Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QF 380 Possible Return To LAX?  
User currently offlinemetsfan1 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 141 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13939 times:

Just looking at QF schedules and it seems that starting January 16 they have the 380 returning to LAX on QF12 about 3 times a week. Is this the plan or will the schedule keep getting rolled back?

60 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetraindoc From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13523 times:

Most likely one of the two brand new A 380 that QF has just received. I believe that these A/C have an updated Trent 900 engine with a revised oil tube in the intermediate pressure turbine.

Traindoc


User currently offlineZuluAlpha From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12923 times:

Quoting traindoc (Reply 1):

And a couple more to come early in 2011?



CRJ CR7 D10 DHT DH8 DH2 DH3 DH4 EMB ER3 E90 F28 J32 M80 SH6 320 332 333 380 717 732 733 734 738 743 744 752 762 763 772
User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7448 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 12739 times:

I thought QF stated that the A380 was unprofitable to LAX?


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineU2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 12661 times:

Quoting United_fan (Reply 3):
I thought QF stated that the A380 was unprofitable to LAX?

That was when the Trent 900 was restricted to needing a inspection every 20 flights (when maximum thrust was used). They could have only taken 80 passengers from LAX I believe, as they would have had to use restricted thrust, making it unprofitable.

That restriction has been lifted to every 200 flights now, so they can now use a higher thrust and lift more passengers from LAX. Making it profitable again.

http://atwonline.com/airports-routes...er-returning-a380-los-angeles-1222


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 12657 times:

Quoting United_fan (Reply 3):
I thought QF stated that the A380 was unprofitable to LAX?

No, they said the A380 would be unprofitable to LAX with the massive payload restriction (30,000 kg i believe) they would have to take to go out at 70k thrust which Rolls said they were ok to do if they wished with the unmodded frames. The T900 issues were only a problem at the upper reaches of the full thrust, but the modifications allow them to use the the maximum thrust available.

After the mods (or on the new planes), they can despatch to LAX with the full certified thrust at full payload - and it is *very* profitable at full payload. Nothing else can touch it.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlinecloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 11850 times:

This means that all issues with the Trent 900s have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction? No problems remain?


Boston, USA
User currently offlinePanman From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Aug 1999, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 10689 times:

Quoting traindoc (Reply 1):
Most likely one of the two brand new A 380 that QF has just received

Rewrite that to read "Most likely one of the ONE brand new A380 that QF has just received" please. Next one not due till mid-January at the earliest on current estimates.

pAnmAn


User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12884 posts, RR: 100
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9931 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cloud4000 (Reply 6):
This means that all issues with the Trent 900s have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction? No problems remain?

   But it means the fix is 'economical enough.' RR will do a further structural revision in the effected region.

Quoting Panman (Reply 7):
Rewrite that to read "Most likely one of the ONE brand new A380 that QF has just received" please. Next one not due till mid-January at the earliest on current estimates.

I hope there are retrofit kits... SOON! (I would be surprised if there weren't.)

This is painful for QF and RR, but the issue is being resolved. I look forward to far more A380s at LAX.  

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineaussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9162 times:

All set to resume QF93 will be the first ops for the A380 to LAX

http://www.qantas.com.au/regions/dyn.../details?ArticleID=2011/jan11/5057


User currently offlineZuluAlpha From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9083 times:

Quoting aussie747 (Reply 9):

I have seen that OQI is scheduled for departure ex TLS 0900hrs 14 January. Which will mean an arrival into Australia on the night of 15 January. I knew that would mean an awfully quick turn around to fly out on the 16th January ?



CRJ CR7 D10 DHT DH8 DH2 DH3 DH4 EMB ER3 E90 F28 J32 M80 SH6 320 332 333 380 717 732 733 734 738 743 744 752 762 763 772
User currently offlineAirvan00 From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 748 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8689 times:

Quoting ZuluAlpha (Reply 10):
I have seen that OQI is scheduled for departure ex TLS 0900hrs 14 January. Which will mean an arrival into Australia on the night of 15 January. I knew that would mean an awfully quick turn around to fly out on the 16th January ?

I suspect that it won't be OQI that will do the QF93 on the 16th. If they follow the pattern they have established recently it will be the aircraft that does the QF10 out of LHR on the 14th. The A380's have been flying SYD-LHR-MEL-LHR-SYD. So the QF93 would be flown instead of QF9 on that day. OQI most likely will come to SYD for a few days to be "kitted out" before its first revenue flight. I presume QF have done a few full power takeoff just to check things out. Also the A380 that did the last minute go around at LHR a week ago most likely used full TOGA power.


User currently offlinewindian425 From Barbados, joined Dec 2006, 166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8649 times:

Congratulations to Airbus, Qantas and RR....

User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26361 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8631 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 5):

After the mods (or on the new planes), they can despatch to LAX with the full certified thrust at full payload - and it is *very* profitable at full payload. Nothing else can touch it.

Yet. 748I can change that.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4702 posts, RR: 38
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8520 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
Yet. 748I can change that.


It might get close on a CASM base, but not overall. The B748i will fill the gap between the B77W and the A380 nicely in the market, but the profitability of a full (or full enough) A380 will be untouchable for the B748i.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26361 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8381 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 14):


It might get close on a CASM base, but not overall. The B748i will fill the gap between the B77W and the A380 nicely in the market, but the profitability of a full (or full enough) A380 will be untouchable for the B748i.

The fact that it can potentially beat the A380 on CASM, while being the lower risk aircraft because of lower trip costs, is impressive. No trade off necessary.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8305 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 14):


It might get close on a CASM base, but not overall. The B748i will fill the gap between the B77W and the A380 nicely in the market, but the profitability of a full (or full enough) A380 will be untouchable for the B748i.

The fact that it can potentially beat the A380 on CASM, while being the lower risk aircraft because of lower trip costs, is impressive. No trade off necessary.

Not sure who told you that one buddy, but I think you've been led up the garden path. In a normal two, three or four class layot, the 748i cannot beat an A380 on CASM. For the routes we're talking about here (LAX_SYD) the 748i cannot touch an A380. No potentially about it - the A380 has a better CASM and if the traffic is there (and it is) then it rightfully hammers the Boeing. As well it should - that's what it was designed from the gear up to do.

There would be something very wrong if a smaller but re-engined, tweaked/reworked 40 year old design could get anywhere near the A380 in CASM. It is a CASM monster - that's its sole purpose.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1586 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8281 times:

Quoting N112OA (Reply 15):
The fact that it can potentially beat the A380 on CASM, while being the lower risk aircraft because of lower trip costs, is impressive. No trade off necessary.

Yet somehow this isn't reflected in the order book. Maybe you have a good explonation for that?



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4802 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8061 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 16):

There would be something very wrong if a smaller but re-engined, tweaked/reworked 40 year old design could get anywhere near the A380 in CASM. It is a CASM monster - that's its sole purpose.

Yes and no... The A380s problem is that to fit that many pax in, it had to be a full doubledecker design... this adds considerable weight (not just the actual structure, but supporting structure also). It has cargo space of 5390cu.ft (most airlines if not all are fitting underfloor crew rest which takes up space). The 748I has 5,705 cu ft. So the A380 may win the battle of seats, but there is also the battle over how much cargo can be taken. The 748I can not only take a bigger volume, it can actually take more revenue cargo due to it having less passenger bags. Cargo revenue is actually often worth more than passenger revenue for some routes and is pretty valuable still on the others. Coupled with lower purchase/finance costs, less trip costs, existing 744 operators, and smaller footprint (A380 is not the best at many airports ie LAX etc), the game becomes pretty balanced.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30553 posts, RR: 84
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8032 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 18):
Coupled with lower purchase/finance costs, less trip costs, existing 744 operators, and smaller footprint (A380 is not the best at many airports ie LAX etc), the game becomes pretty balanced.

That was certainly what Boeing hoped, but the reality is an A380 with 500 passengers will hammer a 747-8 with 400 passengers into the ground in terms of economics and most A380 operators are not having a problem filling those 500 seats in an environment where they could fill 400 seats on a 747-8. So even if a 747-8 ends up with lower trip costs, the A380-800 can offer more than enough extra revenue to absorb those costs.

Also, Airbus seems to be willing to match Boeing on purchase price (since Boeing is not willing to give the 747-8 away to win a sale) and the A380's values and rental rates have remained steady even through the GFC, so financing doesn't appear to be a problem. If anything, that the 747-8 has one-tenth the commercial operator orders that the A380-800 does should result in the 747-8 being a much more risk finance option as the re-sale value is much more at risk of a sharp drop compared to the A380-800.

Quite simply, the 747-8 is out-classed by the A380-800 across the board and any operator choosing it instead of (not in addition to) an A380-800 is likely going to end up regretting that decision over the service life of the plane.


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2212 posts, RR: 56
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7756 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
the 747-8 has one-tenth the commercial operator orders that the A380-800 does

You would expect the opposite to be true, since smaller aircraft generally sell in greater numbers. As far as airlines are concerned, if the 748I were as potent a money-making machine as the A388, you would see a 748I backlog of some 300 aircraft by now. That there isn't such a backlog speaks volumes about the relative merits of these two airplanes.


User currently offlineAirlineCritic From Finland, joined Mar 2009, 699 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7603 times:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 20):
That there isn't such a backlog speaks volumes about the relative merits of these two airplanes.

There's nothing like hard numbers to spoil an a.net (mis)conception  

Still, I'd wait a few years so that both planes are in real usage and the airlines can get a more accurate picture of the situation. Then we'll know.

Remember that 747-8 has competition from below as well, from 350XWB and 777.


User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 14):
It might get close on a CASM base, but not overall. The B748i will fill the gap between the B77W and the A380 nicely in the market, but the profitability of a full (or full enough) A380 will be untouchable for the B748i.

Good luck to QF & RR with these updates and hoped for improvement with these new Trent engines. It seems like the LAX-SYD Flagship route has been plagued with many issues. I hope this helps solves it.

Is there any chance we'll see QF order or lease any 748Is? We all know, the 748I will never be capable of offering the seating the A388 does, but at the same time, is it true a 748I with the obvious reduced seating capacity allow the high yields to increase even more so over A388 since QF's Flagship SYD-LAX-SYD market still commands premium fares in all classes which sees people actually paying versus the amount of upgrades UA gives for their premium cabins? Wouldn't the 748I also allow QF to carry more cargo volume over the A388? If anything, if QF were to buy or lease the 748I and with the reduced passenger capacity, perhaps we'd see them add an additional flight on this route like they used to operate during the peak season, A daylight flight operating saying 4 times a week along with the two daily redeyes.


User currently offlineAirvan00 From Australia, joined Oct 2008, 748 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7525 times:

Quoting laca773 (Reply 22):
Is there any chance we'll see QF order or lease any 748Is?

No.


User currently offlinetullamarine From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1513 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7416 times:

Quoting laca773 (Reply 22):
If anything, if QF were to buy or lease the 748I and with the reduced passenger capacity, perhaps we'd see them add an additional flight on this route like they used to operate during the peak season, A daylight flight operating saying 4 times a week along with the two daily redeyes.

Apart from the fact that QF have stated many times they have no interest in the 748 why would they want to go from 3 flights a day to 4 flights and still only carry about the same number of pax? There are significant gate issues in both SYD and LAX so an extra flight is always problematic. Pax love the A380 and QF report that many regular pax actually seek out the A380 in preference to the older and noisier 744s.

QF have had a setback with the A380 but they are committed to it and remain impressed by its capabilities. There is no likelihood that they are going to go away from their existing fleet choice even though many can rightly argue that a 77W would be a cgood addition but it probably isn't going to happen unless Boeing give them away.



717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,A310,320,321,332,333,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,S
25 gemuser : No. No. The A380 has [or can be configured to be] have more premium seats than the B784I and does not have to discount a large volume of Y seats to b
26 Stitch : The economic case of the A380-800 is just so compelling it's able to reverse that trend, I guess.
27 N1120A : No, I think you have. That is the beauty of the 748I, and you should be well aware of that. Um, they have the same range and the 748I's uplift is sig
28 Post contains images PM : Dream on...
29 Stitch : Boeing almost had the 747-500X and 747-600X launched with TG, MH and BA in 1996 before the MoUs were withdrawn in the face of the 1997 Asian Financia
30 CHRISBA777ER : I do apologise if you think I've got this all wrong. Can you please point me to a source that states that the 747-8i has comparable or better CASM th
31 tullamarine : That doesn't add up either. Since the 748i has been made available for sale airlines such as Asiana and BA have chosen the A380. The only airlines th
32 EK413 : I suspect there would be a retrofit kit... I drove past the jetbase and noted an A380 parked minus her inboard engine... Probably being fitted out wi
33 Panman : Slight correction as you are off by an hour. VH-OQI QFA6024 TLS - SIN 14 Jan @ 1000 pAnmAn
34 ZuluAlpha : Oops .. Sozz .. Silly me
35 CHRISBA777ER : So - to drag this thread back on topic: Are all the QF A388s (minus Nancy Bird who will be back shortly I'm told) be back in service now? All done and
36 Airvan00 : Not OQC.
37 CHRISBA777ER : When's McGinness back, do you know? She's the only QF A380 I've flown on!
38 ZuluAlpha : Would OQC be in for scheduled heavy maintenance? If my memory is correct, I remember that OQB was in the LH heavy maintenance with a C check when the
39 Airvan00 : OQC is still in Sydney, it is the next one due for a "C" check in FRT.
40 Post contains images N14AZ : Hey, this is fantastic news and shoudn't be put in brackets! Does anybody know more? If this turns out to be true it was much faster than expected.
41 Panman : Not true. At least 7 months before it's anywhere near ready. pAnmAn
42 Post contains images N14AZ : Thanks for the update! Seems as if there are different interpretations of the word "shortly". Let's hope they have a documentation team on board so t
43 thegeek : Re: VH-OQA What would take so long? I'd agree with that in general, and specifically for SYD-LAX. However, I am sure that there are some slightly shor
44 Stitch : At that point, however, you might as well go with the 77W, which offers even more cargo volume.
45 Thrust : Is VH-OQA repaired yet and flying again yet?
46 Airvan00 : Did you read post 3 above?[Edited 2011-01-15 15:27:12]
47 qantas834300 : QF 93 X MEL 16/1 OPERATED BY VH-OQD, DEPARTED 1207 ETA LAX 0725 QF 12 X LAX 16/1 WILL BE OPERATED BY VH-OQD, DEPT 2225 ETA SYD 0825 + 2 THE FIRST A380
48 ZuluAlpha : Thanks for the update qantas834300. I will look forward to seeing more of the 380's after this date
49 Panman : Am I seeing correctly. OQC Will be the third one to do the LAX run? It's finally back in the air. pAnmAn
50 Airvan00 : Where did you see that? Last I heard it was still in the hanger with only one engine. It still has to do the "C" check presumabley in FRT, but someon
51 Threepoint : Where or what does FRT stand for?
52 PM : Frankfurt?
53 Airvan00 : Yep, sorry, FRA or if you prefer EDDF. IATA ones do not come naturally to me, i prefer ICAO.
54 Post contains images lightsaber : We've been lulled into a different mindset as a large twin (77W/A333) had the lowest CASM for so long. We now have a quad with lower CASM than a twin
55 Post contains images EPA001 : Yes! Bring it on! . They might, but so far have not done so. CX is rumored for a long time for an A388 (or A389?) order, but so far have not committe
56 AustrianZRH : Maybe BA? They have a large enough VLA fleet (at least now) to maybe justify both the 747 and the A380 in their fleet.
57 thegeek : There isn't a point that the payload-range of the 748i beats the 77W while the cargo volume also beats the A388?
58 Panman : Internal computers. pAnmAn
59 Airvan00 : Well, that will be good if it does Thursday's LAX flight. (the third A380 to return to LAX)
60 Stitch : BA's VLA RFP was a single-source "winner take all" so with Airbus winning it, there will never be a 747-8 passenger plane flying BA colors (the 747-8
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...
Any News About LHs Possible Return To BOG? posted Thu May 28 2009 09:00:57 by LH506
Alaska Emergency Return To LAX posted Mon Sep 18 2006 02:26:55 by HAL
AS 737 Return To LAX 4/4? posted Mon Apr 4 2005 18:18:37 by B-787
Possible Return To SYD For LH posted Wed Jan 19 2005 00:08:19 by Ctang
When Will Aerolineas Return To Lax? posted Thu Aug 22 2002 04:10:04 by L-1011-500
QF B744 Forced To Return To AKL On LAX Flight posted Wed Nov 16 2005 08:40:44 by 777ER
QF A380 Operationg To LAX On The 30th? posted Sun Jan 3 2010 21:16:45 by Braniff747SP
QF 744 Return To LHR, 0020hrs UK Time, 18Jun posted Tue Jun 17 2008 16:50:34 by LHR777
How To Use An Ex SQ, EK, QF ... A 380? posted Fri Apr 25 2008 23:09:24 by N14AZ
QF A332 Service To LAX? posted Sun Mar 23 2008 09:23:56 by Flying Belgian