VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 9:33 am

**NOT YET CONFIRMED**

My mail has it that:

Ansett Australia is about to drop 'Australia' from its brand name & return to just being ANSETT, with a bold new campiagn ('go your own way') & typeface on it's aircraft. Something should be announced soon & staff are being briefed currently!

Ansett's long awaited (narrow body) fleet renewal program will be announced mid-year & will be...........Airbus A319/A320/A321's replacing the B737/ BA'e 146 & some B767's. These aircraft will also be fully containerised (like SR & LH aircraft) & will also replace Ansett's current fleet of A320's. Now this may change as Air New Zealand have just bought the remaining 50% share they did not own, & they are an all Boeing operator, so we will wait & see. Also if SQ finally (& we hope they do!) get in on the act, they also may stipulate a change to the above & go to Boeing, ie. NG B737's?

New International routes - SYD-LAX & MEL-HKG, more to come, especially ex Melbourne. Watch this space...............

Sorry I can't reveal my source as I don't know who reads this, needless to say Ansett has cut costs & is gearing up for a profitable future in a competetive market place. They will never be as big as the big white rat, but they will give them a run for their money!

cheers
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 10:01 am

Thanks for your info.VH-BZF. As a Melburnite I was very interested to see that AN has some International plans ex MEL. Can you give us a few hints to the new routes? HKG is definitely wanted by AN as is MEL-LAX with their own aircraft. I would envisage some MEL Asia services, maybe direct to KL and Japan. Obviously they will need some more 744s and/or 763s. To a future wide-body order I heard AN really likes the 767-400 . Airbus just about had the narrow bodied order sown up until NZ bought 100% of them. This decision must be extremely tight as NZ are all Boeing. However, NZ has stated that their new 733 fleet will not be around long term. I think we will see as much commonality as is possible in the future in the NZ/AN fleets. I would love that info. on ANs future International services from MEL,however.
 
B727-200
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 11:28 am

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 11:26 am


How about the domestic widebody fleet VH-BZF? Those B767-200's are getting mighty old!!!!

As a matter of interest, there are only four operators that I know of in the world who do not run containerised A321's. These are: Aero Lloyd (2), Air 2000 Ltd (2 + 1 convertable), Alitalia (8 of their 20 are bulk load only) and Sichuan Airlines (2).

Regards,
B727-200.
 
Guest

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 11:35 am

Thanks for the news buddy. There was a rumour some time ago about AN starting services to JNB (ex Perth hopefully). Any truth there at all? I can't see it happening before services to LAX are operational.

Regarding SQ buying in and replacing the Airbus fleet with 737NGs. One only has to look at SilkAir (SQ's regional subsidiary) who operate 737-300s and Airbus A320s. My sources have it that MI are over the moon with the operational statistics of the A320, and that they are considering ordering more in the near future. As any purchase by MI has to be cleared by the SQ board, it is obvious that SQ are open-minded as far as aircraft with up to 200 seats, so I wouldn't go so far as to say that ANs fleet may be replaced by 737NGs if SQ buys into them (via NZ). Geeze, I hope not anyway, as it would be great to get some A319s and A321s down this way.

If getting rid of the BAe146s is correct, this is great, as PER would then obviously become a base for the A319s which AN may or may not order.

As for their new advertising campaign I have to give them 10/10 for it. It is the best ad campaign (for any product actually) I have seen in a long time. Now if only I could somehow tape the TV ads and put them on the net as I have friends in US and UK who want to see what I have been ranting on about.

Getting rid of "Australia" in the "Ansett Australia" name may not be the best idea? I say this because AN is still widely thought of around the world (for those who have heard of it at all) as an Australian domestic carrier. Keeping the Australia in the name will surely tell people, Yes, Ansett is an Australian international carrier. While AN may be well known in the Asian market, and to a lesser extent the European market, with services to LAX starting some time in the future, people I know in the US (outside the aviation enthusiast field) have never heard of Ansett and don't even know where it is from.
 
B727-200
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 11:28 am

RE: A319's Are B733 Size.

Wed Mar 22, 2000 11:54 am


Brissie_lions,

If an all-Airbus narrowbody family were orderred then the A319 would be the vehicle to replace the current B737-300's (about the same seating). Obviously the new A320 replaces the current A320's Ansett has (current ones use the old engine which is no longer in production). And the A321? At around 170-180 seats, who knows?

As for the BAe146's - the 300's operating on the East-coast are definately out-of-here, probably being replaced by the KD CRJ-200ER operations. The 200's operated in the "West", well, not too sure what is happening there. They are a 73 seater aircraft operating to a lot of WA, NT and FNQ regional ports.

B727-200.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1614
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 3:59 pm

It's lucky no-one has been holding their breath for this one. We seem to have been hearing about it forever. There is no doubt AN will opt for the Airbus over the 737s. Ansett has always been very happy with the A320s and they have had lots of positive customer feedback. Jim McCrea, MD of Air NZ, has stated he is not particularly wed to their 737s. Given any change over is going to take a couple of years at least Air NZ will probably make their mind up over this time.

As far as the domestic wide bodies are concerned it may be that Ansett eventually has no wide bodies. Rod Eddington intinated this about a year ago. Whilst this would offer huge savings as AN domestic would basically be all A32X I can't see how it would work given the slot shortages in SYD.

I'm surprised AN would want to do SYD-LAX given Air NZ and UA already cover this route thoroughly. Originally I thought they were keen on a BNE-LAX non-stop service. It is possible that AN may just be taking over Air NZ's non-stop service as from a marketing point of view people wanting to travel non-stop from Australia to USA would not automatically think of Air NZ.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772/E/W,300,310,319,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,ATR
 
Guest

Ansett To Canada

Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:20 pm

I also have official word from Air Canada on the status of their flights into Australia.

CP will be operating the flights with a 767 to YYZ and YVR, and will be codeshared with AC.

They are only now waiting for regulatory approval for UA, NZ and AN to codeshare on these same flights.

So it looks like sometime in the near future you can add Canada to the destination list of AN, albeit thru a codeshare
 
Skystar
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: My Analysis.

Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:32 pm

Bravo Zulu Foxtrot, some very interesting words there.

Ansett Australia rebranding simply as Ansett seems like a possibility; already on their new website, they've removed "Australia" in the header bar. I need to see some of these new ads!?!?!? I don't think rebranding as Ansett is terribly bad, because most people refer to it as simply "Ansett". I don't think changing logos and all that is a great idea, the current one looks crisp and then geez, how many liveries would AN have gone through then! But I do like Ansett Australia, however from a branding perspective (I'm yet to do my degree in marketing), Ansett. may be better. All I can say, is the Ansett Australia scheme with the Australian Flag was a flop, people didn't recognise Ansett, they recognised the Aussie flag.

It does seem possible (AN Rebranding), given the few aircraft being repainted (some look like they're "dying" for a fresh coat). Frankly a lot of "new" things possible, when nothing really has happened (save the CRJs). You may notice that they ceased the cabin upgrades on the A320s and B767s (though this may be due to the rushing of the B733 seat config - a big FAILURE, in the AN Customer Relations Department's eyes (one of the worst CR decisions - hey it may only be going down from 32" to 31", but boy, there's been an uproar!). Sadly, I can't forsee any "increases" in legroom, everything point the other way. At best, we will see no change, and that is the minimum that Customer Relations is fighting for.

You may notice that there is no more BusinessFirst, just back to Business Class. If you've noticed, all these fancy names never really last long, in the end they go back to Business & Economy.

Hmmn, maybe my copy of Ansett News might have something soon.

There are some notes on their press release today about their brand being "neglected" during the BRP - business recovery program, and I agree with that. They ran the same Enya ads for about 3 years, then they had a couple of Star Alliance ads for a month and then they pulled the plug on TV adverts, except for some silly airfare ad.

I'll have to go and order some ads from Ansett Public Affairs.

However, I do not believe that AN will go all A320 Family, it doesn't make sense. On the other hand, I believe that it would be more prudent for them to go A320 vs B737NG, AN customers do prefer the A320.

They know that they need widebody capacity, and I can guarentee you that they won't abandon their widebodies. Certainly they need replacement, and VH-BZF is really an ugly duckling in the 767 fleet - cabin wise it's totally different to the whole AN fleet. You have problems with slots at SYD, business travellers demand widebody capacity in the morning.

Ever figured out why AN (once Australia's LEADING domestic airline) lost it's market share to QF. It was beating QF/TN for a while, even after the takeover, but when QF decided to chuck a few widebodies on MEL-SYD, etc trunk routes, the once 55%-45%, went to a 46%-54%. Not a good idea and if they do do that, well then they prove that they don't learn from their mistakes.

Oddly enough, the ideal replacement for the 762 is the 762 with a 777 cabin. Until Airbus brings out its A330-100, we may well see 767s filling in. The A330-200 is too big for domestic markets, its wingspan poses problems at AN's terminal at YSSY, the high MTOW costs extra for higher landing fees and the aircraft will not be flown on routes that it is best designed for. Frankly, QF really struggled with A300s - it ended up deploying them on low yield, high traffic routes, like SYD-OOL.

One thing I must point out, given Australia's union environment with pilots, etc, you really won't see any major cost savings with a full Airbus fleet. The cockpit commonality thing wont work, for example, I'd seriously doubt that you'd see an A320 driver piloting a 330.

I can confirm that AN will be getting rid of the BAe146, as the man in Public Affairs said, "We really don't see any future for the 146 in our fleet, as you may have noticed, with Kendell, we are now headed towards a CRJ Regional Fleet". That's no secret and it's quite obvious that in recent years, AN hasn't been over the moon with their 146s.

In regards to the A320 and NZ, you may be surprised that NZ in fact wanted some of AN's 320s, but AN "loved them too much". When you consider that they have a fuel burn better than the B733 on sectors more than 1.5hrs, why would you want to give them away? Anyway, NZ's 733s are a interim measure as some of you may know.

SQ jumping in on the act and going for 737NG's? I don't think so, they don't have any real reason to do so when Silkair is doing quite nicely with it's A320 Family. And besides, 737/A320s are really irrelevant to SQ ops, as they are a widebody operator.

I certainly hope a lot of what you're saying is true, because I'm in MEL, and hell I'd love to be able to fly AN Interinational without going through SYD.

Cheers,

Justin
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Brissie_Lions

Wed Mar 22, 2000 6:42 pm

I have stated on a recent post that I don't believe AN would fly in it's own right to JNB or Southern Africa, as there has to be money in it for them to fly any international sector, with QF & SA both flying the route I believe there is enough capacity ex Australia currently. As far as code-sharing goes though, SA are a member of Global Rewards & do have a close marketing relationship with AN so that is a real possibility. Ansett is very keen to operate more international services ex Australia and may do so in future at the expense of Air NZ?????? Rod Eddington has made no secret of the fact he is keen to fly to the US west coast (LAX) in its own right (currently code share with both UA & NZ). The BIG problem is aircraft, AN want more (at least 3) B747-400's from SQ, but SQ will not release them fast enough & AN is not keen to operate -400's with different configs or different engine types (GE or RR). So when SQ do make more B744's available, AN will lease them & that will probably be later this year?
Rod Eddington has also stated that Ansett want more international services ex Australia & Melbourne (home base), Hong Kong will be (in all probability) the first destination (apart from DPS) for Melbourne, although Fiji may edge it out? Ansett has to wait to secure rights/additional capacity for HKG until it can launch services & probably will go for daily B744's ex Syd to Hkg first (both QF & CX operate non-stop daily ex Mel to Hkg). Lax will be ex Syd as AN is not too keen to tackle the Mel-Lax market just yet, with both UA & QF operating non-stop ex Mel already. Brisbane has been talked about, however the business market is not strong ex Brisbane for the US, that's where the money is made, obviously.
Rod has also stated that the BA'e 146 is not the right aeroplane for AN either, unfortunately inheriting it from the former East-West & Sir Peter's buying spree! It is definitely the next aircraft to exit AN's diverse fleet. I believe you will see more CRJ's (200's & possibly 700's) in the future & ONE regional outfit/subsiduary, incorporating Kendell, SkyWest & Aeropelican.

So I hope that answers many of your questions? Certainly the future looks bright for Ansett, with so many things that are happening, all i can say is.......watch this space!

Cheers - BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1614
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 6:54 pm

Maybe the answer for AN is to replace their 762's with more 763's. Their greater range would mean they could be swapped between domestic and international ops frequently just like QF used to do before they built up enough 763's to operate some permanently in domestic config and some in int'l config.

Anyone who has flown on AN's current 763 will attest that it is one comfortable bird.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772/E/W,300,310,319,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,ATR
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Brissie_Lions

Wed Mar 22, 2000 6:55 pm

I have stated on a recent post that I don't believe AN would fly in it's own right to JNB or Southern Africa, as there has to be money in it for them to fly any international sector, with QF & SA both flying the route I believe there is enough capacity ex Australia currently. As far as code-sharing goes though, SA are a member of Global Rewards & do have a close marketing relationship with AN so that is a real possibility. Ansett is very keen to operate more international services ex Australia and may do so in future at the expense of Air NZ?????? Rod Eddington has made no secret of the fact he is keen to fly to the US west coast (LAX) in its own right (currently code share with both UA & NZ). The BIG problem is aircraft, AN want more (at least 3) B747-400's from SQ, but SQ will not release them fast enough & AN is not keen to operate -400's with different configs or different engine types (GE or RR). So when SQ do make more B744's available, AN will lease them & that will probably be later this year?
Rod Eddington has also stated that Ansett want more international services ex Australia & Melbourne (home base), Hong Kong will be (in all probability) the first destination (apart from DPS) for Melbourne, although Fiji may edge it out? Ansett has to wait to secure rights/additional capacity for HKG until it can launch services & probably will go for daily B744's ex Syd to Hkg first (both QF & CX operate non-stop daily ex Mel to Hkg). Lax will be ex Syd as AN is not too keen to tackle the Mel-Lax market just yet, with both UA & QF operating non-stop ex Mel already. Brisbane has been talked about, however the business market is not strong ex Brisbane for the US, that's where the money is made, obviously.
Rod has also stated that the BA'e 146 is not the right aeroplane for AN either, unfortunately inheriting it from the former East-West & Sir Peter's buying spree! It is definitely the next aircraft to exit AN's diverse fleet. I believe you will see more CRJ's (200's & possibly 700's) in the future & ONE regional outfit/subsiduary, incorporating Kendell, SkyWest & Aeropelican.

So I hope that answers many of your questions? Certainly the future looks bright for Ansett, with so many things that are happening, all i can say is.......watch this space!

Cheers - BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
pandora
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 7:32 am

Opting For Boeing.

Wed Mar 22, 2000 7:54 pm

why haven't they considered 737ng? it's a pretty good airliner for ansett.

as for long range, 777 and 764s will do. 744s are too big for new routes.
 
QF1
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 12:24 am

What About An A340

Wed Mar 22, 2000 8:05 pm

Everyone here has stated that Ansett will more then likely opt for B744's. has anyone thought of the possibility of them trying A340's. They are extremely happy with their A320's (and why not, they are great aircraft), so it wouldn't surprise me if they go with something that works, and go for 340's.
What does everyone think?

QF1
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1614
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: What About An A340

Wed Mar 22, 2000 8:12 pm

Not a new suggestion at all. With SQ buying into NZ (AN's owner), they have access to SQ's surplus A340s or SQ's 772s as SQ replace them with 773s.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772/E/W,300,310,319,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,ATR
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 8:17 pm

With SQ in the loop who knows, I know there are some at AN who would love to have the B777 on board, it would be the ideal aircraft for AN.
As for BZF AN's only B767-300, it is expensive to lease, yet is a popular aircraft & currently only operating two regular international flights per week (Ex Syd to Hkg). This leaves it operating mainly domestic flying between Melbourne & Sydney. With the new northern summer schedule it will operate a weekly service to Perth (domestic) and it will also be used to collect the Olympic torch from Athens & fly it Guam where it will kick off it's relay, ending up in Sydney for the games in September.
AN's B762's are getting quite old, RMD/E/F & G were introduced into revenue service in 1983, and I believe RMK/RML & RMO are just as old, if not older? (These aircraft were ex Britannia.)
Needless to say now, any new aircraft purchases will be done and made with Air NZ calling the shots. I just hope that Sir Selwyn & Brierley (Air NZ's major shareholder) doesn't bugger up any possible deal with SQ, as Dr Cheong would not like to be mucked around again!

Ansett (& Air NZ) need SQ on board, desperately!
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 8:43 pm

Courtesy of ATW -

Singapore bid for ANZ coming?

ANZ and its major shareholder, Brierley Investments, remain hopeful that Singapore Airlines will take up a strategic stake in the expanded NZ group--up to 25%, according to Chairman Sir Selwyn Cushing. SIA CEO Cheong Choong Kong told ATW he is not interested in New Zealand but remains interested in Australia. While SIA still is considering an option to buy into Virgin's new Australian operation, as of late last week an SIA offer for a minority stake in ANZ seemed near.

As far as A340's go (RE: QF1) I think the closest Ansett ever got to ordering that type of Airbus, was a few years ago when CEO Rod Eddington stated that the wide bodied fleet would be either A330-200's or B767-300ER's - that situation has now definitely changed. SQ don't want the A340's & my guess is neither do Ansett. They are extremely happy with the B747-400 & want more! as for a medium to long range smaller type, I think the B777 (ex SQ) is probably the way AN Intl will go sometime in the future & I know that Air NZ are interested as well for a fill-up between the B767 & B744's. Time will tell!

cheers
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
Guest

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Wed Mar 22, 2000 8:45 pm

Where do you guy/girls get all your Ansett info from???

Thanks,
Heffer
 
v jet
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 9:04 am

Skystar

Wed Mar 22, 2000 9:15 pm

You say QF struggled with the A300. In what way?
They actually operated mainly on the MEL/SYD/BNE route as well as flights to OOL. It is a shame they are no longer around as the pax capacity was more then the 763.
 
MAS777
Posts: 2757
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 7:40 am

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Thu Mar 23, 2000 6:51 am

I think it was probably time Ansett restarted their Syd-Kuala Lumpur service. Qantas has (yet) again pulled out of operations into Malaysia. This is one LARGE market that the Australian carriers are now missing out on - although a (renewed) fan of MAS - they do need some competition - Good competition ensures better service for all customers!
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Heffer & MAS777

Thu Mar 23, 2000 7:12 am

g'day Heffer & MAS777, I get my info from people who work for Ansett & QF & am in the industry myself. I am sorry I can't reveal my source (as stated in my opening post) as I don't know who reads this? So it is to protect the innocent so to speak.

Now re: AN returning to KUL, well certainly not in the near future anyway. I am not sure whether AN still codeshares with MH, but MH have 11 flights per week (soon to be double daily B744's) ex Melbourne & Sydney as well as daily B777's ex Per & Bne to Kul, also 4 weekly svcs ex Adl with both B744's & non-stop B777's.
So there is probably enough capacity at present. When the market to KUL improves (financially speaking), & S.E Asia fully recovers from its economic woes (& it's getting better all the time), then AN may look at returning to KUL? But as I said you just never know, if AN can make a buck or two & can get landing rights, then they will fly there.

Cheers - BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
MAS777
Posts: 2757
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 7:40 am

RE: Heffer & MAS777

Thu Mar 23, 2000 7:26 am

I thought Ansett does already hold landing rights at KUL - MAS does indeed already fly daily ex-BNE and 10x week ex-PER. The Malaysian economy is recovering faster than any other S.E.Asian economy - which is strange that QF pulled out its KUL-SYD service (albeit code-shared with BA).

Ansett currently code-shares with SIA via Singapore - but as I have said time and time again I think STAR is seriously neglecting the Malaysian market and relying on Changi as Malaysia's gateway...this WILL fail as with air travel today - many passengers want faster connections into Malaysia and not waste unnecessary time at Changi - Only KUL offers unbeatable connections to ALL major cities and islands within Malaysia. Eg. I have 7 days leave coming up and plan to go to Langkawi to catch some rays - I would have chosen BA except for the horrendously expensive fares they're charging to Malaysia - so I'm now booking with MAS who for little more than BA's Y-fare - I'll be in Golden Club on MAS...now if I was to fly with a STAR carrier - I would have to go via SIN - with far fewer connections leaving me with less time on the beach ;-(

Ansett broke their KUL code-share with MAS a while back. Things will be changing at KUL soon as it seems likely that Kuala Lumpur International Airport is poising itself to become a 'Wings' hub.
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Ansett Australia & KUL-MAS777

Thu Mar 23, 2000 7:42 am

Thanks MAS777, yes you are right about services to KUL, & KLIA is really lowering it's landing fees to try & compete as a hub in SE Asia, against the mighty Changi & lesser BKK-Don Muang!
I tend to agree with you that MAS will probably go into the Wings camp, especially now that it has NorthWest flying into KLIA & has good relations with KLM. We will wait & see, but Changi seems to be most peoples favourite hub & I guess that has a lot to do with the mighty SQ & all the connections ex Changi available (ex to Malaysia as you quite rightly state!). United are also returning twice daily B744's to Changi from this month I believe, not that that has a lot to do with this argument. Also Changi is a real competetive place with both STAR (SQ,UA,LH) & ONEWorld (QF,BA) trying to dominate there. KLIA seems relatively untouched!
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: MH Flight Increae SYD/MEL

Thu Mar 23, 2000 10:32 am

VH-BZF, I have heard rumors for a while about the increase of MH services to MEL/SYD from 11-14. Is this definite? If it is can you please confirm when these new flights will start. I can't believe QF,BA and AN are allowing MH to virtually have sole Australia- Malaysia rights. Of course the Lauda flights route thru KUL. The travel.com.au International Flight Schedules page showed 14 flights/week a couple of weeks ago but this has changed back to 11 again. Back to the AN fleet renewal(which will also be an NZ fleet renewal), I suspect Airbus has a narrow lead in the narrow-bodied order but Boeing almost certainly will win the wide-Bodied order.
 
The777Man
Posts: 5924
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 1999 4:54 am

RE: Ansett Australia - News & Orders

Thu Mar 23, 2000 6:46 pm

Lauda will join STAR on 26Mar00 and could codeshare with Ansett Australia to KUL. I also think it would be best to keep the name Ansett Australia since a lot of people have never heard of Ansett. I think they may take over the LAX-SYD flight from Air New Zealand or perhaps have a day flight from LAX to SYD which neither UA or NZ have now but QF already operates. I would like to see AN here. Hopefully they will order 777s as a widebody expansion aircraft. The777Man
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Dalecary & The777Man

Thu Mar 23, 2000 8:07 pm

As far as I am aware, having checked the reservations system recently, MH were to commence double daily services ex Mel/Syd around mid-year from memory, or August, it may even be a little later in the year? Lauda have also just announced a 4th weekly frequency ex Mel to Vie & Olympic will also be staying put in Melbourne (after stating that for commercial reasons they would pull out?? funny that, seeings how Melbourne holds the 3rd largest Greek community outside Athens!). SQ operate double dailies ex Mel (B744's) & thrice daily ex Syd (B744's) & Per (A340's & B772's). Dr Cheong is expected in Sydney on Monday next to announce even more services to Australia & my mail is that Melbourne services will rise to 18 per week, with possibly a 4th daily service for Sydney? We'll wait & see.
The777Man, I have stated previously in this post, that I believe in the future AN will lease or buy B777's, this is not confirmed, but SQ is now AN's source for B744's & as they have over 70 B777's on order, AN & NZ will be prime candidates for those surplus units. - I hope so!

If you are a huge B777 fan, you might like to know what airlines operate the B777 to Melbourne? They are:
Lauda - B772 3 times, soon to be 4 times per week
Emirates - B772 - Daily
Cathay Pacific - B772 - daily, to be replaced by A340's/B744's next month.
Thai - B773 - 8 times per week.
Singapore - B773 - (was double daily) currently daily, but to be replaced by B747-400's on March 27th.

Melbourne has a large number of services with this great aeroplane, let's hope they continue in large numbers & that AN eventually join them!

Cheers
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
B727-200
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 11:28 am

RE: Ansett International - B767-200 Ages.

Fri Mar 24, 2000 11:45 am


After its "smash and grab" international expansion into Asian markets, Ansett is much more cautious with its future expansion.

You must remember, there is more to entering a market than just buying or leasing an aircraft and sending it there. For instance, to fly SYD-LAX Ansett has to weigh up many things. Aircraft type is not a choice, but the configuration is. AN's current B747's are 2-class, where LAX almost certainly requires a first class. You also need at least 2 aircraft to operate a decent frequency. This means that you end up with two sub-fleets of B747's (2-class and 3-class). It also means that AN would have two more B747's based in SYD, and they do not have their own hanger in SYD for maintenance. Then you must also consider frequency, days operated, time, slots, connections, etc.... It's a hell of a lot of planning.

Apart from maybe Narita, AN has no need to go into or back into other parts of Asia unless it is using it as a stopover port to Europe. There just is not the market or the yield in Asia. I suppose they will need to look at this if they go into, say, London and Frankfurt.

To fill in the blanks on your earlier reference to the age of the B762's VH-BZF, the remaining units are newer. RMO and RML are 1985, and RMM (200ER) and RMK are 1991 vintage.

It will be an interesting outcome with the widebodies. The B763 and A330 are really engineered for international sectors. You also have trouble swapping them between domestic and international due to the different interiors (stuufs around with the brand image that you want to put into the market). Maybe they will not go for widebodies and just rely on the A321 as its biggest people mover?

B727-200.
 
Skystar
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: V Jet - QF300s

Fri Mar 24, 2000 4:58 pm

QF's A300s were unnecessary birds; one could say that they were the first ugly sisters.

Firstly, the A300s were doing a job which could be easily done by the 767s. There were only 4 of them, QF had no intention of getting more of them, so they were a sore in the fleet (ie, no fleet commonality). Unlike the 767s, they were limited in what they could do and weren't practical for international routes.

They were simply too large for the job. The only real route that they can do viably is trunk routes such as MEL-SYD, MEL/SYD-OOL. SYD-BNE isn't particularaly strong compared to MEL-SYD; ever noticed the type of domestic birds at BNE?

They're larger than 763s - rarely do you ever need capacity larger than that on MEL-SYD. You must remember that the domestic 747s that QF flies are basically international flights going via SYD or the occasional 747 SYD-PER.

When compared to the 767, the A300 wasn't as economic a bird, because it was the wrong type of plane. It was good for short haul, except I doubt that QF could get the loads good enough for it to be at its peak and it struggled to get to altitude (in the sense it couldn't climb as high or as easily as the 767 - hence no SYD/MEL-PERs)

Cheers,

Justin
 
v jet
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 9:04 am

RE: V Jet - QF300s

Fri Mar 24, 2000 10:36 pm

I dont think you can say the A300s were unnecessary acft. They were inherited from the Australian Airlines fleet remember. Obviously that is why QF would order no more of them. You also have to remember that by the time QF merged with TN in 1994 they were getting to the end of their operational life.
They were certainly too large when they were introduced back in the early 1980s
but proved to be very valuable acft in later years. You should study the QF schedules more carefully as there are now a number of 747 domestic services that are just that. Not the beginning or end of an international flight. I can tell you that the 747 domestic flights easily fill. As for the A300s performance they used to regularly operate MEL/PER all the time. I must say I've never been on one that "struggled to get to altitude" Have you actually ever flown on one?
They were much more comfortable that either the 762 or 763 especially with the separate Business Class cabin
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: QF Keep Your Nose Out!

Tue Mar 28, 2000 11:05 am

I hope QF keep their nose out of Air NZ, at least until such time as SQ has an apportunity to buy all of Ansett. The ideal way for Ansett to go would be for it to be in the SQ/VS group, but they would need to grow at a rapid rate to combat a combined QF/NZ.

The A300 (TN/QF) was a great aeroplane, but was slower at climb & cruise than the B767. We used to constantly sit behind the A300 on a Mel-Syd sector in the B767 & one day had to pull back to mach .72 in order to stay clear of the Airbus in front! But the A300 was a great revenue earner & carried alot of cargo & pax generally liked flying in them. They started/pioneered widebody service (domestic) in Australia.
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
B727-200
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 11:28 am

RE: QF Keep Your Nose Out

Tue Mar 28, 2000 12:50 pm


For god sake, QF keep your nose in. A QF purchase of NZ would mean an NZ divestment of AN by regulation. Along comes SQ and buys AN which they really want rather than the buying NZ to get to AN. Everybody happy!!!!

I do, however, think that the SQ share of NZ will be the likely outcome of this. There is a thread on the old topics page (by "Brissie_lions" I think) that shines a bit more light on this.

Rgds,

B727-200.
 
Skystar
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: V Jet - QF300s

Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:54 pm

Hi,

I do realise that they were ex TN. I don't have any anti A300 stigma, actually you'll find that I'm a pro Airbus person.

However, you will notice that they had to fly a lot of low yield traffic. They had no commonality with the existing fleet and did a job which a 763 practically do for less.

QF was displeased with the orphan status of the A300s, but searched for five years to find a route for them on Australian domestic services. They ended up being stuck primarily on SYD-OOL flying low yield leisure passengers and basically earning the airline nothing. The decision to make them leave the fleet was based on two reasons: (i) D-checks were coming up and QF didn't want to pay for them; and (ii) they were too big anyway, and were stuck on a low yield route with no future.

Anyway, basically the only reason why QF kept its A300s was to squeeze all (whatever little) worth left in them. Capital costs for new birds outweigh the inefficiencies of the A300 in Australia.

I'm not sure here, but the 763 may even have better seat costs than the old A300B4. You do realise that the main reason why TN went with the A300 as Airbus was able to offer earlier delivery dates.

Frequency rules here and the A300 doesn't provide frequency, it's far too big for regular service.

If you think about it, Ansett's 762s can shoot up to FL370 from max weight if they really wanted to. You'd probably be on the A300-B4s ceiling by then. The 767 is also faster. I'm not sure how it compares to the A300-600R.

When you talk about 747s, heck thats only a SYD-PER here and there, maybe a service up to CNS. They're not regular services all year round and they only do occasional runs when they do (ie, they're not dailies).

Certainly the A300 would have a better business class over the 767 in a 2-2-2 config, but a 767 would have a better premium class in a 1-2-2 config.

Just a note, QF actually wanted to order A310s over the B767 as it could offer a real premium class. But the A310 just didn't have the range. Ever since then, Airbus has paid the price (no QF birds).

Cheers,

Justin