Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Future Of Ex BA QF763's @ QF?  
User currently offlineTimetable From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 217 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 5 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6992 times:

Dose anybody kinow the future of the Ex BA 763's currently with QF? Does Qf plan to retire them in the future or are they going refurbish them & repaint them into the newer QF colours? Thanks in advance if you can help? Regards from Timetable.

65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBAeRJ100 From Australia, joined Nov 2011, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 2 days ago) and read 7001 times:

QF intends to only keep the 16 767s with GE engines (registrations that begin with VH-OG*), and these are the aircraft being fitted with the refurbished cabin. I can't remember off the top of my head exactly when it is to occur (when the JQ A330's move back to QF after the 787 deliveries?), but they plan on very soon getting rid of all the 767s with RR engines, which happen to be all of the ex-BA birds (registrations beginning with VH-ZX*).

[Edited 2012-11-19 05:59:36]

[Edited 2012-11-19 06:00:22]

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7001 times:

Quoting BAeRJ100 (Reply 1):

I can't wait! The RR aircraft or better known as ACE aircraft are a nightmare of an aircraft...
On a sidenote QFs latest A332 Domestic configure aircraft will be arriving on the 25th of November...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently onlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2887 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6998 times:

The 767 refurbishment programme will be finished next March.

The latest guide for the JQ 787s is next October with a total of 3-4 next year from memory, so there's a good chance they'll all be gone by early 2014. Retiring these aircraft is the priority for the domestic fleet, so expect to see them leave pretty rapidly from March.

On another side note, do we have any word on what QF are doing with the international aircraft in this refit?


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7000 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 3):
On another side note, do we have any word on what QF are doing with the international aircraft in this refit?

I take it your referring to OGR, OGS, OGT and OGU... Interesting question and never really thought as to what would happen with these aircraft...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2152 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6998 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EK413 (Reply 2):
The RR aircraft or better known as ACE aircraft are a nightmare of an aircraft...

How come QF has kept them for so long if they are not good to work in? I seem to remember from earlier threads that the aircraft have hopless galley configs or something, but that could have been changed to QF standard during D-check, right?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6998 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
How come QF has kept them for so long if they are not good to work in? I seem to remember from earlier threads that the aircraft have hopless galley configs or something, but that could have been changed to QF standard during D-check, right?

The aircraft interiors have been upgraded to QF standards, however the galleys are BA ace galley standards which create a headache from the catering perspective... As for the power plants I believe they are same ratings as the RR power plants on the B744 fleet (3 RR aircraft to remain active)...

EK413

[Edited 2012-11-20 01:12:53]


Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently onlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2887 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 6957 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
How come QF has kept them for so long if they are not good to work in? I seem to remember from earlier threads that the aircraft have hopless galley configs or something, but that could have been changed to QF standard during D-check, right?

The two aircraft have totally different exit configurations. QF could never have configured them in the same way without wasting a lot of space in the GE aircraft which have overwing exits in place of full size doors.

It's also worth noting that the aircraft were never originally meant to be a long term part of the QF fleet, so it didn't make sense to do massive work when they first came to QF. QF only took them on more permanently a few years later and at that stage they were only supposed to be staying in the fleet for a few more years until the 787s started arriving in 2008 causing the subsequent movement of A332s to replace the 767s.

So it's always been a lot of money to spend doing major galley/toilet moves for only a couple more years of QF service.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 10 hours ago) and read 6947 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 7):
It's also worth noting that the aircraft were never originally meant to be a long term part of the QF fleet, so it didn't make sense to do massive work when they first came to QF.

I believe QF originally had plans to operate the type for 7 years (7 year lease) and then return the aircraft to BA... In the end I believe BA didn't want the aircraft therefore QF purchased / leased the aircraft to fill the B787 gap...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinevhebb From Australia, joined Apr 2011, 155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 6834 times:

Hi,

The only Intl B763 route is SYD-HNL-SYD... The current 4 Intl config B763s VH-OGR/S/T/U will be reconfigured to domestic config when the go thru the cabin refurbishment meaning that all 16 GE B763s will be in the same domestic config.

The longer term options I see for the QF SYD-HNL-SYD will be:

*B763 replaced with Intl A330s which are currently flying domestic routes.

*All HNL services handed over to JQ.

*B763 will continue to operate the route but in the new domestic config.

Only time will tell I guess......

[Edited 2012-11-20 21:36:43]

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 6809 times:

Quoting vhebb (Reply 9):
The longer term options I see for the QF SYD-HNL-SYD will be:

*B763 replaced with Intl A330s which are currently flying domestic routes.

I would agree with B763s being replaced with A332s...

I believe the new QF have come to terms and realised there is room for both QF and JQ on key holiday routes with OOL as an example with mainline resuming services...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6431 times:

Quoting vhebb (Reply 9):
The only Intl B763 route is SYD-HNL-SYD...

And SYD-NOU-SYD x 1pw.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6276 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 11):

Quoting vhebb (Reply 9):
The only Intl B763 route is SYD-HNL-SYD...

And SYD-NOU-SYD x 1pw.

The SYD-NOU-SYD QF91-QF92 service is usually operated by a domestic configure aircraft with the odd International aircraft from time to time...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently onlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2887 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6239 times:

Quoting vhebb (Reply 9):

Thanks! I can only assume that QF will continue to fly to HNL past March (they're leaving it a bit late to make an announcement...), so it will be interesting to see which direction they go in with the equipment...

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
I would agree with B763s being replaced with A332s...

I think an A333 is more likely. It's a bigger jump in capacity, but the A332s have far too many J seats to work to HNL.

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 11):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):

I imagine NOU will probably migrate to 738s over the next year or two. 1 weekly through the low season, with an extra weekly flight through peak periods.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6215 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13):
I think an A333 is more likely. It's a bigger jump in capacity, but the A332s have far too many J seats to work to HNL.

That's a big jump in capacity 5J & 63Y seats but I certainly ain't complaining...

B763 - 25J 204Y
A333 - 30J 267Y

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13):
Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 11):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):

I imagine NOU will probably migrate to 738s over the next year or two. 1 weekly through the low season, with an extra weekly flight through peak periods.

Isn't the service already operated by a mix of B738 & B763... I'm a bit rusty with the days of operations with SB filling the gap too...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinesydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2807 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6131 times:

Quoting vhebb (Reply 9):
B763 will continue to operate the route but in the new domestic config.

I tend to think this will be the QF option. That way the only difference between the QF operated servie and the JQ service is the standard of on-board service and the proper fitting of the IPAD's as IFE. But that's only speculation.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
I would agree with B763s being replaced with A332s...

I would have thought the point to point Asia services would be a better use of the A332's in International config? Having said that I also think there is a case to be made to refit the International A332's to remove some of the business class seats. That would make them more workable on routes such as HNL, SIN, CGK and MNL where there is alot of leisure traffic but also a fair mix of people willing to pay business fares and burning FF points.


User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6050 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):
The SYD-NOU-SYD QF91-QF92 service is usually operated by a domestic configure aircraft with the odd International aircraft from time to time...

I am quite aware of that.

As part of the refresh bassinets will be removed from the J cabin on domestic-configured aircraft. This suggests to me that the international aircraft will be a sub-fleet of some description.


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5985 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13):
I think an A333 is more likely. It's a bigger jump in capacity, but the A332s have far too many J seats to work to HNL.

Can QF's A333s fly that far? It's further than SYD-HKG which I'm not sure how they manage.


User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5976 times:

The 333s flew BOM-SYD non-stop, SYD-NRT, SYD-PVG and SYD-PEK. I am pretty sure that if a 763 can make SYD-HNL-SYD, then the 333 will do also.

User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5942 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 18):
The 333s flew BOM-SYD non-stop

I'm sure they flew SYD-DRW-BOM-SYD. And were load restricted on the route too, severely I believe.

Can't comment on the other routes you've said.


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5925 times:

Did the A333s have an upgrade to their MTOW in service, not reflected on the qantas.com.au website? I can't see how a 212t A333 could do SYD-PEK with a commercial load.

User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4773 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5903 times:

The main reason for the retirement of the RR 763s is that they need an expensive upgrade on the flight deck/navigation systems to bring them up to a new Australian standard... Something like $2m per aircraft which couldn't be justified considering they were due to be retired soon anyway.


54 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlinea36001 From Australia, joined Sep 2012, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5881 times:

When they are retired, will the engines be kept as spares for the remaining 744 fleet? or have I got it totally wrong and they can't interchange them. Do they even own the engines or are they leased separately from the airframe?  

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5807 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 20):

Did the A333s have an upgrade to their MTOW in service, not reflected on the qantas.com.au website? I can't see how a 212t A333 could do SYD-PEK with a commercial load.

I don't recall any load restrictions on the PEK route from memory... As mentioned by Ditzyboy if a B763 can operate the route with nil issues I doubt an A333 would have any load restrictions...

Quoting a36001 (Reply 22):
Do they even own the engines or are they leased separately from the airframe?

I've red in previous posts the engines are interchangeable with the B744 RR fleet...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2253 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5593 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 19):
I'm sure they flew SYD-DRW-BOM-SYD. And were load restricted on the route too, severely I believe.

Can't comment on the other routes you've said.

The non-stop eastbound leg with the A333 didn't last long. In 2008, the A332 replaced the A333, and then in 2009 the flight to BOM became a 1 stop A333 via SIN.

A non-stop BOM-SYD, coming in at over 10,000 km, is an awful long way for the early version A330-303 that QF used on the route. Must have been quite a hefty payload restriction.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-11-22 06:08:28]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineJQflightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 940 posts, RR: 1
Reply 25, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 5722 times:

Well they would want to have home's fast, the first 763 RR leaves in Decmber, then another in January.
                
This is due to a new A330-200 entering the fleet this month!
I couldnt care were they head off to personally aslong as i dont have to fly on them ever again! The only time i will be happy seeing it again is if it were turned into coke cans and im drinking from one!

Our first refurbished B763GE VH-OGQ is already out online, it looks nice and refreshed!  
Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
How come QF has kept them for so long if they are not good to work in? I seem to remember from earlier threads that the aircraft have hopless galley configs or something, but that could have been changed to QF standard during D-check, right?

Horrid aircraft to work on in the J Class galley, but not so bad in the Economy as there are 2 galley's that serve the economy section, and we also get an extra crew member onboard which is always handy.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 8):
I believe QF originally had plans to operate the type for 7 years (7 year lease) and then return the aircraft to BA... In the end I believe BA didn't want the aircraft therefore QF purchased / leased the aircraft to fill the B787 gap...

This is a common misconception, BA DO NOT OWN THESE AIRCRAFT, they are ex BA aircraft, but are owned by a leasing company.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
I believe the new QF have come to terms and realised there is room for both QF and JQ on key holiday routes with OOL as an example with mainline resuming services...

there is actually a huge frequent flyer base in the OOL region, but QF resumed services to OOL to offer a premium product to compete with VA, and where both JQ and QF fly to together, we seem to do extreemly well.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 13):
Thanks! I can only assume that QF will continue to fly to HNL past March (they're leaving it a bit late to make an announcement...), so it will be interesting to see which direction they go in with the equipment...

The HNL flight is full of FF's burning points and usually filled with that. I think you will actually see an International A332 fill in from the 763 with a 36J 199Y config (it will actually go to 195 due to Long Haul Crew Rest requirements)
But dont underestimate this route, it would connect quiet well with the EK flights, so if it carries the EK flight code on it, i think you may even see it revert to A333.

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 16):
As part of the refresh bassinets will be removed from the J cabin on domestic-configured aircraft. This suggests to me that the international aircraft will be a sub-fleet of some description.

i was under the impression that the bassinets will remain, but will be the A380 style bassinets.



Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 26, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 5537 times:

Anyone know which two are leaving first?

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 27, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5730 times:

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 25):

The new Airbus arrives on the 25th of November VH-EBV... The registration ring any bells...

I'm aware the aircraft do not belong to BA... When the leases expired in 2007 (787 due to enter service 2008?) QF established a new leasing term for each aircraft... Correct me if I'm wrong...

The point I was making in regards to HNL is the fact everyone has the idea glued in their head QF will be handing the route to JQ ... This was the plan with the OOL services and it's 2012 & QF have returned... The HNL service will continue to be served by mainline...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5568 times:

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 25):
This is a common misconception, BA DO NOT OWN THESE AIRCRAFT, they are ex BA aircraft, but are owned by a leasing company

BA did own the aircraft until circa 2008 when they sold them to a bank that now leases them to QF. They are also all registered with that company in their British registrations, even though they are on the Australian register and with VH-*** sequence.


User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5526 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 19):
I'm sure they flew SYD-DRW-BOM-SYD.

That is correct, which is why is specified BOM-SYD.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 20):
I can't see how a 212t A333 could do SYD-PEK with a commercial load.

I am not sure if the fleet has ever been upgraded, but 333 was the main equipment on SYD-PEK. I was surprised that the 332s were not used more on this route after they joined the fleet.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 24):
The non-stop eastbound leg with the A333 didn't last long.

It lasted at least two years.

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 25):
I think you will actually see an International A332 fill in from the 763 with a 36J 199Y config (it will actually go to 195 due to Long Haul Crew Rest requirements)

The four crew rest seats with extended leg room are above the 199Y as they are not certified to be occupied for take-off and landing and, therefore, cannot be sold. For a while there was one international 332 with 201Y (EBL?) with standard legroom crew rest seats. They could be used for take off and landing, but were never sold as it was permanently curtained crew rest (like the international 763s). This aircraft converted to 199Y at the start of AKL-LAX ops.



I have always wondered why, now that range/payload is not an issue, the 332 config is not something like 24J226Y. It seems that this config is a better 763 replacement and also more suited to the Perth and Asia flying it now does.

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 25):
i was under the impression that the bassinets will remain, but will be the A380 style bassinets.

The bassinets will be removed from business on domestic configured aircraft and an A380-style bassinet will be positioned at 1JK on international configured 763s. What other differences there will be on refreshed international 763s is anyone's guess. New seat covers on the Dreamtime seats? Millennium seats with more legroom? No other differences?

[Edited 2012-11-22 13:39:43]

[Edited 2012-11-22 13:44:11]

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 30, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5343 times:

The need for increased Domestic capacity saw QANTAS take seven Rolls-Royce powered 767-300s from British Airways which had become surplus to requirements in London due to traffic lost to the Channel Tunnel. Due to their different internal specifications, including different galleys these machines have been restricted to the Domestic network since their arrival.

http://www.theqantassource.com/b763.html

The aircraft originally arrived at QF on a 7 year lease, when the lease expired the aircraft had been purchased by a leasing firm and leased back to QF...

Looking further into the QF B763 fleet the aircraft operated with a configuration of 6F / 17J / 212Y in 1988...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5236 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 29):
That is correct, which is why is specified BOM-SYD.

Well, I felt the need to clarify it, because it wasn't clear from that specification that you are referring to eastbound only. Call me pedantic if you like.

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 18):
I am pretty sure that if a 763 can make SYD-HNL-SYD, then the 333 will do also.
http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airl...raft-seat-map-boeing-763/global/en

Specifies the "Range with full payload" as 9085km, while the A333's "range with full payload" is specified as 7000km. Not sure whether full payload = MZFW or max pax load+bags, I suspect the latter, but something isn't right.


User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2152 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5060 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting thegeek (Reply 31):
Specifies the "Range with full payload" as 9085km, while the A333's "range with full payload" is specified as 7000km. Not sure whether full payload = MZFW or max pax load+bags, I suspect the latter, but something isn't right.

How come QF's A333s have such limited range? Did QF order the lowest-MTOW version? How old are those aircraft now? Factory fresh A333s can fly 10,000km with 300 pax.



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5554 posts, RR: 6
Reply 33, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4980 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 28):
They are also all registered with that company in their British registrations

What registration are you referring to? They can't be on both the VH & G register at the same time, the G rego would have to have been cancelled before they could be VH registered.


Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4945 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 33):

He must be referring to the original VH-ZXA to ZXG registrations?

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineJQflightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 940 posts, RR: 1
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4897 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 28):
BA did own the aircraft until circa 2008 when they sold them to a bank that now leases them to QF. They are also all registered with that company in their British registrations, even though they are on the Australian register and with VH-*** sequence.

Yes i know they OWNED them, but they havnt for a while...



Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
User currently offlineemirates773 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 40 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4891 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 28):
BA did own the aircraft until circa 2008 when they sold them to a bank that now leases them to QF. They are also all registered with that company in their British registrations, even though they are on the Australian register and with VH-*** sequence.
Quoting gemuser (Reply 33):
What registration are you referring to? They can't be on both the VH & G register at the same time, the G rego would have to have been cancelled before they could be VH registered.

An example of this is:

B767-336ER (25443/419) with BA as G-BNWP was leased to Qantas as VH-ZXG.

When it was sold by BA it was bought by a leasing company which I think is/was owned by ANZ as G-BNWP Aircraft Pty Ltd. This is also applicable to the other 6 frames when they were sold. i.e G-BNWE became VH-ZXA on lease and eventually purchased by G-BNWE Aircraft Pty Ltd.



Emirates. Keep Discovering.
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 4737 times:

Quoting JQflightie (Reply 35):
Yes i know they OWNED them, but they havnt for a while...

Probably have not owned them since 2007 when the lease expired...?

Quoting emirates773 (Reply 36):
An example of this is:

B767-336ER (25443/419) with BA as G-BNWP was leased to Qantas as VH-ZXG.

So in other words the aircraft have been sold to the leasing firm with the UK registration which in turn have been leased back to QF with the ZX* registrations (which the aircraft have been operating under since 2000)...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineemirates773 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 40 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4730 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 37):
So in other words the aircraft have been sold to the leasing firm with the UK registration which in turn have been leased back to QF with the ZX* registrations (which the aircraft have been operating under since 2000)...

The UK registration was cancelled upon the uptake of the lease to Qantas on the aircraft.
e.g G-BNWP De Reg : 10th November 2000 from UK, Reg'd VH-ZXG 10th November 2000 to Autralian Register.

Ownership Transferred to G-BNWP Aircraft Pty Ltd on the 2nd May 2006. I think I have read somewhere that the UK registration was used in the company names as BA may still have held an interest in them initially possible with a buy back clause, however I could be completely wrong on that. I shall check if I can.



Emirates. Keep Discovering.
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4675 times:

Quoting emirates773 (Reply 38):
Ownership Transferred to G-BNWP Aircraft Pty Ltd on the 2nd May 2006. I think I have read somewhere that the UK registration was used in the company names as BA may still have held an interest in them initially possible with a buy back clause, however I could be completely wrong on that. I shall check if I can.

BA hold a first right of repurchase clause on the aircraft I believe which is why for trading purposes they are still G-BNW* registered. BA might want to buy a couple back when QF dispose next year as in-house spare parts doners to the 767 fleet as BA really is the only major operator of that engine type, they did scrap BNLB/C for that purpose on the 747 side of things.


User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 40, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 30):
Due to their different internal specifications, including different galleys these machines have been restricted to the Domestic network since their arrival.

The ex-BA 763s were used on the Tasman (not sure if only AKL?) for a time. They featured ACE galleys which were also on the leased BA 744, which operated QF25 SYD-BNE-AKL-LAX and QF127 SYD-HKG. The equipment was interchangeable. The aircraft in AKL:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Matthew Johnston
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Colin Hunter - AirTeamImages



There was anecdotal evidence of a one-off PER-NRT-PER sub.

[Edited 2012-11-23 12:04:15]

User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4500 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 32):
How come QF's A333s have such limited range? Did QF order the lowest-MTOW version? How old are those aircraft now?
Quoting thegeek (Reply 20):
Did the A333s have an upgrade to their MTOW in service, not reflected on the qantas.com.au website?

The initial three 333s were delivered in a Domestic configuration. All were identified as -301s. I am assuming they were derated to lower landing and navigation charges. The same thing was done with the initial domestic -200s (EBA-D), which were upgraded when they went to JQ. These pics show -QPA as a model -301 on delivery, then as a -303 after they were converted to international configuration. You can note the difference externally as there is plugged windows on the international configurations aft of doors 1 and forward of doors 2 due to toilet and galley structures not present on the domestic aircraft.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Micheil Keegan
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Martin Eadie



My point is, perhaps Qantas has not updated the range information on the website (as hypothesised by thegeek)?


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 42, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4387 times:

Quoting emirates773 (Reply 38):
The UK registration was cancelled upon the uptake of the lease to Qantas on the aircraft.
e.g G-BNWP De Reg : 10th November 2000 from UK, Reg'd VH-ZXG 10th November 2000 to Autralian Register.

Ownership Transferred to G-BNWP Aircraft Pty Ltd on the 2nd May 2006. I think I have read somewhere that the UK registration was used in the company names as BA may still have held an interest in them initially possible with a buy back clause, however I could be completely wrong on that. I shall check if I can.

Thanks for clearing the lease term and conditions for us... I'm not 100% on it being fact but from memory BA didn't want the aircraft when the leases expired therefore Qantas extended the lease...? Again I don't any source I've just heard word of mouth...

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 40):
The ex-BA 763s were used on the Tasman (not sure if only AKL?) for a time. They featured ACE galleys which were also on the leased BA 744, which operated QF25 SYD-BNE-AKL-LAX and QF127 SYD-HKG. The equipment was interchangeable. The aircraft in AKL:
Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 40):
There was anecdotal evidence of a one-off PER-NRT-PER sub.

Correct... The aircraft have operated the odd International & Tasman service... The issue faced with ace galley / ZX* aircraft is the lack of galley stowage space for equipment and carts especially double catered services... Another issue is the fact there are no chillers on board the aircraft...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5554 posts, RR: 6
Reply 43, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4342 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 39):
BA hold a first right of repurchase clause on the aircraft I believe which is why for trading purposes they are still G-BNW* registered.

But they are NOT G registered aircraft! That was cancelled on 10 Nov 2001 as per reply 38. The company names G-BNW* are NOT aircraft registrations! They are registered company names, sure, but it is confusing to just call them "registrations" on an airliners forum.


Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinepeterinlisbon From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4317 times:

Out of curiousity, what is an ACE galley and what is so bad about them?

User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4260 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 43):
But they are NOT G registered aircraft! That was cancelled on 10 Nov 2001 as per reply 38. The company names G-BNW* are NOT aircraft registrations! They are registered company names, sure, but it is confusing to just call them "registrations" on an airliners forum.

Numerous people including me have stated the situation of these aircraft correctly very clearly, nobody has said that the aircraft operate under G-BNW* registrations nor are they current British CAA registred or on the British books. You have essentially repated what myself and emirates773 have already explained.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 46, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4281 times:

Quoting peterinlisbon (Reply 44):
Out of curiousity, what is an ACE galley and what is so bad about them?

Atlas Equipment... Qantas


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Claridge-king


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © M Tian



Ace Equipment... British Airways "Ace"


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nitin Sarin - AirTeamImages


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © M Radzi Desa



The photo's I've provided are demonstration photo's of Atlas equipment and Ace equipment...

EK413

[Edited 2012-11-23 16:08:15]


Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4227 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 46):

The photo's I've provided are for demonstration reason's ONLY...

What else would we be doing with them?


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 48, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4210 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 47):

What else would we be doing with them?

When I said demonstration I was referring to the photo's not being that of a Qantas or British Airways aircraft...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4191 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 41):
The initial three 333s were delivered in a Domestic configuration. All were identified as -301s.

So A333s #4 through #10 were delivered from the factory as 233t MTOW versions, is that what you are saying? If so, it makes complete sense now.


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 50, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4099 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 48):
When I said demonstration I was referring to the photo's not being that of a Qantas or British Airways aircraft...

Ah thanks, I was genuinely confused. It's easily done(!)


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 51, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4067 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 50):

Easily confused and easily rectified... Cheers...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5554 posts, RR: 6
Reply 52, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4027 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 45):
nor are they current British CAA registred or on the British books

Then stop saying: (From reply 39)

Quote:

they are still G-BNW* registered

They are not!

Gemusr



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3812 times:

You've taken that reply totally out of context and I go on to say "for trading purposes" .

Now you're just being awkward. I will say it again, nobody in this thread has stated that they operate under G-BNW* registrations myself and emirates777 have explained correctly what the situation is with these aircraft.

[Edited 2012-11-24 03:36:22]

User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2253 posts, RR: 12
Reply 54, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3646 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 41):
These pics show -QPA as a model -301 on delivery, then as a -303 after they were converted to international configuration. You can note the difference externally as there is plugged windows on the international configurations aft of doors 1 and forward of doors 2 due to toilet and galley structures not present on the domestic aircraft.

Unless -QPA go some new GE engines and some other mods that go with it, it is still an A330-301. The person who tagged that second photo incorrectly listed it as a -303.

301 vs 303 has nothing to do with interior config, and everything to do with type of engines on the aircraft. In this case, the 303 means General Electric CF6-80E1A3, whereas the 301 means the aircraft has older General Electric CF6-80E1A2 engines.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-11-24 09:46:43]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 55, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3546 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 54):

I am absolutely aware that the type designation is nothing to do with the interior configuration (though I can see why you thunk that from what I had oreviously posted). Aren't the engines upgraded/uprated by reprogramming or replacing computer chips to allow for higher thrust (as well as other modifications)? They are the same physical engines though, aren't they?

The same was true for the domestic -200s on their transfer to JQi ops. If you check photos in the database for -EBA-D and -QPA-C, you will see what I mean. I do know that these aircraft were upgraded significantly after they were transferred out of domestic operations. The aircraft mentioned are more capable than they were on delivery. The initial plan for them was to be used solely as domestic aircraft. The first four -200s were even delivered with lightweight floors that cannot support an international J product.

So what you ask about the aircraft being modified with 'new engines' is correct - the aircraft were upgraded to match the international fleet. I have located five independent sources across the internet that make reference to, or identify that the aircraft were upgraded in the manner you describe (it took two minutes on Google).]

[Edited 2012-11-24 13:44:46]

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 56, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2957 times:

The 1st of 7 ex-BA B763 aircraft in the QF fleet is off to the desert middle of December...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 4707 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2914 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 40):
The ex-BA 763s were used on the Tasman (not sure if only AKL?) for a time

I believe that they popped up every now and then in CHC and NOU as well. Basically anything operated by Domestic.

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 40):
There was anecdotal evidence of a one-off PER-NRT-PER sub.

Yes, I remember a British poster arguing until they were blue in the face that it was impossible that QF couldn't do a double meal service on this route given that BA flys them into Sub-Saharan Africa and TATL.

However, from the anecdotal evidence it seems that EK413 is right that in Qantas service this was not possible because of the galley configuration not aligning with the rest of the fleet, and that the second meal service was a sandwich.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 42):
the lack of galley stowage space for equipment and carts especially double catered services
Quoting EK413 (Reply 42):
I'm not 100% on it being fact but from memory BA didn't want the aircraft when the leases expired therefore Qantas extended the lease...? Again I don't any source I've just heard word of mouth...

I don't think that BA not wanting them was not of itself the reason for them being extended. Rather, BA wasn't desperate to get them back and QF - despite all the problems with them - was happy to keep them due to the capacity they provided.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 58, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2877 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 57):

Cheers... I guess the lease price must've been appealing too...

The 1st bird is being retired middle of December  

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 57):

The galley config on BAs LH aircraft is different to the SH configuration. The QF aircraft are ex short haul at BA and at around the same time of their exit from BA service a few other SH birds were converted to LH. All of BAs 767s have the four main exists.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4691 posts, RR: 4
Reply 60, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2704 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 59):

Did the LH aircraft have chillers in the galleys?

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 4707 posts, RR: 4
Reply 61, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2699 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 59):
The QF aircraft are ex short haul at BA and at around the same time of their exit from BA service

Right, that makes a lot more sense.

This was a couple of years ago now, maybe 2010. But this poster was absolutely adamant that it was QF's gross incompetence that meant that they couldn't do a second meal service.

[Edited 2012-11-30 08:15:10]


Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2641 times:

The main difference is in the D2 galley I believe.

User currently offlineDitzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 63, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2619 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 62):
The main difference is in the D2 galley I believe.

Judging by the number of deactivated circuit breakers, I thought it was the rear galley that is much smaller on the SH configuration. A whole galley unit (a rear-facing unit) is missing. I think there is also a side facing unit aft of L4 and the toilet there is repositioned forward of L4. There is also a toilet forward of L3 on the LH configuration.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 60):
Did the LH aircraft have chillers in the galleys?

Yes, judging by the deactivated circuit breakers.

In stating the above, my only qualification is working on these aircraft and seeing the references to previous galley configurations.


User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2517 times:

Quoting Ditzyboy (Reply 63):

Yes I forgot about the rear facing unit. I know G-BNWD was one that was converted and that the work was fairly extensive, not just a rip Club Europe out and stick Club World in etc. In more recent times they could have really done with more SH birds as the fleet slack is virtually non existent, that's how LH substitutions are quite common these days.

Not aware of any 767s that have gone from long-haul to short.


User currently offlineGCPET From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2012, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2351 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 64):
Yes I forgot about the rear facing unit. I know G-BNWD was one that was converted and that the work was fairly extensive, not just a rip Club Europe out and stick Club World in etc. In more recent times they could have really done with more SH birds as the fleet slack is virtually non existent, that's how LH substitutions are quite common these days. Not aware of any 767s that have gone from long-haul to short.

The Long-Haul BA 767's that were previously Short-Haul don't have the fuel dumping option which is one way of telling if they're ex SH.

GCPET



If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
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...
Future Of Two Ex-PAA 747s, Incl. PGE Testbed? posted Sun Jul 15 2012 18:49:41 by fanofjets
Future Of BA's 744 And 77W Fleets. posted Tue Dec 20 2011 15:20:28 by CX747
The Logic Of Joint BA/QF SYD-LHR Via BKK posted Wed Oct 26 2011 06:06:53 by bastew
The Future Of QF 73 And QF 74. posted Fri Apr 9 2010 22:19:20 by SexyAdonis
Future Of Sun-Air (BA) Franchise! posted Fri Jun 26 2009 02:23:34 by AIR MALTA
Future Of BA Franchises posted Wed Oct 31 2007 11:41:16 by Baexecutive
QF Buys 7 Ex BA 767s posted Fri Sep 28 2007 13:04:44 by Flyboysp
Future Of Bmi As BA Franchise Carrier? posted Fri Apr 6 2007 11:12:10 by BestWestern
The Future Of BA Connect posted Mon Jun 26 2006 20:58:55 by Sam1987
Future Of BA @ LGW If Open Skies Goes Ahead? posted Wed Oct 26 2005 02:10:07 by Englandair