mig17
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Thu May 11, 2017 1:50 pm

parapente wrote:
There are many types of one stop flight and many 'classes' of passenger.Its important to distinguish which ones we are talking about.Indeed the same person can be 2 types -I know I am one of them!
If you are first/business even Premium you are far less 'price elastic' for most you are not 'price elastic' at all as you are not paying for the flight anyway!
If (say) you are flying business class with your flat bed fantastic food,great entertainment and privacy then non stop is the way to go.I would (and have) choose it every time.
But on holidays travelling economy with my family I would not just stop ( refuel or make a connection) I would turn it into a part of the holiday whether this be Singapore/kl/Dubai etc and indeed have.Spending the money saved on 48 hours wherever.

Far more importantly however is the fact that Qantas will have researched all these peramiters to death.Just a Singapore will have done before them.Clearly the answer is a big yes.The only question is 'how big'.
A 359url will take 250 pax in the right balance of classes.The 778 will take more 270? But drink more fuel.Thats for them to decide -except- I don't think that will be the deciding factor in the slightest....

For Qantas the days of the 744 and 380 are coming to an end - no not tomorrow but as sure as night follows day this move to non stop will hasten it.
So the 'total' order will all be about choosing the 350-1000/1100 or the 779/10.This is where IMHO Boeing have the upper hand.But again it all depends what their volume projections are going forwards and that's the one thing they will never let leak out as it gives away the answer to A or B.
But make no mistake this is going to be one hell of a fight! Look forward to it!



You are absolutely right. We are speacking here of a small subfleet of 6 ULH planes. Their purpose will be to allow Qantas to offer non-stop flights to it's frequent flyer "elite members" who are ready to pay more to avoid correspondance.

Both the A350ULR and the 777-8X can do it and in the end a difference of 30 pax, a few tonnes of payload or a few tonnes of burnt fuel are irrelevant. Qantas doesn't care which one is optimized for the task.They will look at the bigger picture. Is the A380 realy leaving and are they going to have a 787/A350 widebody fleet or a 787/777-X one.

Only point I disagree with is on the 777-10X. Like I said in the SIA 777-9X topic, it's not looking like it's going to happen any time soon. Same for the A350-1100 for now.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 8838
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 9:25 am

mig17 wrote:
Both the A350ULR and the 777-8X can do it and in the end a difference of 30 pax, a few tonnes of payload or a few tonnes of burnt fuel are irrelevant.

In an industry where 1 to 2% performance PIPs are highly valued... you can be assured that your statement above is less-than-accurate.

No airline is going to overlook "a few tonnes" of ANYTHING, in making a cost comparison.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
redroo
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 9:49 am

I've said before but if you look at QF long term plans it is to standardise around the 787. They are chasing the high yield, mainly ex Australia passenger and as such the days of big people movers are going. The 787 will replace the a330 across Asia and then eventually on some key domestic routes. The 747 are going.

IMHO and speaking to people at QF the A380 will not be replaced either. They are not loved. They are "needy" aircraft was the turn of phrase used and they are hard to fill on all but trunk routes. The 787 is perfect for them as it enables them to fly to almost anywhere from any Aussie capital city and its goldilocks size means they can fill it.

That just leaves the UULH to London and New York. This is boeings to lose. The 778 will give them the distance to get to New York and a bit more capacity for those routes that they really fill a 787. There is commonality with the 787 which is important for a small fleet.

Any A380 deposits will go to A320s for JQ
 
mig17
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 10:39 am

LAX772LR wrote:
mig17 wrote:
Both the A350ULR and the 777-8X can do it and in the end a difference of 30 pax, a few tonnes of payload or a few tonnes of burnt fuel are irrelevant.

In an industry where 1 to 2% performance PIPs are highly valued... you can be assured that your statement above is less-than-accurate.

No airline is going to overlook "a few tonnes" of ANYTHING, in making a cost comparison.

Depends, if the 777-8X is better for the job, but Qantas will buy some A350-900 or -1000 in the near future, they will chose the A350ULR. If they are interested in some 777-9X for the future, they will take the 777-8X. The fleet commonality savings and contract negociation can easely outweigh "a few tonnes" on 6 aircrafts dedicated to 2 or 3 image flagship destinations.

If like redroo just said, there is no plan for A350-900 or 1000 or 777-9X at Qantas or if they want more than "just 6" ULH planes, there, they will choose the better one for the job. Maining here the 777-8X who has more performance.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 24212
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 10:48 am

parapente wrote:
For Qantas the days of the 744 and 380 are coming to an end - no not tomorrow but as sure as night follows day this move to non stop will hasten it.


Hold on a minute, Qantas plans to fly the A380 for at least another 12 years. That's not what I would call "coming to an end".
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4580
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 11:05 am

zeke wrote:
qf789 wrote:
As stated above 787's will replace the A330's


He just stated the obvious that at some stage they will replace the 747 and A330, he did not specify 787s. Since then Qantas has said it will keep 11 747s for a while, the ones that were due for retirement in 15/16 did not go. They now look like retiring 5 by 2019.


Those plans changed when QF announced the delivery dates for the remaining 4 Dream)liners will be brought forward 12 months (All 8 by end of 2018). The 5 B744's you mentioned will be gone, -OJM scheduled to be retired in July 2017, -OEB on charter duties leaving -OJU,S,T. The -400ER's will serve until at least 2020-22.

https://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-brings- ... deliveries

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
redroo
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 10:07 pm

@KarelXWB By "coming to an end" I mean they will not replace them in 10-12 years time when the frames start hitting 20 years old.

QF had a very long internal debate about whether to invest the money on refurbishing the A380 with the 787s coming on board. Now my read of that is that they knew they had to do it because the A380 product is previous generation but that they didn't want to spend money on an aircraft that they don't see a future for.

The recent QF investor presentation clearly states that the plan is to chase the higher yielding passenger and use smaller aircraft.

The 787 is much cheaper to operate than the A380 as well.

If the western PER works, over the long term I think we will see London become completely B787 and those A380 deployed to Singapore, Hong Kong or USA. Over time the USA routes are going to fragment and QF will offer multiple dailies to LAX and SFO (prob daily) from SYD, MEL and BNE. I wouldn't be surprised if SYD JNB becomes PER JNB sometime too.

Does beg the question about the long term plans for F at QF. If the UULR aircraft is viable then F will be on there and do SYD LHR and SYD JFK.

I really hope they don't have F on subfleets of 787. QF have made some bad decisions with multiple aircraft configs over the years introducing cost and complexity.

Sorry. Long rambling post. It's early!!
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 10:25 pm

Interesting redroo.

It would seem QF would be a shoe in for the 778 for its range and volume for SYD-LHR and then probably SYD-JFK, MEL-LHR and maybe some of the DFW flights they will add from BNE and MEL plus also SYD. Which then to me makes a fleet of 779's to cover the bigger O&D markets of SYD/MEL to LAX.

Various 787's could probably cover the rest long term once A380's, 744's and A330's are gone.
 
parapente
Posts: 1776
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 10:56 pm

Karel I did say 'not tomorrow'
Having said that accepting their stated proposals...How does an A380 work when (Take SQ as a very good example) when you strip out Business and Premium? (As They in their vision are now proposing to do on the non stop flight).
IMHO it is simply not possible to do non stop prem (in either 778's or 359ulr's) and have A380's doing the same thing.Somethings gotta give no?
 
travelhound
Posts: 1456
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Fri May 12, 2017 11:02 pm

The A380's will probably be re-prioritised.

My understanding is “First” class will be going to the upper deck and premium economy will be going down to the lower deck.

QANTAS have made statements to the effect A380's will be used for parts of the Asian network during peak periods. If this is the case we could see them fitted out in a high-density seating layout.

For me a significant question revolves around first class passengers and how QANTAS plan to cater for this market once the 787 (no first class) starts to replace on the A380 on core long haul routes.

......and this is why I suspect the 777X will be the aircraft of choice. It will have the flexibility to replace the A380's on core routes, offer the full range of cabin seating offerings and fly the distances required with a viable payload to make one stop flying commercially and operationally viable.

I suspect current planed 787-9 routes (PER-LHR) could be replaced with 778X/9’s allowing QANTAS to offer first class on these flights. If QANTAS did purchase the A350ULR, they would simply be in a similar product to what they currently are (will be) with the 787-9. They wouldn’t have the opportunity to diversify their product offering.

Ultimately, I see the A380’s being used to fly to SE Asia, North and South America and South Africa. From where I sit they could probably use a couple more.
 
redroo
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sat May 13, 2017 10:14 pm

+1 @travelhound

My sentiments exactly.

The 77X is going to be QFs long term bigger bird. Capable of doing the UULH to LHR and JFK, and offering more capacity for the trunk routes to HKG, SIN, LAX when the A380s eventually leave the fleet.
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 407
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 5:15 am

Re the non-stop vs one-stop discussion: A significant value-add to the non-stop is a major reduction in risk of a trip anomaly occurring. When on time-critical business travel, the last thing needed is a transfer to stop-over whereby an aircraft can go tech, awaiting inbound, luggage transfer mess up, greater weather risk, airport congestion delay, etc. With a non-stop, once you have boarded the plane, you're greatest risk of anomaly is over. This is not true on 1-stops ... greatest risk is still yet to come after boarding the first plane.

For many front-cabin business travelers, this inherent reliability matters a lot and adds significantly value (aka willing to pay $$$).

Let's not start warping numbers. There is no way the already commercialized 359-ULR is going to fly SYD-LHR with more than 170pax. Singapore will fly the same bird on 1000nm shorter segments with only 170 pax. For the same cabin configuration (no regular Y, just premium Y), significant additional seats will need to be blocked or removed (seats themselves are heavy). Not sure where this 250pax number came from but it's physically impossible in the -ULR as sold and available today. I don't see any way to get over 200 pax at a 280T MTOW.

An Airbus solution would require new changes and I suspect such changes would be expensive. As has been mentioned, switching to the originally-proposed 359R which is basically a shrink of the A35K, is one option and probably the most likely option. It doesn't look like there is room (at least not enough) to boost MTOW on the current A359 (or even revised/stiffened) 4-tire gear. Option 2 would be to shrink the -ULR to -800 length to remove structure weight, and free up MTOW for fuel / payload. This might create a more balance pax to floor space situation, but certainly is niche and even worse economically than the A359R option, so it's basically a non starter. Option 3 is a MTOW boost to the A35K and a light pax load, probably around 220pax. I suspect such option is more economical on a fuel / weight basis than A359R but would likely require significant R&D and certification cost to achieve, and doubt the market is anywhere close to being large enough to pencil out.
 
AsiaTravel
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:28 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 5:40 am

redroo wrote:
@KarelXWB By "coming to an end" I mean they will not replace them in 10-12 years time when the frames start hitting 20 years old.

QF had a very long internal debate about whether to invest the money on refurbishing the A380 with the 787s coming on board. Now my read of that is that they knew they had to do it because the A380 product is previous generation but that they didn't want to spend money on an aircraft that they don't see a future for.


Hasn't the A380 refurb already been stated to start in Q2 2018 once the QF9/10 switches to 787?
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 6:00 am

AsiaTravel wrote:
redroo wrote:
@KarelXWB By "coming to an end" I mean they will not replace them in 10-12 years time when the frames start hitting 20 years old.

QF had a very long internal debate about whether to invest the money on refurbishing the A380 with the 787s coming on board. Now my read of that is that they knew they had to do it because the A380 product is previous generation but that they didn't want to spend money on an aircraft that they don't see a future for.


Hasn't the A380 refurb already been stated to start in Q2 2018 once the QF9/10 switches to 787?


Though QF hasn't confirmed yet though it is speculated that A380 reconfiguration will take place from Q2 2018 which will include first class moved to upper deck and premium economy moved to main deck

https://www.ausbt.com.au/community/view ... s-upstairs
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 6:20 am

Okcflyer wrote:
Let's not start warping numbers. There is no way the already commercialized 359-ULR is going to fly SYD-LHR with more than 170pax. Singapore will fly the same bird on 1000nm shorter segments with only 170 pax. For the same cabin configuration (no regular Y, just premium Y), significant additional seats will need to be blocked or removed (seats themselves are heavy). Not sure where this 250pax number came from but it's physically impossible in the -ULR as sold and available today. I don't see any way to get over 200 pax at a 280T MTOW.


You are wrong.

Image
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
parapente
Posts: 1776
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 6:32 am

I think it will be a close decision between the 350 family and the 777x family (inc a 10 btw).It will be a very long term decision and effect the whole long distance fleet.
IMHO it will come down to their projections of numbers (bums on seats and what type of seats).
If lower (i.e. Emirates etc get the lions share of cattle class) then they may well go for the small,lighter more economical 350 family.But if they feel they can win more of the traffic then clearly it has to be the 777X family.
History suggests they are 'Boeing boys' but I think it's too close to call at this stage.
Going to be interesting!
BTW as an aside.Does BA 'give up 'on the gold plated blue ribbon kangaroo route or will they too get a sub fleet?Obviously in their case it would be the A350ulr as they will be operating 350's anyway.
Actually (thinking about it a bit) what BA do may have an impact on what Qantas do?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6874
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 8:07 am

I doubt BA would feature in their thinking as Qantas have made it increasingly obvious that they focus on premium Australia POS demand.

They do trade on their Australian-ness through promotions with Tourism Australia and the state tourist boards, but they only really care about what their Platinum (and higher) frequent flyers are willing to fly/pay for. They aren't flying BA, as the changes to Qantas Frequent Flyer make it very discouraging to do so.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
rotating14
Posts: 1299
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:54 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 11:09 am

zeke wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
Let's not start warping numbers. There is no way the already commercialized 359-ULR is going to fly SYD-LHR with more than 170pax. Singapore will fly the same bird on 1000nm shorter segments with only 170 pax. For the same cabin configuration (no regular Y, just premium Y), significant additional seats will need to be blocked or removed (seats themselves are heavy). Not sure where this 250pax number came from but it's physically impossible in the -ULR as sold and available today. I don't see any way to get over 200 pax at a 280T MTOW.


You are wrong.

Image



Not that you would know, but if this graph is indeed accurate, why is SQ only configuring their A3559Ulr with 168 seats? They must be aware that more seats were not feasible. At 12k nm in range, it seems like something is missing.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 11:33 am

It is obvious, to maximize yield, a premium only cabin layout has been selected. The number of seats is limited by the floor area available in the premium layout.

If you want to get there cheaper, people can shop around for multi stop flights. Discount Y fares have no place on such a long flight.

This is the same airline that has 77Ws configured with only 278 seats and no one blinks an eye at that.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 972
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 11:53 am

zeke wrote:
It is obvious, to maximize yield, a premium only cabin layout has been selected. The number of seats is limited by the floor area available in the premium layout.


It would be interesting to see the outcome, in terms of available space for premium seating, of similar constraints being applied to the B777-8's floor area. A ULR version would certainly not feature 10-abreast economy seating, for the reasons stated by Zeke, and such seating density is a main weapon of the 777 against A350s in general.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3302
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 5:39 pm

zeke wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
Let's not start warping numbers. There is no way the already commercialized 359-ULR is going to fly SYD-LHR with more than 170pax. Singapore will fly the same bird on 1000nm shorter segments with only 170 pax. For the same cabin configuration (no regular Y, just premium Y), significant additional seats will need to be blocked or removed (seats themselves are heavy). Not sure where this 250pax number came from but it's physically impossible in the -ULR as sold and available today. I don't see any way to get over 200 pax at a 280T MTOW.


You are wrong.

Image


Hey Zeke, I've got a couple of questions about your payload - range chart.

1) Will the A359ULR not be fuel volume limited at 280t MTOW?

2) The SYD-LHR & SIN-LHR ranges appear to be great circle distance. Won't they need to be increased for airways allowances and winds to get an accurate payload capability? (probably more important for understanding SYD-LHR than SIN-JFK)
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5378
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 7:56 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:

2) The SYD-LHR & SIN-LHR ranges appear to be great circle distance. Won't they need to be increased for airways allowances and winds to get an accurate payload capability? (probably more important for understanding SYD-LHR than SIN-JFK)


I believe the ESAD JFK-SIN is nearer to 8650nm. Not that I think this materially affect the payload that SIN is planning for the sector. In my view SYD-LHR has to be flown eastbound trans polar where the routing would essentially be great circle and winds for much of it on the tail.. Flying across China on their airways probably adds close to an hour on the flight time.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 8:44 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
1) Will the A359ULR not be fuel volume limited at 280t MTOW?

2) The SYD-LHR & SIN-LHR ranges appear to be great circle distance. Won't they need to be increased for airways allowances and winds to get an accurate payload capability? (probably more important for understanding SYD-LHR than SIN-JFK)


1) All current A350-900s have an additional capability of around 22-23 t of volume that is not used, the -1000 uses this volume in the center tank by changing the high level cutoff. The -900 and -1000 have the same wing volume.

2) Yes real world ground distance should be greater than the great circle, it will depend on conditions if the air nm will be greater or less than great circle. For example SIN-JFK could make use of jet streams tailwinds averaging over 50 knots, and the return trip could use polar jet streams to have tailwinds on the return leg.

Traditionally your previous employer would apply the 85% average annual winds to the great circle track for its marketing material. Real world flight plan routing would be optimised for minimum cost on the day resulting in a dynamic route which has little relationship to the great circle.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
Continental767
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:22 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 9:31 pm

First post on a.net, so please bear with me here. :smile:

Any chance that EK's massive 777 fleet and 777x order would have an influence on this order? We know that QF and EK are very tight, so QF probably knows how well the 777 performs for Emirates. Just a thought.

-Davis
Indianapolis.
 
redroo
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 9:47 pm

sunrisevalley wrote:
In my view SYD-LHR has to be flown eastbound trans polar where the routing would essentially be great circle and winds for much of it on the tail.. Flying across China on their airways probably adds close to an hour on the flight time.


Eastbound? As in out over pacific and up over the pole? Is that right?

I have seen an argument put forward that it may be quicker flying Sydney straight north up the coast of Australia up to Japan and then over the pole that way. It may be a bit longer but it was argued that the route is relatively traffic free which would allow qantas to fly at optimal height and speed for most of flight.

Flight planning is not my thing so can anyone comment?
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Sun May 14, 2017 11:00 pm

At 280T with an OEW of 147T , you can fill the tanks (112T) and take 21T of payload. MZFW( 192 to 195T) does not enter the calculation at these weights.
The 21T looks very much around 160 pax to me.
Looks like max payload is 48T to me.
It looks to me that the ULR should become fuel limited at about 21T payload also.
The Airbus site was quoting 16T of payload 15,000km but it also said Ramp weight was 12T below MTOW so ?
I think the payload range graphs above are based on empty green aircraft with no interiors. (just a guess)
Ruscoe
 
rbavfan
Posts: 1650
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 1:10 am

qf789 wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
This has been known for awhile.

Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8


Actually QF considering replacing the 744ER's with either the 777-8 or A350ULR is new information as highlighted above

In an exclusive interview with The Australian Financial Review Magazine, published today, Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce has for the first time canvassed the Airbus A350-900ULR or Boeing's 777-8 (or 777X) as a legitimate successor to the airline's final six 747-400ERs loosely slated for retirement by 2022-23.


For those who can not read the article due to a paywall, you can see it here

https://www.facebook.com/AIRLINESECRETS ... 7700301906



As they mention replacing SYD-JFK with 778 or A350-900ULR and those route is currently flown by 747's. It's not a hard stretch t figure out that yes the other link has discussed this as it's really about the 778 & A359ULR not the 747.
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5378
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 1:41 am

redroo wrote:
Eastbound? As in out over pacific and up over the pole? Is that right? I have seen an argument put forward that it may be quicker flying Sydney straight north up the coast of Australia up to Japan and then over the pole that way. It may be a bit longer but it was argued that the route is relatively traffic free which would allow qantas to fly at optimal height and speed for most of flight.


You are correct . What makes it possible is the winds out of the west which give a ground speed of better than 485k for most of the route. This east bound routing is frequently used from JFK/YYZ to HKG/PEK/PVG.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 3:19 am

Ruscoe wrote:
At 280T with an OEW of 147T , you can fill the tanks (112T) and take 21T of payload. MZFW( 192 to 195T) does not enter the calculation at these weights.


What are those numbers ?
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
aerohottie
Posts: 731
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 3:20 am

sunrisevalley wrote:
redroo wrote:
Eastbound? As in out over pacific and up over the pole? Is that right? I have seen an argument put forward that it may be quicker flying Sydney straight north up the coast of Australia up to Japan and then over the pole that way. It may be a bit longer but it was argued that the route is relatively traffic free which would allow qantas to fly at optimal height and speed for most of flight.


You are correct . What makes it possible is the winds out of the west which give a ground speed of better than 485k for most of the route. This east bound routing is frequently used from JFK/YYZ to HKG/PEK/PVG.


Slightly off topic... but presumably a SYD-LHR eastbound capable aircraft would also be capable of AKL-LHR also???
What?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 8838
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 6:47 am

aerohottie wrote:
Slightly off topic... but presumably a SYD-LHR eastbound capable aircraft would also be capable of AKL-LHR also???

Not necessarily. AKL-LHR westbound is already 900mi longer than SYD-LHR. That difference would only grow longer over an eastbound routing of that segment.

So it just depends on the margin that the aircraft would be able to perform the SYD run.
If it's barely limping-in over reserves at acceptable payload; then trying to coax another 1000mi+ out of it for AKL, is probably a no-go.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5378
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 12:05 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Not necessarily. AKL-LHR westbound is already 900mi longer than SYD-LHR. That difference would only grow longer over an eastbound routing of that segment.

No the eastbound routing is shorter. GC mapper calculates based on a waypoint of N88 and one half the longitudinal distance between AKL and LHR ( ~W92.5) a GC distance of 9944nm. Essentially AKL is equidistant from LHR whether you are going westbound or eastbound. The initial heading from AKL is 3 degrees which means the abeam winds are likely to be positive and as the track takes a more easterly heading based on Flightradar 24 observations the winds can be a positive 20 to 30k. or more
 
Planetalk
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 12:49 pm

I have to wonder, and more knowledgeable minds can help me here, is it really worth designing planes to be able to fly such incredible distances, that will only ever be used by one or two airlines on a couple of routes? Surely some efficiency is being lost for the 99% of other routes the planes are flying? It may do for good marketing and bosses love flashing big numbers around, but to me it seems to be getting a bit silly, I'm really not sure many people want to fly SYD-LHR non-stop, and certainly not enough to influence plane design.

(I know it's a slightly different version of the A359, but only fairly small changes that mean some of the original must have had this 'designed in')
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 4:45 pm

What you see on the A350-900 is very much like the A330-300 and A330-200. The centre tank on the A330-300 is just not activated on most of them. The A330-200 has the centre tank activated. The newer A330-300 with the 242t MTOW has the centre tank activated.

Essentially very little difference between the A350-900 and the ULH model, both have the centre tank just activated to different capacities. The ULH probably achieves it higher weights at the expense of increased maintenance costs.

We operate our A350s at two different weights, one for short/medium haul, the other for long haul.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
xxcr
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:37 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 7:47 pm

I've always wondered why QF hasnt ordered and 777?? this would fit perfectly in their fleet...no?
 
ZEDZAG
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 3:09 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 8:28 pm

zeke wrote:

You are wrong.


By ACAP there is no 270T variant, so did u mean 268 or 272T?

Furthermore, non of this WV have same ZFW, and by assumtion that u use same seat config, and have the same OEW for all WV, then the payload is different.

And one final question, will ULR gain weight by adding this mod for more fuel, and will it have lower ZFW, cause of more fuel? If so, once more u have payload decrease
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24272
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 9:47 pm

ZEDZAG wrote:
By ACAP there is no 270T variant, so did u mean 268 or 272T?


The listed Weight Variants are not the only options available - customers can order custom operating weights (and subsequently change them with the OEM if desired).
 
jagraham
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Mon May 15, 2017 11:57 pm

Zeke's chart does not match the Airbus airport compatibility document

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... -Nov16.pdf

Sec 3.2 page 2 shows the A359 range chart. It's an improvement from previous versions as it specifies the 275t variant

325 pax is at 7700 nm. And the passenger with bags assumption is 95 kg.

The average man weighs at least 95 kg with no luggage, but that's another story.

The MTOW / Max Structural Payload point is 5700 nm. The MTOW / max fuel point is 8600 nm.
 
User avatar
RL777
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:43 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 12:05 am

xxcr wrote:
I've always wondered why QF hasnt ordered and 777?? this would fit perfectly in their fleet...no?


In hindsight they should've ordered the 777, I believe everyone in QF management over the years would tell you the same thing. However the decided against it and have done okay without, interesting to note they were amongst the few airlines who worked with Boeing on the design of the original 777 and were the only airline of that group who did not place an order or ever operate the type.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 12:15 am

ZEDZAG wrote:
By ACAP there is no 270T variant, so did u mean 268 or 272T?


It is based upon WV000 -268

ZEDZAG wrote:
Furthermore, non of this WV have same ZFW, and by assumtion that u use same seat config, and have the same OEW for all WV, then the payload is different.


The ZFW is not listed there. We operate the same aircraft with two different WV, 001 and 005 depending is we are doing a short of long haul flight, no seats are changed.

ZEDZAG wrote:
And one final question, will ULR gain weight by adding this mod for more fuel, and will it have lower ZFW, cause of more fuel? If so, once more u have payload decrease


Not sure what you mean there, the -900 and -900ULH use tha same fuel tanks, they just fill the centre tank up to a different level.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 12:21 am

jagraham wrote:
Sec 3.2 page 2 shows the A359 range chart. It's an improvement from previous versions as it specifies the 275t variant


It does not say 275 t at all on that chart that is your assumption. It is for WV000 which is the 268 t MTOW, just like the -1000 chart is also done for its WV000.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4560
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 12:55 am

RL777 wrote:
xxcr wrote:
I've always wondered why QF hasnt ordered and 777?? this would fit perfectly in their fleet...no?


In hindsight they should've ordered the 777, I believe everyone in QF management over the years would tell you the same thing. However the decided against it and have done okay without, interesting to note they were amongst the few airlines who worked with Boeing on the design of the original 777 and were the only airline of that group who did not place an order or ever operate the type.

Not "everyone" in QF management! I have been following the QF/B777 since QF was invited on to the design group. They didn't order it because ALL things considered it was NOT the best choice for them. The best summary of the situation, that I have seen, was provided by Stitch some years ago:
From:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forum ... 724725/#41

by Stitch

As I understand it, QF's traditional long overwater route structure favored four-engined aircraft, both for performance and passenger safety/convenience (an IFSD did not require a diversion).

As twins proved themselves to be reliable, the "safety/convenience" argument carried less weight compared to the efficiency argument they offered over quads. Therefore, QF started to operate twins on missions to destinations around Asia previously served with quads, but continued to operate quads on the traditional "trunk" routes like North America, South America and Europe.

By the time QF decided to start adding twins, the A330-300 was more efficient than the 777-200 on medium-haul missions and QF didn't really need the extra range the 777-200ER offered, since the long-haul missions were the province of the 747-400 fleet. And by the time the 777-300ER proved herself as such a capable plane, QF already had 12 A380-800s on order with 12 options at favorable pricing and they were expecting to start receiving those A380s in less than three years. So the 777 family just didn't really fit into their route structure.

It's why I am bit hesitant about seeing an A350XWB order. The only real way it makes sense to me is if the A380-800 proves to be a failure for QF in that it offers too many seats and flies at load factors too low to make it efficient and therefore QF needs to purchase something smaller in their place.

And if QF is indeed sticking to a "hub centric" model out of SYD, then it seems to me they should be able to force enough people through SYD to keep those A380-800s at a profitable load factor and therefore the need for the A350XWB just is not there - as it just was not there for the 777


I'll just add to Stitch's post that Australia's CASA is EXTREMELY conservative about ETOPS > 180 until the last few years when they said they would approve a complying application. So far none has been approved and we don't know if any application has been made.

That puts the issue to bed! The new issue is will they buy the B777X [any version]. That IMHO is a legitimate subject for speculation. Purely personally I hope not as the B777 is IMHO the worst airliner of the last 20 os so years, I do not hold out much hope that the updated versions will be much better, BUT I will withhold judgment until I actually fly in them.

Gemuser
 
edmaircraft
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:40 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 1:54 am

Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but could an all-J/F cabin work for QF's upcoming ULH routes? Or would such a configuration be economically unviable as it was for SQ and their SIN-NYC flight?
Let me up!
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2584
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 2:12 am

edmaircraft wrote:
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but could an all-J/F cabin work for QF's upcoming ULH routes? Or would such a configuration be economically unviable as it was for SQ and their SIN-NYC flight?


No, QF is seeking the A359ULR or 778 to replace 744ER's with around 300 seats so they can operate SYD-LHR and SYD-JFK plus be able to use the aircraft on other routes throughout the QF network
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 2:28 am

qf789 wrote:
edmaircraft wrote:
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but could an all-J/F cabin work for QF's upcoming ULH routes? Or would such a configuration be economically unviable as it was for SQ and their SIN-NYC flight?


No, QF is seeking the A359ULR or 778 to replace 744ER's with around 300 seats so they can operate SYD-LHR and SYD-JFK plus be able to use the aircraft on other routes throughout the QF network


Again that around 300 seat marker is an important detail for me, how can the A359 match that amount of seats?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 2:46 am

ikolkyo wrote:
Again that around 300 seat marker is an important detail for me, how can the A359 match that amount of seats?


Neither the 77X or A359 can do that ULH SYD-LHR, I have not seen a direct quote from QF to say they require 300 seats. There are a number of airlines do not have 300 seats in a 77W today.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 3:32 am

zeke wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
Again that around 300 seat marker is an important detail for me, how can the A359 match that amount of seats?


Neither the 77X or A359 can do that ULH SYD-LHR, I have not seen a direct quote from QF to say they require 300 seats. There are a number of airlines do not have 300 seats in a 77W today.


Very few airlines have under 300 seats in their 77Ws. Also here is the link from saying QF wanting at least 300 seats, it was said in the opening post. http://www.afr.com/business/transport/a ... 126-gtz0gv

Personally I don't see either aircraft hitting 300 seats but the 778 will be MUCH closer to it then the A359. Additionally size and range wise it's a better the 744ER replacement.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 11084
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 4:54 am

I had seen that article before I provided the link earlier in this thread as well. It does not actually quote anyone from QF saying 300 seats on syd-lhr. They were Joe Astons words from the AFR.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
ASQ400
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 5:42 am

This is honestly a good thing IMO.
They've been turning into an EK feeder, and we all know EK is getting really strong.
With these nonstops, they'll be able to skip DXB
TLV, BRU, ZRH, CDG, FRA, EWR, JFK, DEN, SFO, AUS, RNO, SEA, YYC, YYZ, IAH, ATL, IAD, DCA, ORD, SJC, SNA
 
parapente
Posts: 1776
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Qantas considering 777-8 or A359ULR to replace 744ER's to fly SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR non-stop

Tue May 16, 2017 9:48 am

It will be a numbers (projection) game I feel.
If you are flying non stop with high yield pax from Pert and Sydney (Melbourne/Brisbane someday?) to NY London (Frankfurt? Someday?) then clearly you will markedly reduce load factors and margin on the 'one stopper' routes.So I imagine it's a question of 'how much'.If one is conservative then the 359/3510/11? Would make sense.If the forecast is higher then it has to be the 778/9/10?
Either way long term the 744ers and 380's will become history.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos