Rw From Netherlands, joined Dec 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1664 times:
Now that Airbus seems to have won the first of three Airbus/Boeing battles (how many A3XX SIA will get for free?!?!), we are looking at their 250-seater decision and at NW´s and Quantas`fleet plans. For some of our Airbus- or Boeing-fans another thriller!
Qantas747-SP From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1462 times:
For a start , Qantas is spelt Q-A-N-T-A-S, and not "QUANTAS". Anywho, Qantas plans to update it's ageing 747's (-200 -300 -SP) with the 747-400. It was said on both the airbus and Qantas web sites a few months back that Qantas was a possible launch customer for the A3XX. I don't know about North West though.
AussieErj145 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1420 times:
The Qantas decision may be as far off as next March. Their fleet requirements are for about 12 -15 long thin route aircraft to replace the "Classic" 747's in the fleet. Under review are the 777-200LR, and the A340-500. Both offer the accomodation and range that Qantas needs to comence the new planned routes from Sydney to Dallas and Perth to London.
The 777 must start favourite as Qantas is a very loyal Boeing customer. Remember Qantas inherrited 4 Airbus A300's when it took over Australian Airlines, and where are they now? Also why would you have an aircraft that needs four engines serviced when you can have one with just two engines.
Unfortunately I prefer the A340, but I feel the 777 will get the order.
As to the A3XX or A350 as we will know it. Qantas is interested in it only because it's competition is interested in the aircraft and doesn't want to be left behind!
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9710 posts, RR: 10 Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1407 times:
Wouldn´t it be strange if QF does not order both aircraft from the same manufacturer? Airbus´ chances also in "secondclass" (in terms of size) must be a lot bigger after todays news. And given these mentioned thin routes are often very long overwater trips a Quad should be the wiser decision.
BOS-CDG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1388 times:
If Quantas selects the A3XX, this program will be definitely a success. Quantas should do it to have an edge in the pacific competition :
United likely will never buy the A3XX and Air New Zealand does not have enough money power to do it...So it is a unique chance to gain profitability on routes and markets that is key for them obviously and also to be in a position to get a weapon (lower cost than the competition) that others won't have on the same routes.
BOS-CDG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1375 times:
Yeah, yeah...It used to be QUANTAS or whatever...But go on the australian website and try to find how they write it...Quantas all the way (unless a statement is in capital letter of course)...Quantas Airways Limited...Quantas...QUANTAS....Who cares anyway...
V Jet From Australia, joined May 1999, 719 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1364 times:
Actually lots of people care even though you dont. It has never been Quantas . If the Australian website you refer to is the Qantas website than may I suggest you get some glasses and take another look.
BOS-CDG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1344 times:
Actually I was very aware of what it meant...Now if you talk about the website, I don't need any glasses to see that if the logo is written in capital letter, everywhere else in texts, the word "Quantas" is used (ex: click on menu "Our company")...
Anyhow, I find a rather positive sign that the word "Quantas" rather than the acronym is used because it tells a lot about the perception of the airline and how wide-spread its name is, as it is mainly always used as a "normal" name of the common language...Now if you want to be picky about the symbology and history of the acronym vs Quantas that everybody uses without even knowing what it means...I let it to you then...
Joni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1337 times:
The confusion with "the Australian airline's" name is because IMO the name is poorly chosen. It's spelled Qantas, but pronounced Quantas. In addition, Quantas looks dyslexic because "quanta" is plural in itself (or quantum) and writing "Quantas" reveals your ignorance... Whatever.
Qantas747-SP From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1291 times:
Accept it, Qantas is spelt.........QANTAS. If you have a problem with it, dig up the founders of the airline and have a good long argument. And another thing. i just checked the Qantas web site, and never does it spell Qantas as Quantas. You hear me!~NEVER
Mx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1277 times:
Peanuts to you, ignorant, arrogant French git. If your trying to upset some Aussie then "boo".
C'est comme appeller "Air France" "Air Chance" (et alors c'est la verite apres votre pauvre Concorde!). Il'y a de tres bonne raison pour qu'on appelle Qantus sans "u", c'est une acronymme. (PS Vive Mmme Perec!!)
DeltaRNOmd-80 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1216 times:
Fine by me, I dont really care what you call them. Victor Hotel, to answer your question, Delta probably wont order any in the near future, they have a contract with Boeing and since they dont operate the 747, I dont think they would get an even larger plane such as the A3XX. do a search, you will probably find more info
AussieErj145 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1139 times:
The 777 can do the trans Pacific easily despite the ETOPS rules as there are many islands along the way that can be used for emergency landings.
Air New Zealand would be able to get the A3XX = A350 via it's parent Singapore Airlines.
Qantas will probably order the 747x as well but this aircraft is not what they want at the moment, the parameters require something smaller.
On another note,
Don't they all look stupid when the second letter is a "U"!
25 Victor Hotel: Nicely put AussieErj145, Im sure if we kept spelling them like that quite a few people will start getting pissed off, LIKE US. I dont get though how s
26 TEDSKI: For long distance flights over the Pacific the new 4-engine 747X and RR Trent 500 powered A340-500/600 would be the logical choice for QANTAS.
27 Qantas747-sp: Because of the short term need for mid size aircraft over longer routes and because of Qantas's long partership with Boeing, Qantas will most likely