the cabin.


Most of the other QF 330 issues have been discussed elsewhere. Mainly along the lines of interior configuration problems, costs with increasing floor strength etc.

Basically QF were so un happy they made a point to make their next order (which was for 787s a little while ago) an ALL boeing order. (They had been rumoured to have been looking at a mixed fleet order).

Rumours floating round still are that QF are fairly unhappy with the A380 order re delays.


User currently offlineQANTAS077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5855 posts, RR: 39
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 12074 times:

Quoting Maddog (Reply 6):
Most of the other QF 330 issues have been discussed elsewhere. Mainly along the lines of interior configuration problems, costs with increasing floor strength etc.

those issues were related to the A330-200 only, i've not heard bad reports about the 330-300.



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineMaddog From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11979 times:

correct, floor strength issues affected the 200s and the early 300s. QF paid some vast amout of money to have the 300s strengthed but wouldnt outlay the cost on the 200s. Hence the long range 200s on domestic runs.

This translates into problems on the long haul sectors for the 300s - most notably out of mumbai, where it is payload limited.

I suspect this is why the 200s will be off to Jetstar first.


User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11902 times:

Aren't the 787 going to replace the A330 and the 767?


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlinePilotdude09 From Australia, joined May 2005, 1777 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11821 times:

Quoting JAL (Reply 9):
Aren't the 787 going to replace the A330 and the 767?

They are replacing the oldest 767's and the A332's, i doubt the A333's will be retired yet? They might put them on domestic routes?
Also the 747-300's look set to be retired in 2012!



Qantas, Still calling Australia Home.........
User currently offlineKoruman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 11685 times:

No, Qantas aren't happy at all with their A330s, finding them barely superior to their outdated 767s.

The aircraft lacked the floor strength to install their business class beds. The A330-300s were subsequently reinforced, and do have Skybeds, but are unable to fly a long enough range to be worthwhile.

The A330-200s are so compromised in range and power that they haven't even been retrofitted with the Business Class product, and are having to be used on domestic short-haul routes.

When the order was made it seemed like a good idea, particularly as the A340-500 looked like a possible future acquisition, and a future 777-300ER-like stretch of the A330 looked like it might replace the 747-300 and 400 fleet and the 787 had yet to be designed.

Qantas will dump all its A330s onto Jetstar International (which won't have flat beds or even Business Class) and I suspect that they will be disposed of as soon as enough 787s arrive.


User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4768 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 11582 times:

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The aircraft lacked the floor strength to install their business class beds. The A330-300s were subsequently reinforced, and do have Skybeds, but are unable to fly a long enough range to be worthwhile.
QF asked specifically for a unique version with lower floor strength to save weight and money as they didn't think they would need it for domestic routes. They then found they needed the "regular" floor every other Airbus A330 customer gets! Thats QFs own stupidity for asking for something special and then regretting it later, for whatever reason they needed the higher floor strength for different markets, routing than initially planned. QF have some of the longest regularly scheduled routes on an A333- SYD-PVG and there is one flight to India they fly non stop eastbound!

[Edited 2006-06-12 04:54:40]

User currently offlineAussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11392 times:

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
Qantas will dump all its A330s onto Jetstar International (which won't have flat beds or even Business Class) and I suspect that they will be disposed of as soon as enough 787s arrive.

Only the A332's will go, the A333's will stay for quite a while yet, and yes the A333's do have the Skybed in business class on those planes.


User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11211 times:

Quoting Aussie747 (Reply 13):
Only the A332's will go, the A333's will stay for quite a while yet, and yes the A333's do have the Skybed in business class on those planes.

Albeit a narrower skybed than on the 747 fleet, due to cabin width restrictions. QF had teething problems transitioning from all Boeing to having a part Airbus fleet. That is understandable. It was also an Airbus requirement that A380 operators had another Airbus WB type for the carrier to get the requisite Airbus flying training. QF wanted the 380, so they had the choice b/w 330 or 340 as the 2nd type. As they never wanted the 340, the 330s were very attractively packaged in with the 380s.
As to whether they are happy with their A330 fleet now. I don't really know. I suspect they find them adequate, but the 333s are very payload restricted on medium haul sectors such as MEL/SYD-HKG/NRT/PVG.


User currently offlinePilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1384 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10979 times:

This has been discussed a few times on this site, and the same arguments keep coming up:
1) No they aren't that happy (or they weren't anyway)
2) They specified a lower floor strength on the 200's because I believe they wanted to save on landing fees, and then found they couldn't install the sky beds.
3) They seem to have gotten the fleet mixture mixed up, if they went for 300's on the Cityflyer routes and put regular 200's on the India routes, they'd have no problems with range issues. Instead they put the longer range aircraft on short haul routes and put the medium range aircraft on long-haul routes, and then moan about the results!

I've no idea what was actually said/promised by Airbus, but from comments made here in previous posts, it is suggested Airbus did question the 200 efficiency on the some of the sectors Qantas wanted to use it on.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The A330-200s are so compromised in range and power that they haven't even been retrofitted with the Business Class product, and are having to be used on domestic short-haul routes.

I'd check your facts on that one! It was a Qantas A330-200 that set a World Record on a delivery flight from Toulouse to Sydney (or Melbourne can't remember which city) doing the route non-stop with no special operating procedures etc.



Aircraft I've flown: A300/A310/A320/A321/A330/A340/B727/B732/B733/B734/B735/B738/B741/B742/B744/DC10/MD80/IL62/Bae146/AR
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10712 times:

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 2):
I don't know any airline that is not happy with their A330, whether they are -300 or -200.

Qantas isn't that thrilled - hence the thread. Most all of the other opperators are happy with A330, which isn't surprising, it is a very nice aircaft in a number of different respects. The fact it was able to one-up the spectacular 767 is testament to how impressive A330 is, and what large shoes it leaves 787 and A350 to fill. That said, for some things, like the shorter high density routes - things A330 was never so much intended for - which is what Qantas uses them for, it is not the best choice, and other, older aircraft like 767 and even A330 can seem better choices than A330.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The A330-200s are so compromised in range and power that they haven't even been retrofitted with the Business Class product, and are having to be used on domestic short-haul routes.

Hmm, you know NW is using the A332 on transpacific flights, PDX-NRT for instance is serviced by an A332. I don't think they have any range issues. A333 however, cannot fully loaded service those routes.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10482 times:

Hmmmm....Is Qantas Happy with their A330s?

Good question.....

Considering the A330's Qantas operate on the domestic and international network have been pretty given to them at an extremely low rate by AIRBUS so that they can familize with the Airbus cockpit layout so that when the A380 joins the fleet in late 2006 early 2007 Qantas wont experience as many teething problems as they have with the A330 when they first received them.....

In my opinion Qantas is happy with the A330 otherwise they would off loaded the aircraft by now in favour of Boeing product (eg. B767-400ER)....

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineRdwelch From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10126 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 4):
Frenglish

Perfect.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9994 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Maddog (Reply 8):
correct, floor strength issues affected the 200s and the early 300s. QF paid some vast amout of money to have the 300s strengthed but wouldnt outlay the cost on the 200s.



Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The aircraft lacked the floor strength to install their business class beds.

As Trex8 pointed out, this is entirely down to QF's original choice of a lightweight floor.

It does seem that QF is unique in having so many problems with the A330, but reading between the lines it would seem that many of these "problems" are of their own making.

Nobody seems to be able to explain why QF has such a problem turning the A330 round in a resonable time when no other airlines in the Middle-East or Asia-Pacific have this issue.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5242 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9917 times:

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The A330-300s were subsequently reinforced, and do have Skybeds, but are unable to fly a long enough range to be worthwhile.

The QF A330's as mentioned above fly some of the longest A333 flights int he world. SYD-PVG, PEK etc. Their missions are Australia-Asia flights.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
The A330-200s are so compromised in range and power that they haven't even been retrofitted with the Business Class product, and are having to be used on domestic short-haul routes.

Compromised in range? Someone better tell Jestar who are planning on flying them SYD-HNL later this year!

Quoting Koruman (Reply 11):
Qantas will dump all its A330s onto Jetstar International (which won't have flat beds or even Business Class) and I suspect that they will be disposed of as soon as enough 787s arrive.

Not quite - Jetstar are getting the first batch of 787's followed by QF domestic wqho have something like 30 767's to replace before the 787's replace the A333's. I'd expect to seem them in QF colours for at least the next 10 years.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 17):
Hmmmm....Is Qantas Happy with their A330s?

Probably not - hence why they converted a few of their options a year or 2 back. As has been discussed to death on this board - QF seem happy with the A333's and the A332's have been misused, but are being offloaded ot Jetstar to be used "properly"


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9769 times:

Scbriml

Nobody seems to be able to explain why QF has such a problem turning the A330 round in a resonable time when no other airlines in the Middle-East or Asia-Pacific have this issue.


Qantas originally ordered 7 A330-200s to operate the longer international routes & 6 A330-300s to operate the domestic network and a undisclosed number of options.....
When Qantas received the first series of A330-200s aircraft Qantas deployed the aircraft onto the domestic network for cabin crew training.....I believe it is here when the SH#T hit the fan and Qantas experienced teething problems....Qantas noticed a quick turn around time of 10-20 minutes (Qantas Domestic Boeing 767's are turned around in 10-15 minutes) wasnt possible with the -200 series then how could it be made possible to have a quick turn around with -300 series.....
Qantas changed the original order of 7 A330-200s to only 4 aircraft -EBA,BB,BC & BD which operate today on the long turn around CityFlyer flights operating SYD,MEL,BNE,PER,CNS routes.....
I hope this info. helps answer your questions! Big grin

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineMusapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1089 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9364 times:

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 14):
As to whether they are happy with their A330 fleet now. I don't really know. I suspect they find them adequate, but the 333s are very payload restricted on medium haul sectors such as MEL/SYD-HKG/NRT/PVG.

I would like to ask, CX is using these planes for SYD-HKG but why are they not payload restricted? I am a bit confused is this only the problem related to QF?



Lufthansa Group of Airlines
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9327 times:

Musapapaya

I would like to ask, CX is using these planes for SYD-HKG but why are they not payload restricted? I am a bit confused is this only the problem related to QF?


Probably an issue with the powerplants....

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineMOW From Israel, joined Dec 2005, 192 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 9234 times:

I heard some rumours that KLM is also not very happy with 332s. Can anyone tell more?

25 Post contains links Ha763 : It was my understanding that the -200s were ordered for use mostly on the domestic routes and the -300s would be for regional international routes. H
26 CRJ900 : So, to conclude, it is QF's own bleedin' fault for not using the aircraft for what they were intended for. The A332 is the long-hauler of the two, th
27 Scouseflyer : "Basically QF were so un happy they made a point to make their next order (which was for 787s a little while ago) an ALL boeing order. (They had been
28 EK413 : Ha763 The information I have gathered together was from an article which I had stalled away from from around 2002 when Qantas placed the order....It b
29 Scbriml : Thanks for the information, but my understanding was the opposite: that the 200s were intended for domestic (hence lightweight floor) and the -300s f
30 ClassicLover : I never knew that before. What a complete wank! Flight simulators were invented for a reason, you know...
31 Trex8 : I find such a stipulation by a manufacturer hard to believe. No doubt its very useful for both airline and OEM. But it would only be really useful an
32 BNE : I have actually read that Airbus wanted Qantas to have a plane before the A380 so it might not be to far from the mark. The great deal that Airbus ga
33 ANstar : True - I had forgotten that one! So from the iniital order they have had 2 more A333's & 2 more A332's now? Not bad for an airline "unhappy" with a t
34 MotorHussy : Get your hand off it. No airline would submit to that kind of blackmail. As ClassicLover said, flight simulators are purchased for a reason and pilot
35 Post contains images TS-IOR : Would you propose a solution if they are not happy I'm just kidding, anyway, i think that A332s are better due to their flexibility. Is the A333X coul
36 Zeke : Correct me if I am wrong, QF get an extra 40 pax and 5000 kg of freight using the 330 on international routes over their 767s, and doing so with less
37 PanAm330 : CX has the much more capable A333, the -300X. This version has a higher-rated powerplant and other things (not good with this type of thing, sorry),
38 MotorHussy : I think you'll find that QF used the A380 to leverage a great deal on the A330. Other airlines with A380 orders didn't order thei other FBW Airbus wi
39 Trex8 : I believe all the QF A333s now have the -80E3 engine which is the highest rated thrust engine on the A333. what is less clear to some of us who have
40 Mlsrar : True, but there is no other FBW all-cargo variant available, so they were somehwat limited...
41 Lufthansa : There's a lot of BS in this thread from some australians who i'd describe as 'stuck in the past'... of the 'one airline, QF the chosen instrument, one
42 Revelation : That seems odd: Since the only Airbus products FedEx and UPS have are A300s/A310s, that would imply the pilots would jump from them to A380, which se
43 1stfl94 : Maybe Qantas should have looked at the experience of Air Inter which tried using A330s on French domestic routes, they couldn't get the turnaround tim
44 Gearup : This seems likely and if QF are as unhappy with the A33X as some have said, they are the exception rather than the rule.
45 Gigneil : All of this is Qantas' fault. Nobody elses. I really would like to see that backed up with evidence. I cannot for a moment believe that any airline w
46 Dalecary : I will try and get something more definitive on this, but I believe there was some Airbus stipulation on this. I believe it is a reason why SQ got th
47 Carpethead : Is QF too cheap to add an additional boarding bridge to some of its Australian airports? We here in Japan an turnaround a 744D which has almost the tw
48 Zeke : And depending on the fitout, we have 0F/44J/267Y and 8F/32J/211Y. CX have the Trent 772 and the 772B. They have airbus widebodies, which I think is a
49 EK413 : Carpethead Quoting EK413 (Reply 21): Qantas noticed a quick turn around time of 10-20 minutes (Qantas Domestic Boeing 767's are turned around in 10-15
50 Planemanofnz : QF should use theier 330's (332 or 333, doesn't really matter) to NZ. Why haven't they in the past?
51 Columba : Great statement - by the way NW will replace all of their Dc 9 by the end of the year and according to AF policy every aircraft has to be washed befo
52 ANstar : QF did add an extra Air Bridge to the A330 gates, but it still wasn;t allowing a fast turnaround due to the bely freight
53 EK413 : Planemanofnz QF should use theier 330's (332 or 333, doesn't really matter) to NZ. Why haven't they in the past? A matter of fact Qantas have operated
54 Baroque : It seems as unlikely that Airbus would demand a joint purchase as that Qantas would accept that proposal. But Qantas does seem to have done some quai
55 Nzrich : After flying around the world as crew and the only airports where we get multiple problems are the Australian ones ... We have problems in other airp
56 AC777LR : Are QFs A330s all the light weight versions, I mean not the 330-303X (343X in Rolls Royce)? So are they limited in range vs lets say an Air Canada A33
57 Gigneil : Correct. There is no evidence to indicate any of the newer deliveries were the X version, and certainly the ones that were delivered as -301s likely
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...
Is Qantas Happy With Australia? posted Wed Jun 14 2006 05:36:17 by Mariner
Is SIA Not Happy With Their A340s? Why? posted Mon Nov 27 2000 10:38:28 by Red Panda
Is JetBlue Happy With Boston? posted Tue Mar 21 2006 17:21:46 by ChrisNH
What Is NW Doing With Their New 747-400s? posted Tue Apr 9 2002 01:30:04 by Travelin man
How Far Is Virgin Atlantic With Their Upgrades posted Fri Jan 18 2002 14:19:07 by Skippy777
Qantas Pilots Not Happy With Jetstar posted Tue Jun 20 2006 14:38:25 by VHVXB
Is Air Nostrum Happy With The First CRJ900? posted Sun Jan 15 2006 00:18:17 by CRJ900
How Is Qantas Going To Compete HKG-LHR With VS/BA? posted Tue Jun 22 2004 09:59:02 by Qantasclub
Is KLM Having Problems With Their 777s? posted Thu Mar 4 2004 19:21:33 by Korg747
Qantas's Leased B 747-436. Is It Still With QF? posted Sun Sep 23 2001 05:06:29 by United Airline