Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Qantas, "A380 Unprofitable To LAX With Trent 900"  
User currently offlinenetjetsintl From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 45466 times:

Qantas' CEO does not sound like a satisfied customer. He doesn't seem to think the airline can turn a profit on its flagship route if it uses the Trent-900

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-unprofitable-with-trent-900s.html

187 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9689 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 45279 times:

It appears that they can only use the engines at a derated thrust which results in only 30,000kg of available payload which is absolutely not profitable. It looks like the engine trouble is not resolved.


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 45175 times:

Ha!!

That's what they said in a statement of claim to a court. They have to sound like "not a happy customer".


User currently offlinenetjetsintl From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 45175 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 1):
It appears that they can only use the engines at a derated thrust which results in only 30,000kg of available payload which is absolutely not profitable. It looks like the engine trouble is not resolved.

this mele between Qantas and RR is going to get messy and it will drag on for a while..

This issue will not be settled out of court, not in a million years... Looks like Qantas wants more than their money back, they want restitution, damages, etc, etc...

[Edited 2010-12-14 18:11:04]

User currently offlinen126dl From United States of America, joined May 2010, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 45133 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What is Qantas using on this route now? What did they use before they acquired the A380? A 744?


DH8 E145 E175 CR2/7/9 A319/20/21 A332/3 D95 M83/88/90 712 737/8 752/3 763/4 77L
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 44995 times:

Seems that Qantas has bought the wrong aircraft for their LAX operations if the Trent-900 lacks the required thrust and the GP7200 has even less thrust?

User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5760 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 44940 times:

Quoting n126dl (Reply 4):
What is Qantas using on this route now? What did they use before they acquired the A380? A 744?

They are using B744s & B744ERs SYD/MEL/BNE - LAX and A332s AKL-LAX and on the LAX-JFK-LAX tag. Which is what they used before the A380, except AKL-LAX and the tag was B744s.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5283 posts, RR: 23
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 44886 times:

Interesting that they talk about 72,000 lbf as being the thrust target. I thought that the max thrust on the EA engine was 76,500 certified lbf, and similar (if a smidge lower) on the Trent. Is 72,000 the derated thrust (i.e. new maximum), or was it always the max takeoff thrust of the 900?

User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6812 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks ago) and read 44784 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 5):
Seems that Qantas has bought the wrong aircraft for their LAX operations if the Trent-900 lacks the required thrust and the GP7200 has even less thrust?

It doesn't lack the thrust, simply the engines that are currently under the wings of Qantas A380s (owned by RR and not Qantas) have a defect and thus can't be used at full thrust without risking another blow up.

I'm thinking one of the things Qantas wants is to get new built engines without the defect. They would still be Trent-900, still rated at 72Klbs, but without any kind of usage restriction.

wjcandee : both engines can be bought in a range of thrust ratings. A higher rating can mean things like more frequent maintenance, oil changes etc. In the case of the Trent 900 with the defect it seems it also means they fail much sooner.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1075 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 44507 times:

I suspect it looks like RR needs to come up with the "D" version of the Trent 900 fairly quickly - one that can meet needed thrust with a decent engine life.

Baring that.... Ultimately Qantas may be forced to replace many of their A380's with 747-8I's.


User currently offlineAmmunition From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 1065 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 44292 times:

you would think all this nasty could have been done behind closed doors, Qantas must really be against a brick wall in terms of negotiations with RR, not good for any future relationship, althogh their good friend BA might come to the rescue in the long term. And airbus stuck in the middle, this is not pretty for them at all.


Saint Augustine- 'The world is a book and those who do not travel, read only 1 page'
User currently offlineKent350787 From Australia, joined May 2008, 968 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 44204 times:

My understanding is that QF lodged this mostly so that, if it needs to in the future, it can sue RR in the Australian courts rather than having to take action overseas.

As to the 748 suggestion - how do warm snowballs fare?  


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15809 posts, RR: 27
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 44171 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 5):
Seems that Qantas has bought the wrong aircraft for their LAX operations if the Trent-900 lacks the required thrust and the GP7200 has even less thrust?

No, it's just because they can't use all of the available power. It will get resolved.

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 9):
Baring that.... Ultimately Qantas may be forced to replace many of their A380's with 747-8I's.

I find that to be highly unlikely. RR will eventually come through before too long. The two companies will hash things out either between themselves or in court and things will go back to business as usual. I doubt that there will even be lasting damage to the relationship between QF and Rolls.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5133 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 44041 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 12):
I doubt that there will even be lasting damage to the relationship between QF and Rolls.

The relationship has been just so-so for some years. The problems go back to the blade rubbing issues on the 744's which QF and others felt RR were much too slow in addressing the problem. There was also an issue on spare parts. Both issues had a thread on this forum 5 or 6 years ago.


User currently offlinerottenray From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 279 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 43705 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 7):
Interesting that they talk about 72,000 lbf as being the thrust target. I thought that the max thrust on the EA engine was 76,500 certified lbf, and similar (if a smidge lower) on the Trent. Is 72,000 the derated thrust (i.e. new maximum), or was it always the max takeoff thrust of the 900?


Referring to http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...62573080054f9ea/$FILE/E00075EN.pdf ---

All of the T900 series has a max continuous thrust of 71,850 lbs.

The difference is in the TO (5 minute norm, 10 minute contingency) thrust ratings for the various models.

According to the cert sheet:
75,152 -- T900
76,752 -- T972-84
80,213 -- T972-B84
84,098 -- T980-84

This is not to say that Qantas is leasing their T972s at 76K or 80K.




Quoting 2175301 (Reply 9):
Baring that.... Ultimately Qantas may be forced to replace many of their A380's with 747-8I's.


Rolls should be able to come up with a fix, but this could certainly turn into a mess for all 3 companies if it doesn't happen fairly quickly.



I've been saying this all along: The A380 should have been a trijet with GE90s...   


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1871 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 43489 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Realistically, QF will want to see a solution that allows them to keep the frames. There just isn't an alternative solution near term for the problem. I suppose RR could fit up a D variant but the time frame isn't near-term; I'd think that would be a couple of years down the road.

Can the QF 380's be re-engined? If so is the earlier assertion that the alternate power plant for the A380 can put out a comparable amount of thrust accurate?


User currently onlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3807 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 43487 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 12):
I doubt that there will even be lasting damage to the relationship between QF and Rolls.

Seeing that they've been doing business with one another for decades, I doubt it as well. But it may certainly influence their engine choice for future aircraft orders...

So far this is just the usual lawyers' dramatization of facts for the court. I'm Surprised they haven't mentioned how many widows and orphans they will now have to leave behind because of the evil RR corporation.

It says somewhere something about a restriction of 75 take offs using the full rated power (72k lbs) before the engine has to be removed and overhauled... Was that restriction in place before the accident or did RR set it up afterwards?

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 9):
Ultimately Qantas may be forced to replace many of their A380's with 747-8I's.

They'd have a much easier time swapping to the GP7200 that changing the fleet altogether, they have invested a great deal on the A380, and it worked out pretty good until the engines cr@pped out.

And if the rumours about the -8's range and payload performances possibly missing targets are true, I doubt it will be a viable replacement on those routes either.

[Edited 2010-12-14 21:47:17]


Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineContinental From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5520 posts, RR: 18
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 43337 times:

Why couldn't this have been figured out before buying the plane/engine combo? Were the specs not available at the time?

User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2241 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 43089 times:

Quoting Continental (Reply 17):
Why couldn't this have been figured out before buying the plane/engine combo? Were the specs not available at the time?

Read the article again. The airplane was perfectly profitable until Rolls slapped operational restrictions on it (reduced thrust) following the recent accident. Qantas is saying that the airplane is no longer profitable on that route under those restrictions. The idea being to get those restrictions lifted, pronto, on Rolls's dime.


User currently offlineluftaom From Australia, joined May 1999, 428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 42860 times:

For those interested you can view parts of the court file (principally the orders made on each occasion) here:

https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Federal/P/NSD1681/2010/actions


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20188 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 42574 times:

Can the GP700 provide the needed thrust?

User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15809 posts, RR: 27
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 42413 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Can the GP700 provide the needed thrust?

Well yes, but they almost certainly can't retrofit them on existing airframes (economically), assuming they could get the engines in the first place. I don't know the status of current orders, but I can't imagine that QF could get EA powered A380s before RR resolves the issues. It seems to me that there isn't a whole lot that QF can do now other than use 747s for the interim, bitch about the engines, and wring what compensation they can out of Rolls Royce.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineCFBFrame From United States of America, joined May 2009, 531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 42344 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 16):
And if the rumours about the -8's range and payload performances possibly missing targets are true, I doubt it will be a viable replacement on those routes either

Please share more on this because I've seen nothing on the GEnx performance.


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10166 posts, RR: 97
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 42357 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting netjetsintl (Thread starter):
He doesn't seem to think the airline can turn a profit on its flagship route if it uses the Trent-900
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 1):
It appears that they can only use the engines at a derated thrust which results in only 30,000kg of available payload which is absolutely not profitable

C'mon guys. Lets at least tell the other 2/3 of the story as well......

The advisory issued by Rolls-Royce says that until the problem is resolved, "mod B" and "mod C" engines should be operated at a reduced thrust rating or replaced after 75 cycles at 72 000 lb thrust
There is nothing whatsoever stopping QF operating their aircraft profitably on that route except perhaps timely availability of replacement engines.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 7):
Interesting that they talk about 72,000 lbf as being the thrust target. I thought that the max thrust on the EA engine was 76,500 certified lbf, and similar (if a smidge lower) on the Trent. Is 72,000 the derated thrust (i.e. new maximum), or was it always the max takeoff thrust of the 900?

See reply below

quote=rottenray,reply=14]All of the T900 series has a max continuous thrust of 71,850 lbs.

The difference is in the TO (5 minute norm, 10 minute contingency) thrust ratings for the various models.

According to the cert sheet:
75,152 -- T900
76,752 -- T972-84
80,213 -- T972-B84
84,098 -- T980-84

This is not to say that Qantas is leasing their T972s at 76K or 80K.[/quote]

The Trent 980-84 is actually certified at a higher rating than the GP7000

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 9):
I suspect it looks like RR needs to come up with the "D" version of the Trent 900 fairly quickly - one that can meet needed thrust with a decent engine life.

No. The "mod C" version will be just fine once the IP turbine bearing modules are replaced.......

Quoting 474218 (Reply 5):
Seems that Qantas has bought the wrong aircraft for their LAX operations if the Trent-900 lacks the required thrust and the GP7200 has even less thrust?

But as they don't, I guess they actually bought the right one...  
Quoting 2175301 (Reply 9):
Baring that.... Ultimately Qantas may be forced to replace many of their A380's with 747-8I's.

In your dreams maybe

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 18):
Read the article again. The airplane was perfectly profitable until Rolls slapped operational restrictions on it (reduced thrust) following the recent accident

  

From the article linked in the OP

Quote:
Before the 4 November incident prompted a grounding of Qantas' A380 fleet a typical A380 flight operating from Los Angeles to Sydney or Melbourne carried up to 450 passengers and freight

Rgds


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6955 posts, RR: 63
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 42146 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 16):
Seeing that they've been doing business with one another for decades, I doubt it as well. But it may certainly influence their engine choice for future aircraft orders...

Well, it's not as if RR were guaranteed QF's business to begin with. QF rather strangely chose the CF6 for their A330s when I wasn't alone in expecting an order for Trents and, of course, they chose the GEnx for their 787s.

Before the A380, the only type QF had ordered RR for was the 747.

767 PW, GE, (RR)
747 PW, RR, GE
787 GE
A330 GE
A380 RR


25 thegeek : Do you mean the original A333 order around 2000? QF did already have the CF6 for its 767s, so maybe it wanted commonality.
26 luftaom : That is essentially saying that they can't be used at that thrust setting because replacing the engine after 75 cycles is simply not economical.
27 ADent : Isn't QF buying power by the hour? So is their problem with the perceived reduced safety or the downtime needed to swap engines? I would think the eng
28 Post contains images PM : I do. I was in Australia when they announced it. Fell off me chair! Could be. But with 30-odd A330s in the combined Qantas/JetStar fleet, it probably
29 thegeek : I thought it was only recent variants of the engines that have made the CF6 uncompetitive? Was it that obvious 10 years ago that the Trent was a far
30 Post contains images PM : It was to me!
31 Stitch : Evidently GE developed a tech insertion package or somesuch that addressed much of the weakness the CF6 engine had. That being said, RR has done wond
32 astuteman : couple of points in response... Do they have to use 72k lb all the time from LAX? SQ and LH are flying T900's unrestricted at 70k lb. Does 70k lb rea
33 N14AZ : Excuse me very much, but I don't think this is the right way to present this issue. It would be appropriate to quote from that article the main reaso
34 Burkhard : They want RR to pay. That is fair. RR has messed things up badly, now they have to see that they get engines with the warrented performance to the air
35 eggync : 75 cycles? replaced with what? a new engine or refurbished engine? so with the fleet they currently have, how many "EXTRA" engines does QUANTAS need
36 Post contains images EPA001 : It is always so easy to "misread" parts of the story or the whole story all together. It automatically leads to the wrong conclusions which might fit
37 ltbewr : Could RR get into another situation, as happened with the L-1011 engine development problems almost 40 years ago, causing them to go into bankruptcy/r
38 Eagleboy : Nice concise sentence there.........would have saved quite a few questions being asked....
39 CHRISBA777ER : A few people clutching at straws that QF will buy 748is. Never going to happen in a million years. Its a step backwards and QF know it. Dump the A380
40 scbriml : But not bad enough to stop Qantas selecting the RR engine (and being perfectly happy with it before the incident) for their A380s. As has been pointe
41 CHRISBA777ER : I suspect you are wrong. The decision to take the A380 was an absolute no-brainer. QF have a number of routes where they can fill the A380 daily or e
42 sunrisevalley : I doubt if there is one executive left in QF that was involved in the A380 decision.
43 Post contains images AustrianZRH : Do you hear some sparrows chirp a timeframe? If so, can you tell ? What are those D-mod engines, it's the first time I hear about something higher th
44 Post contains images par13del : We have always - on this site at least - accepted airlines reasons for doing and saying things because they are the experts Why the need to defend RR
45 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : My understanding was that C mod was a pre-existing Trent that had had a field mod to "safe" standard to op at full thrust, and a D was a newbuild wit
46 CHRISBA777ER : There is a clear need to be defensive of the OEM as several posters on here are choosing to view the whole incident as a failure of the aircraft as w
47 Daysleeper : I thought the C-Mod fixed all the issues with the engine and could therefore run unrestricted? So why is this such a big issue? Don't all the latest t
48 Post contains images StickShaker : Has anyone heard if Nancy Bird has had her broken bones set and skin stiched up yet ? Need to address those incontinence issues on long hauls too. Qu
49 astuteman : The only issue is an A-net one, and it is that QF have done nothing more than lay a marker down in the (legal) sand - and yet all sorts of fanciful n
50 CHRISBA777ER : People see what they want to see, especially if there is an agenda to be pursued. Hopefully people will realise after reading this thread, and indeed
51 474218 : I will criticize it. Why is such a small amount of structural damage causing so many problems. An approved Structural Repair Manual is a required for
52 Bralo20 : Hmm... AFAIK no D version exists (yet). The latest, current in production, version is the C version. The new build A380-842 for QF which is currently
53 rbgso : Just out of curiosity, what type of pax loads and cargo does the 777 carry on its LAX-SYD runs? How does this compare to a 747 and 380 (assuming prope
54 Daysleeper : What problems has it caused? Are you referring to in flight problems such as failed systems or difficulty in repair? In flight problems are explained
55 justloveplanes : Don't think it was a small amount of structural damage. That engine blew up pretty good, A380 came through it well. This is just Rolls missing it's p
56 CHRISBA777ER : Aha - sorry. My bad. Thanks for clearing that up. My understanding was that a mod D engine would be fully released for full spec thrust with no artif
57 rottenray : Which leaves us with the question regarding the 11 engines which haven't been changed yet. How many of the "approved full thrust takeoffs" have they
58 JerseyFlyer : Also stated is an equally massive passenger reduction from 450 to 80 - minus 82%!! From a maximum thrust reduction from 72,000 to 70,000 (a little un
59 Burkhard : To be more precise the A380 with RR engines. While this is an expensive fault for RR, I doubt it brings them near bancrupcy. LH and SQ can run their
60 Post contains links 9V-SPJ : I can't get to the Flight Global article where I first read this, but the second post down in this link: http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/...nprofi
61 indolikaa : There's one I disagree with. Qantas and Air New Zealand were the first two customers I thought of when I first read about the A3XX project. And the R
62 328JET : That cannot be true, because 30 tons payload are only around 320 passengers and no cargo.
63 Post contains images Zkpilot : How can replacing engines every 2 months be economical? Essentially that is what you are saying as QF can't just operate them at lower thrust after t
64 CARST : Why doesn't Qantas fly their 744ERs to LAX and use the A380s for the flights to Europe? The flights to Europe all stop in BKK, SIN, etc. and aren't as
65 Lufthansa : In reality I suspecdt QF are gonna need the capacity over xmas/new years peak season to America. I wonder if they will simply run the aircarft with a
66 sunrisevalley : An obvious move would be for LAX to allow the A380 to use 25 L and R and if the winds require it 7L and R. Takeoffs to the east are not unheard of.
67 Daysleeper : Rest of their life's? Why are we still going around in circles in this thread regarding this one issue. It should be clear now that this is a smoke s
68 netjetsintl : I don't think Qantas wants to play chess with their fleet, move aircraft around just to accomplish the flights. No interim solutions in this business
69 Lufthansa : bit late for that. the 744ERs never left north and south america routes... with the excephtion of sometimes J'berg. They are not normally used on fli
70 SKAirbus : Sounds like a bit of an hysterical reaction from Qantas. Of course the 380 incident should never have happened but to Rolls Royce's credit they have t
71 astuteman : Version "C" was supposed to be unlimited. That's the issue that QF have When RR pay for the downtime and the change? I can't believe it's impossible
72 adam42185 : If they are unhappy with the A380 what are the chances they decide to go smaller and replace them say with 77W or 748i? Honestly 77W seems more likely
73 Daysleeper : Only in the wettest fanboi dream.... If you read the rest of the thread its pretty clear why. And its been discussed countless times why QF doesnt wa
74 CHRISBA777ER : As previously discussed, they (QF) are NOT unhappy with the A380. They are having a problem with the engines, but QF's position on the A380 as an air
75 frmrCapCadet : snarky comment #1 - at this point there were suppose to be a lot of these engines and aircraft in the air. Snarky comment #2 - a monumental understat
76 Daysleeper : How so? There was no evacuation, no panic. It didn't even blow any tyres, the fuseplugs melted due to overheated breaks.
77 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : Snarky response - Should have read - "The failure is with a small number of engines on one type of aircraft" Fault was, to my knowledge, with just th
78 Post contains images N14AZ : Can we ask the manufacturer of this thread to produce a C-version for this thread as soon as possible?
79 par13del : I think that is my point, an active defense will only bring out the trolls who contribute nothing valuable to the convo other than A versus B or GE,
80 Hiflyer : 75 cycles.....that is just over a month that they would then need to ground the birds out of service and wait while RR delivers rebuilt engines and ha
81 sunrisevalley : This is probably a way off the theme of the thread, but a V Aus. 77W pilot reported on Pprune that he had recently flown LAX-MEL with full ~ 360 pass
82 CHRISBA777ER : Respectfully, I would contend that there are any number of things taken as gospel truth on here, that are pure, absolute fiction, and nothing more th
83 GEnxPower : Aircraft performance is more than just engine performance alone. Airplane aerodynamics, wings, wing-engine interactions, engine performance, plane we
84 Post contains images rottenray : LH changed an engine in the early part of November. SQ changed, I believe, 3 engines in the early part of November - grounding 3 of their aircraft. Q
85 CHRISBA777ER : I dont recall calling it insignificant - please do not put words in my mouth. I said it is a small number - 25% of a whole total is a small, but not
86 Daysleeper : I was thinking about this the other day as I was posting about Boeing conduct in the KC-X program. I’m a relatively new member to this site and it
87 EA772LR : Chris IIRC, EK and AF are flying EA GP7200s, so that'd be 15 of 27 you mentioned without the Trents. So that leaves us 18 Trent 900 powered birds del
88 CHRISBA777ER : Great post - completely agree with you. The thing is that if every time you log on here you are constantly being told that the A380 is a dismal failu
89 CHRISBA777ER : Yes, but only QF fly the uprated thrust versions, which are the ones with the immediate problem.
90 Post contains images Daysleeper : Simply an incredible list LOL. The whole launch aid thing still winds me up from time to time, yet the billions Boeing get in various grants and subs
91 Post contains images Stitch : There are still solid discussions with intelligent points going on, but memories - and vendettas - are long so almost five years on from her first fl
92 AustrianZRH : Welcome to my RU list FWIW from an RR 0 user like me...
93 SEPilot : Which ones? All of the A346's built have been delivered except the one that they totaled during runup. There may be some looking for a home (ex CX bi
94 manfredj : At least they wouldn't have to worry about turning a profit. Since the 744's have been turning a profit for many years, how is it all of a sudden the
95 jetjack74 : It doesnt matter what powerplant you put on these aircraft, they'll never be really all that profitable. The fact we have twinjets that can fly ultra-
96 XT6Wagon : To be fair, Airbus sunk the A346 ship just as much as Boeing did. Lol that horrible HGW package becoming manditory.
97 Post contains images indolikaa : Perhaps the most accurate statement I have ever seen here. The USAF would never...NEVER...reduce itself to a bidding war among lobbyists or those wit
98 garynor : I'd like to see you support these views instead of just putting them forth as fact (I respectfully disagree in that I do not think that the number of
99 Post contains images Daysleeper : I'm not entirely sure if you posted this as a joke considering the list Chris posted, but in case you are serious... You honestly believe that Airbus
100 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : Cheers mate - appreciated. Where did i say it wouldnt be profitable? Stop putting words in my mouth. I am not saying the 748i wouldnt be profitable f
101 Post contains images EPA001 : One of the best posts ever here on A-net. Very, very well written Chris. You have my highest respect for this. . But also this post from Daysleeper i
102 ltbewr : I agree that the decision to go for the A-380 was a 'no-brainer'. Routes between the western USA and Australia, of limited frequency, non-stop and wi
103 tarheelwings : CHRISBA777ER With respect, are you seriously saying that this sort of nonsense only goes one way? Seems to me that it wasn't that long ago that a pos
104 Daysleeper : No one is denying that. The point I was trying to make at least was that it was the sheer volume and in some cases inaccuracy to the point of being b
105 474218 : My point is structural defects are to be expected. If the small amount of structural damage can not be quickly repaired it does not speak will of the
106 EPA001 : It is not the amount of damage, it is the specific damage which was done which makes the repair quite a big thing. But they will repair it. Mind you,
107 BMI727 : In some threads I've just given up trying to be the voice of reason. Like the whole NEO thing. I've grown weary of raining on the parade that Airbus
108 Post contains images Continental : Aha, thank you. You see, my problem was not reading the article in the first place! I must educate myself before I discuss!
109 474218 : But that was eight years after the production of the B-1 was completed.[Edited 2010-12-15 17:59:15][Edited 2010-12-15 18:00:23]
110 BMI727 : Boeing has it and a lot of other programs listed on their BDS products page, even ones where they were a subcontractor. My guess, however, is that Bo
111 rottenray : Chris - wasn't putting words in your mouth, I was simply wording it a different way. You say to-MA-to, I say to-mah-to... If anything, I was mostly a
112 Post contains images MD-90 : This is costing Qantas a LARGE amount of money in lost revenue. Every day those planes don't fly the routes for which they were bought to fly is mone
113 Post contains images aloges : I joined for the same reason... nine years ago, for the first time. In all that time, I've found many of the things on CHRISBA777ER's list purported
114 QFA787380 : This is hysterical ranting IMO and there are very good reasons to suggest that although the 380 may be a technical marvel, it might also prove to hav
115 cerecl : The business of A380 is of course debatable, the lengthy delay it encountered clearly not helping. However, I think you will find that the business c
116 QFA787380 : Is it after 10+ years? It is and quite a few key carriers are still yet to commit, including CX/JL/NH/UA. Mnay others have only committed to a few. A
117 cerecl : Well, if one considers the life-span of the program is at least 3-4x this length of time... These are why I think it may still be too early to declar
118 Post contains links indolikaa : It should be that simple. A slew of electronics-related upgrades. A fair chunk of the Block-E upgrade was theirs, as was part of the JDAM integration
119 Post contains images astuteman : Sorry, but the defence is brought about by the trolling which has already occurred. And its really sad that there are still posters, and many of them
120 Post contains links BMI727 : Boeing does. http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/hsfe_shuttle/index.html Perhaps, but A380s aren't free.
121 Post contains images cerecl : Neither is any other aircraft? The list price of 10 77W is higher than that of 7 A388. I am not sure what you are trying to say.
122 BMI727 : If you're already flying 777s or A330s on a route the cost of getting A380s probably cancels out most of the economic gain. It's one thing for an air
123 thegeek : That's exactly right, and if the A389 is ever developed the decision to buy that would also be a no brainer, and for CX and EK as well as QF, in spit
124 cerecl : Some damage for sure, but the bulk of the impact would be on 748i. Clearly not, and I do not for a moment suggest that this is a sensible strategy. M
125 JerseyFlyer : Agree - driven by a perceived need to respond to 77W rather than customer pressure.
126 travelhound : This might be a little off topic, but I thought BA are taking a HGW variant of the A380 from 2012. You would think this version would require a higher
127 Daysleeper : I don’t understand how you can reach the conclusion that the A380 has sold so badly, In the 747’s first 10 years, going from the end of 1965 to 1
128 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : Also lest be realistic here - there are probably only 30-ish airlines worldwide that could possibly use the A380, and many of those have huge fleets
129 AirNZ : And you know that how? Would it interest you to know that the current operators find them extremely profitable, or are they incorrect? And which of y
130 Post contains links and images Aesma : One of Emirates planes, MSN007, was a test frame, with RR engines. Now it has EA engines. When it was F-WWSD, first flight, notice the RR stickers :
131 Post contains images travelavnut : AirNZ, I think we are dealing with a troll here (although the account is almost 7 years old). He just repeated all the endlessly beaten dead horses c
132 Aesma : At least the first new wing (with 0,5° more twist) should be in the building phase right now.
133 airzim : Not really a fair comparison. The highly regulated and highly fragmented air travel market in the late 60's early 70's was probably 1/2 the size it i
134 Post contains images travelavnut : Both valid points. However, the A380 is just starting a career that will probarbly last 30 to 40 years. I know you are not doing it, but it is way to
135 airzim : I agree way too early. Plus it is hard to define 'success' in this case. I just wonder without the interest from EK if this plane would of ever been
136 CHRISBA777ER : When the A3XX was first conceived, EK were miniscule. When it was green lit and given the go-ahead, nobody ever thought EK would be a buyer, let alon
137 PlaneAdmirer : Forgive me for asking and I have gone through the thread to a point (the A v. B is a bit out of hand), but these are the questions in my mind and I do
138 Daysleeper : It isn't an accurate comparison. What I was trying to get across is that there isn't anything really to use as a benchmark for the A380, and writing
139 stitch : It's an official Weight Variant (004): Maximum Ramp Weight - 575t Maximum Takeoff Weight - 573t Maximum Landing Weight- 393t Maximum Zero Fuel Weight
140 airzim : I have to disagree here. I worked with EK during those years and their 'ambition' was pretty well defined by both the Dubai government and their mana
141 airzim : Your selling my argument beautifully. True many airlines order the 747 for prestige and later dumped them. Secondly many ordered the 747 for the legs
142 stitch : The argument that the A380 was ordered purely for prestige like airlines originally bought the 747 for might hold more water to me if AF was flying th
143 Daysleeper : What exactly is your argument? If the A380 sells, it sells. It's irrelevant who too. I doubt that its ever going to be the success that the 747 was,
144 Post contains images par13del : Never said it offends and you are perfectly within your rights to correct the crap as you say. I personally don't believe that one can reason with th
145 netjetsintl : WOW, I do agree with on some points. For me, the 4 engine configuration is not obsolete, but not a necesity either. The 777 can do any mission the 74
146 CharlieNoble : Just to "inform your opinion" a bit, something I've learned (from reading on here) is that the one place where 4 engines beat 2 is when you want to d
147 ADent : Thanx. I tracked down MSN009 which was intended for a swap, but didn't happen. I thought the 777 had problems on Australia to South America and Austr
148 Aesma : The 777 certainly can't manage the same payload ! Or did you mean a pair of 777 ? With two crews, two ATC and landing fees, etc. ?
149 dynamicsguy : If you're going to quote numbers to support your argument then at least get them right. Go to the Orders and Deliveries page on Boeing's Commercial A
150 BMI727 : He probably did not count freighter orders.
151 dynamicsguy : Yeah, I realised that an instant after I pressed the button to post it.
152 Post contains images Daysleeper : If your going to try and discredit someones post its often a good idea to think it through first. It's also it often pays to be polite and ask how I
153 Post contains images Ferpe : This topic is about the fact that RR have put restrictions on QFs engines, not wether A380 is a good plane or not. This has other threads. So on the t
154 Post contains images par13del : Excellent start and in general sums up what the whole issue is all about, unfortunately the technical folks abandoned this thread a long time ago. Th
155 ltbewr : As I noted earleier, IIRC, some of the eaaliest 777, especially those for BA had some engine problems, I believe with GE engines, had deliver delays o
156 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : Can I just say - this thread has been all the richer for allowing it to take its own course. Its been a fantastic discussion and I'm really pleased th
157 Daysleeper : I think alot of the technical aspects of this thread were dealt with early on - There wasn't much more to be discussed. And I agree that the off-topic
158 dfambro : The lawsuit certainly was filed fast. My speculation is that Qantas feels they need to get into a discovery process to access RR confidential informa
159 Post contains links Aesma : In fact it did happen this year, last summer, to a Qantas 747 with RB211s no less ! Well, the failure didn't damage the wing (luck ?) but it was unco
160 Post contains links VHHYI : The main reason cited was to allow the case to be heard *in Australia* should Qantas and RR not be able to work something out. From an article, 2nd D
161 Post contains links Daysleeper : Is there any infomation as to the cause of this failure? Or is it still under investigation. The article Here Has a little bit more information inclu
162 Post contains links Aesma : There is a preliminary report (the thread here by Baroque didn't get even one reply) : http://lord.asmodeus.free.fr/avions/ao2010066prelim.pdf It's on
163 Post contains links 747classic : Are the RB211-524-G2-T-19/15 engines, as installed on the QF 744-SFO incident , new builds or upgraded RB211-524G engines ? In an upgrade program engi
164 DocLightning : I've looked through this thread but I can't find an answer: Can the GP700 provide the thrust that QF needs?
165 PlaneAdmirer : I asked that too....It doesn't seem as interesting the A v. B discussion. While we are at it, What does the 75 cycle limitation really mean and what
166 par13del : I believe it can either saw it earlier in this thread on another, howvever, the general consensus seems to be that by the time QF would be able to so
167 Post contains links 747classic : The certified higher rated GP 7277 is delivering 80.290 lbs T/O thrust and 73.850 lbs continuous thrust, however the combination GP7277 and A380 is n
168 DocLightning : That depends. QF may also be angry enough at RR regarding their handling of this situation that they may make the switch because they no longer wish
169 par13del : I could see that if a/c and engines were still purchased in the old fashion, but I believe - those in the know can correct me if I'm wrong - RR has c
170 tayser : So the 744ERs must be back on MEL-LAX-MEL full time again now? that uses up 2 or 3 of the 6 total planes? Booked a trip to the US for March, price dif
171 Post contains links MDShady : You didn't post this on Avherald by perchance? Boeing vs Airbus By Cluster on Thursday, Dec 16th 2010 23:41Z The world would be a much better place i
172 thegeek : 2. The remaining 4 are either for SYD-LAX, SYD-SFO or down for maintenance/reconfig. There aren't enough ERs for all their desired duties.
173 PM : No, they haven't. Or just prudent.
174 Post contains links and images lightsaber : Data sheet on the GP7200 http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...e791c/$FILE/E00072EN%20Rev%203.pdf max thrust: 73,470lbf Maximum (5min) GP7270: 74,735
175 Post contains links 747classic : As clearly stated in the ATSB preliminary report, QF operated the incident A380-842 aircraft with T972-84 engines. (one of the two engine variants at
176 PM : EK may be but LH certainly aren't!
177 Post contains images EPA001 : I guess you mean EK & AF here? . LH is a RR customer on the A380 as far as I know. Thanks for the interesting data to Lightsaber & 747classic
178 747classic : Yes, I meant EK and AF, .......................................... thinking quicker then typing with my one finger typing system.
179 BA174 : The 744ERs pop over to SIN/LHR occasionally too. I wonder if QF are currently considering stepping aircraft up from VCV even though that is unlikley
180 Daysleeper : Does anyone have a conclusive list of what routes the A380 would be capable of running with de-rated thrust. Is it just LAX which they have issues wi
181 Flyingsottsman : I havent heard anything about the 748I, To me it sounds like QF are not interested in the 748I. The reason why RR was on the 763's was because Qantas
182 netjetsintl : correct, I haven't read or heard anything about Qantas looking to replace the A380s (they just got them for crying out loud), but even if they were,
183 Heavierthanair : G'day There were no issues with the aircraft itself, besides being somewhat late for entry intro service. So are some other new aircraft projects from
184 BA174 : Correct 7 of BAs 767s are with QF and are RR powered. There is even rumer that BA will take them back to cover 787 delays so RR 767 may not be with Q
185 gemuser : Might be a bit trickie, as BA do not own them any more. They are owned by various finical institutions and consortium. Of course if QF not longer wan
186 AusA380 : I doubt that will happen as I understand QF were to replace them with 787 themselves, so they will need to keep them until that fleet arrives.
187 thegeek : It's a possibility as QF are parking 767s in spite of delays to the 787.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
QF A380 Operationg To LAX On The 30th? posted Sun Jan 3 2010 21:16:45 by Braniff747SP
Qantas A380 Ever To JFK? posted Mon May 18 2009 12:23:16 by Richiemo
Qantas A380 Launch MEL-LAX 20OCT posted Sun Jun 15 2008 20:36:07 by Aussie747
A380 Coming To LAX Again - Nov 28th. posted Mon Oct 29 2007 10:30:47 by LAXintl
Qantas 743 Flight To LAX From Nzaa? posted Thu Jun 21 2007 10:26:47 by LAXspotter
QF 744 Returns To LAX With Engine Failure. posted Thu May 3 2007 11:00:37 by Jafa39
Southwest Returns To LAX With Shattered Window posted Thu Mar 9 2006 04:31:40 by AS739X
Why Is A380 Essential To LAX? posted Wed Nov 30 2005 23:00:31 by AirlineAddict
772NG Or 787-10 To Compete With A350-900? posted Fri May 20 2005 00:53:18 by NorCal
Qantas B747-300's To LAX posted Tue Apr 5 2005 11:21:42 by ZK-NBT