Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Doesn't AN MkII Use Their 762's?  
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1443 times:

Hey guys,

I have a rather interesting question. I have it on reasonable authority that AN still owns their 762's (the RM's).

What I can't understand is why they are not using at least some of them on some routes? Surely it would be less expensive to fly the 762 (if they could get a reasonable loading) free of lease - rather than a leased A320? The increase in capacity and revenue on SYD / MEL - PER would be great!

I heard a few rumors they may be used around Christmas time for a few runs but other than that are being put into long term storage.

Any ideas?

Cheers,

mb

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJsmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1377 times:

Because they are weary and old and need to be retired like the graceful old ladies that they are....

However, you are right - it would make more sense if they are trying to generate as much revenue as possible, esp over the Christmas period.

Not that I would fly AN or anything like that  Smile

Let's not get into this argument again!!!


User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1349 times:

Jsmith,

They are not that tired and old. Just a lot of cycles for that particular type of aircraft and they have been properly maintained.

What if they set seat prices to just cover running costs and then set about recouping more from freight?

Cheers,

mb


User currently offlineJsmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1331 times:

I was waiting for that response from you....do you have some kind of equity interest in AN by chance?

Just kidding...I know the a/c have been maintained properly over the years. In fact, my last AN flights were on their 2 oldest 767s and they performed well on the MEL-PER-MEL sectors.

It is a shame to see one of its brothers sitting on the ramp at SYD, where I am now based and work.

It would be good to see some other types of a/c in the skies again - one can look at QF737s only so much before it all starts to get ho hum. Do you agree?


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16368 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1323 times:

I don't think the 762 would be a wise choice for AN II. While they may cheap to operate from an ownership-cost standpoint (assuming they're owned & fully depreciated), it is a rather large aircraft....beyond SYS-MEL/Brisbane, are there many routes that the 762 could operate on with high frequency? Moreover, is the 762 is right aircraft for further expansion? Seems they would need a narrowbody to complement the 762 which would increase costs.

Also, aren't the AN A320's currently suffering from v low loads anyway?

Neil





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1297 times:

Jsmith,

Yeah, it's getting a bit monotonous seeing those red tails everywhere down at SYD. We need more blue, ha ha.

No equity interest in AN whatsoever (except perhaps a tonne of FFP's), it was just my favourite airline. It's in the interest of the Australian flying public to have 2 full service carriers competing against one another.

The low end of the market is just not that big to support two carriers. Let's face it, the administrators are not airline managers - we'll see if SQ's involvement initialises changes to AN MkII's fortunes.

What we need to see is a commitment from interested parties ASAP so AN can start to claw back corporate a/c's. Although that will be difficult.

Anyhow all I was suggesting was that they could ramp up capacity quite easily, undercut DJ / QF on routes like MEL / SYD - PER and subsidise the flights via freight.

Cheers,

mb


User currently offlineRmm From Australia, joined Feb 2001, 525 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

Mx5,
Well I think it's partially due because AN owe Boeing quite a bit of money.
I don't think Boeing would part with the operational spares until they got some
money back.
Airbus on the other hand have done the complete opposite and are supplying
spares and support for A320's as an inducement for potential buyers.

Rmm


User currently offlineThe Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1287 times:

If they can't fill an A320, how can they possibly fill a B767-200?

The Coachman



M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1272 times:

Coachman,

A good point, but if we had the ability to see what the actual loads are and which ones could be increased we could see the 762 slotted in there.

As far as I am aware, the only routes that are failing to deliver at this point in time were the "SYD-MEL-SYD". That was a press report about a week or so ago - after which the Admin said that yields were up after GW lounges were re-opened.

As stated before, if they can use the 762 on say SYD-PER even with 'break even' seat prices they can add coverage, and increase value with freight.

Alternately their is a lack of capacity to CNS. Again, run the darn things around DEC / JAN two return trips a day and fill it with tourists. Coverage is important even if it just covers costs.

Same with OOG. (Not with the 762)

All it take is a bit of imagination and some strategy.

Cheers,

mb


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16368 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1263 times:

AN II's best chance of survival is cost minimization (whether they become a LCC or FS). Hence one aircraft type....whether A320 or 733. 762 is the least flexible...and also the oldest.

Neil




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1251 times:

Neil,

Where do people keep coming up with the "one" fleet idea from? Keeping maintenance staff on for a small fleet of 762's is not going to add up to too much.

We are not talking about ANII being a complete low cost carrier. It can never be that - not with the infrastructure in place. The Admin, SQ, Lew / Fox and others realise this.

Given the dynamics of the market, and having the ability to add load / v's frequency adds up to a more flexible fleet for the current Australian conditions. Regardless of age, these a/c can probably be slotted in to take up competition with QF. A ressurection of AN needs serious short and long term strategy and thinking. What is worse? To have an inflexible fleet or one that can easily ramp up loads if required?

Remember that AN's 762 were used for freight out of peek hence the excellent returns they got from those aircraft. It will take AN mkII several years to grab back market share, this is where long term thinking, getting back freight contracts and winning corporate Australia are important. It also needs to have decent route structure, FFP, Lounges, and at the very least code shared regionals under the banner.

We have seen in this country how short term thinking ends up with long term debt and eventual failure. Particularly with utilities, infrastructure projects and the failure of corporatised public entities.

Time to think beyond short term gain for long term benefit.

Cheers,

mb


User currently offlineThestooges From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1244 times:

From what I heard, before the collapse passengers were trying to avoid flying the the 762's just cause of their bad reputuation i.e. grounding. If they want to revamp Ansett by restoring public confidence in the airline it's not going to help having those things hanging around. Besides Qantas is getting rid of theirs soon anyway.

User currently offlineTullamarine From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1243 times:

MX5_Boy, I admire your love of AN but on this I think you are wrong.

The A320 is the most flexible member of the AN fleet. It can cover everyone of AN's domestic routes, has low operating costs, is liked by pax and is the youngest member as well.

I loved travelling on the 762s but unfortunately they don't have a future in AN. They are old and have an unfortunate recent history which is a pax turn-off whether this is justified or not.

Realistically there are only 2 options for AN at this point, Fox/Lew or liquidation. Under either option the 767s are on their way out so the administrators are probably correct in keeping them parked.

Seeing them sitting alone at MEL and SYD is sad but unfortunately their time has come.

As far as your rumour that they are still owned by AN, I have a feeling this might be true. NZ were in the process of selling them to GECAS but it appears this may not have been completed before AN collapsed. The only positive of this is that the 762s can now be sold (for a very reduced amount) by the administrators for the benefit of AN creditors rather than the benefit of the NZ bank account.



717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9210 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1230 times:

ANStaff and Singapore Airlines please...... I would love to see that!

User currently offlineSkystar From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1226 times:

Well, according to analysts (as reported in The Age), an ANstaff and SIA partnership is ideal to keep AN.

Reports have ANstaff getting ready to put in a bid very soon; apparently they have secured the $500 million they wanted.

I wouldn't simply write them off entirely, I would foresee them in a partnership however. Boeing and Airbus have been talking to ANstaff, so they must have some credibility.

Cheers,

Justin


User currently offlineB727-200 From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1051 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1211 times:


Five of the B762's are fully owned by AN and two more are under something similar to a finance lease. I have heard that the reason they are not being run at the moment is because of the expense of getting them back in the air and keeping them there.

I have also heard the sale did not go through with GECAS because the two-man cockpit status that these aircraft have is only recognised in Australia by CASA and not by the FAA. If operated overseas they would require an FE, which is scaring off potential buyers.

I do agree that there is some merit in flying a small fleet of these aircraft, if for nothing other than to increase cargo capacity pre-Christmas. It is well known that there is a shortage of overnight freight capacity SYD/MEL-PER pre Christmas, with the B762 able to carry 10,000kg with a full pax load.

Considering that there is no longer the AN evening and morning B767's on these markets, the problem has surely been compounded. Taking this into account, one would expect to be able to achieve the full load Westbound and about 5,000kg East at a rate per KG that would cover 60% of the round trip costs.

Having said this, I doubt that we will see it happen because the Mark twins made redundant the remaining Australian based intellect that was at AN last week.

B727-200.


User currently offlineOz777 From Australia, joined Jun 2000, 521 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1209 times:

While the airframes are freehold, I think you will find that the engines are leased, and this is one of the reasons that it is very difficult to get the 762's up again.

As to the issue over the 2 man cockpits. As originally built the aircraft were certified by the FAA as three man operation, although the type certificate from Boeing allows for 2 person operation. When the aircraft were reconfigured, they adopted the Boeing rating, and from my understanding there is no restriction on a 2 person cockpit for those aircraft.

The plain simple fact is the aircraft are high cycle. There is an "advanced maintenance" alert on them, and for this reason would be one of the most expensive 767's to operate in pax config.

From an aircraft broker I know, there is still a fair a mount of interest in the 767's for freight conversion - and the RAAF is looking for several aircraft for conversion to tankers. The 767 could fulfil that role admirably.

Oz777


User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1205 times:

With all the uncertainty over its future, who - in their right mind - would give AN a freight contract now anyway??  Insane  Insane

User currently offlineB727-200 From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1051 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1204 times:

Ceilidh,

There is always overflow, so it is not a matter of having a dedicated contract as much as picking up the excess that is available. At the moment, that should be ample.

B727-200.


User currently offlineThadocta From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1194 times:

Forgive me for jumping in if this comment has already been attacked.... but the 762's have been properly maintained? You are kidding, right? These are the same aircraft that have been grounded by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority TWICE in the last twelve months due to Ansett (version 1) not complying with maintenance directives issued by Boeing.

And you claim they are properly maintained? Don't make me laugh.

Dave


User currently offlineUSAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1180 times:

This summer I flew AN 910, SYD-CNS, on a 767-200, and it did not appear to be aging in the least...Im sad that their not being used  Sad

Greg



Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1165 times:

Dave,

The 762's were and still are properly maintained. Rather than make such rash statments that they were not take the following quote from someone I know:

""As a Maintenance Development Engineer for Ansett, I can safely say that there was no problem with our 767s. The problem was CASA and the media.

The only things CASA had problems with once they audited our system of maintenance were stupid things like having too many life jackets and torches on board the aircraft. What a crock of the proverbial. Then CASA - who are supposed to be the "independent umpire" - handed over confidential photographs to the media involving cracking in pylons which were fixed per the aircraft's Structural Repair Manual. In other words the cracking was within tolerance, it was repairable and the fact that we found them and repaired it shows that our system of maintenance works.""

Cheers,

mb


User currently offlineJsmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1157 times:

mb

Looks like I opened a can of worms with this one - re the maintenance of the AN 762s!!

We might hear by the end of the week whether the Lew/Fox bid has been accepted. Do you think we will see a fleet of blue tail A320s in the skies again - permanently?

I am all for choice in the market and have no problems with AN returning to full strength. I just like to be provided with options when I want to fly.

If newer A320s come on board - I hope they are IAE-powered - those engines look cool on the A320.

Oh - and although not entirely related - RIP Sabena!


User currently offlineThadocta From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1149 times:

And allowing an aircraft to fly with the evacuation slides inoperable?

And allowing an AD to go unaddressed for several months, in contravention to Boeing's instructions?

Doesn't sound like an adequate maintenance regime to me.

Dave


User currently offlineSkystar From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1146 times:

Jsmith,

Given that Lew/Fox will be flying A32xs intended for UA, you will find that they will be V2500 A320s.

Cheers,

Justin


25 Mx5_boy : Jsmith, The biggest problem with the 762's is the public's perception after the ridiculous media beat up they received. No one knows why CASA reacted
26 Jsmith : Yay - IAE powered A320s. Bring them on. Is it confirmed that such aircraft are coming from a deferred UA order? mb I would be surprised if DJ took ove
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...
Why Doesn't Westjet Advertise On Their Planes? posted Fri Mar 8 2002 19:54:20 by Ba777-236
Why Doesn't HA Use Wingwalkers? posted Tue May 23 2006 21:44:18 by Midex461
Why Doesn't CX Use 777s Longhaul? posted Sun Jul 18 2004 09:45:00 by ACB777
Why Does Qantas Use Their A330's For Cityflyer? posted Wed May 14 2003 06:03:25 by Apollo13
Why Doesn't Air NZ Keep Ansett In Their Group? posted Sun Nov 11 2001 03:28:43 by United Airline
Why Doesn't Delta Paint Their Planes Faster posted Sun Nov 4 2001 18:45:07 by Critter592
Why Doesn't Disney Start An Airline? posted Sat Mar 17 2001 00:20:05 by Exusair
Why Doesn't American Airlines Still Use 747's posted Thu Aug 17 2000 01:13:01 by Zeppelin5
Why Doesn't AA Have 'Economy Plus' On The 777s? posted Sat Dec 9 2006 20:58:13 by Gh123
Why Doesn't NZ Re-enter The SYD-LAX Market? posted Sun Nov 12 2006 05:06:12 by ZKNBX