georgiabill
Posts: 755
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:08 am

If Qantas were to order the 777-20LR or 777-300ER how long before they would receive first aircraft? Just a bit off topic is Qantas a potential 787 customer?
 
SthPacific787
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:25 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:26 am

Really soon I hope for both the 787 and the 777. I know this is not what you need to know. I just wanted to express my hopes that QF will get on board with the duo.
Aussie Based Air NZ 787 fan
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:33 am

Quoting Georgiabill (Thread starter):
If Qantas were to order the 777-20LR or 777-300ER how long before they would receive first aircraft?

Depending on if or when QF places their order, first B777 would be 1H'07.

Quoting Georgiabill (Thread starter):
Just a bit off topic is Qantas a potential 787 customer?

Indeed! Whether QF chooses the A350 or B787, they will be one of the largest initial customers for either type.

A decision is due next month.

 airplane QFA001
 
AirNZ777
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 7:13 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:49 am

wow that going to meen a HUGEfleet for them ....gee that

744...
777's...
787...
Airbus330
Airbus380.?
737-& (800-winglets)
dash...

what have i missed?

are they planning to retiere some aircraft?
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:51 am

QFA001 is correct.

The order is expected to be ratified by the Board at the October meeting with public announcement possibly due around QF's 85th birthday in mid Nov.

I think it's 783/8/9, 772LR, 773ER v A345/6HGW, A358/9.
No 747Adv but extra A380 orders are possible(exercising some of the 12 options).
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:57 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 2):
A decision is due next month.

QFA001, you don't happen to have heard any rumours on which way the decision is leaning, have you?

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:33 am

Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
QFA001, you don't happen to have heard any rumours on which way the decision is leaning, have you?

I won't speak for QFA001 but all indications are that a 777/787 order is clearly favoured. But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.
 
User avatar
Dalavia
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:08 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:54 am

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 4):
I think it's 783/8/9, 772LR, 773ER v A345/6HGW, A358/9.
No 747Adv but extra A380 orders are possible(exercising some of the 12 options).

I understand the 787 is favoured for the 767 replacement over the A350. However, I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

I think it is fairly certain that Qantas will not go for a mixed 787/A340 choice, which means the competition is open.

Despite these points, the rumours I hear are also for a 787/777/380 fleet pattern, or perhaps 787-domestic/380 and 350-international.

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.

Correct. Speculation may be fun but it is very hard to be accurate with predicting QF. Things can change very quickly at the last minute.
 
MarshalN
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:39 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:04 am

How much are they affected by the ETOPS regulations? I know those South Pacific routes are pesky -- but how much of a detour are we talking in order to meet ETOPS?
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:13 am

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

if it wasn't, Dixon wouldn't have been harping about the merits of the 777 for a reason..like AC's milton, he's a huge fan of the 777......I don't think ETOPS will be a problem for QF, especially if there is an ETOPS extension...

while the decision can go either way, my intuition is tells me its going to be for a Boeing order....
"Up the Irons!"
 
hz747300
Posts: 1911
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:17 am

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
and 350-international

Would that not have ETOPS concerns as well? Also, hasn't the reliability of twin engined trans-Atlantic performance and trans-Pacific performance aleviated conerns against ETOPS? I would think that with the only major threats to transoceanic travel having been sabotage (Shoe Bomber), or human error (Air Transat) in recent years--2001 onward--that airlines would have seen that reliability of twins is well above acceptable and nearly perfect.

Anyhoo, Geoff Dixon recently spoke at the American Society of Australia in Sydney, did anyone catch the speech? Did he give any clues?
Keep on truckin'...
 
SthPacific787
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:25 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:20 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 9):
it wasn't, Dixon wouldn't have been harping about the merits of the 777 for a reason..like AC's milton, he's a huge fan of the 777......I don't think ETOPS will be a problem for QF, especially if there is an ETOPS extension...

With Air NZ going the 777 way, therefore one would expect the same or similar ETOPS challenges as QF. Does this mean it is not a huge issue?
Aussie Based Air NZ 787 fan
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:23 am

What are you all talking about? QF have been flying the 777 for years now!

 Wink


Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Jason Z. Lee
Template © Gerry Soejatman

Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:55 am

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 8):
How much are they affected by the ETOPS regulations? I know those South Pacific routes are pesky -- but how much of a detour are we talking in order to meet ETOPS?

Actually its the Indian Ocean routes that are real ETOPS problems!

Look at:
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=b...GE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=180

You can see that East Coast Oz - LAX is not a problem, AKL-LAX is a small detour, but SYD-DFW is a problem, the detour could make the whole route not viable.

BUT SYD-JNB & PER-JNB would require real detours, up to about half the route for SYD-JNB, so B777/A350 are not viable there.

There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins, similar but not exactley the same as ETOPS. I do not know how the B777/A350 would be affected by these.


Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
Halophila
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:44 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:58 am

Here's hoping that if QF does purchase the 787/777 combo, they lease one to FJ - their 767 (plural?) were looking a little dogeared last time I flew on one.

Does QF-link have any plans to replace their fleet of 146's?

Any chance that AO might pick up a 787 to replace their 763 should they be ordered?
Flown on 707, 717, 727, 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 743 744 74SP 757 753 762 763 772 773 77W D10 DC9 M11 M80 M87
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:06 am

Quoting Halophila (Reply 14):
Does QF-link have any plans to replace their fleet of 146's?

Any chance that AO might pick up a 787 to replace their 763 should they be ordered?

The 146s are being replaced at the moment by ex Impluse/Jetstar B717s (still operated by NJS, as the 146 are, but subleased from Qantas Group).

It is unlikely that AO will get new anything, certainly for a while anyway. Only rumor I hear consistantly is for the B743s, but thats a belive when you see it!

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5010
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:11 am

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 13):
There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins,

There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:24 am

Quoting QANTASforever (Reply 12):
What are you all talking about? QF have been flying the 777 for years now!

damn does the 777 look awsome in QF colours..thanks for the link.. Wink

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 13):
There is also the question of the Himalayan Plateau, which raises operational problems for twins, similar but not exactley the same as ETOPS. I do not know how the B777/A350 would be affected by these.



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 16):
There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.

correct, no carriers fly over the Himalayan Plateau with any aircraft..so this shouldn't be a problem..

regarding the SYD-JNB route, if ETOPS can be extened to 330 minutes, then it won't be a problem.....
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:41 am

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

I beg to differ. NZ are in exactly the same boat. While yes, the 777's will fly a lot to Asia, they will also be deployed to SFO, LAX and a couple of other places I won't name yet. I can't see ETOPS being the main reason for NOT going with the 777/787.

NZ1
--
NZ1
Head Forum Moderator
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:46 pm

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
I won't speak for QFA001 but all indications are that a 777/787 order is clearly favoured. But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.

Dale,

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3086
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:25 pm

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
However, I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

You wont see 777's or A340's operating to LAX or SFO in any case. They will be combination 744 & A380 runs. The only potential 777 destination in North America is Honolulu depending on wether that stays as QF mainline or goes to AO or another subsidiary. I think it highly unlikely you will see an A340 order from Qantas however.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9864
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:04 pm

Quoting AirNZ777 (Reply 3):
744...
777's...
787...
Airbus330
Airbus380.?
737-& (800-winglets)
dash...

Better make a few adjustments. I will also include the whole QF group fleet
B743/4/4ERs
B777s/A340s
B787s/A350s
B763s (AO)
A332/3
A320s (JQ)
B734/8s
B717s
Dash-8 Q300/Q400

I do doubt an A340/A350 order thou due to QFs very keen interest in the B777/B787

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

NZ doesn't think so, thats why B777s and B787s will join the fleet over the next 6 years

Quoting Halophila (Reply 14):
Here's hoping that if QF does purchase the 787/777 combo, they lease one to FJ - their 767 (plural?) were looking a little dogeared last time I flew on one.

FJ were interested in 1 or 2 B772ERs and were talking to SQ, havn't heard anything more about that thou.

[Edited 2005-09-19 08:10:00]
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:22 pm

The problem with the Himalayan Plateau is to do with pressurisation. In the event of the loss of it, an aircraft must descend with all haste to 13,000' where the air is legally safe for the passengers. The Himalayas are above 25,000' elevation so you see the problem. Loss of pressurisation can be caused by things independent of the engines, most obviously a window blowing out. This means that it affects all aircraft regardless of the number of engines.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:40 pm

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 16):
There are numerous postings in the archives on this; it is one of those canards that has been refuted a number of times. If my memory serves me correctly the answer is that there are no major air corridors anywhere near the Himalayas.

Dont tell the QF B767/747 Captians I sometimes drink & fly with. One made a convincing case last time I flew to/from LHR with him that we were over the Himalayas. QF uses corridors that are just west of the western Nepalese N/S border and over eastern Tibet. I been on them, in the cockpit (pre 9/11)

Quoting Glom (Reply 22):
The problem with the Himalayan Plateau is to do with pressurisation. In the event of the loss of it, an aircraft must descend with all haste to 13,000' where the air is legally safe for the passengers. The Himalayas are above 25,000' elevation so you see the problem. Loss of pressurisation can be caused by things independent of the engines, most obviously a window blowing out. This means that it affects all aircraft regardless of the number of engines.

The engine related problem is MEA or Minimum Enroute Altitude that the aircraft can maintain on one engine, if its not 1,000 feet above the terrian, you have problems! As a GENERAL statement quads generally have a higher MEA than twins with an engine out.

Also the size of the O2 system is relevent, it may not have the capacity to serve every person on board untill the aircraft can get to a place where it can safely get down to a low enough alitude. This is why, according to the Captians mentioned above QF cannot operate their B763 to Europe (without a detour) as they have the small O2 system. Lets face it, where QF usually operate their B763s, 13000' is a very safe terrain clearing altitude!


Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
aussieA346
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:40 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:53 pm

Hi everyone! This is my first post and would just like to know what ETOPS means...thanks

Andrew
 
FriendlySkies
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:09 pm

Extended Twin-engine OPerationS. It's basically a set of rules that defines how far a twin-engine aircraft can fly over water or a certain range from a diversion airport (don't quote me on that last part).

Based on comments from QF's CEO, and their long use of Boeing products, I can also see this going to Boeing. The A350 is simply too big for regional routes, the 787-3 is perfect.
 
laca773
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:51 pm

What do the cockpit and cabin crews think of the 330 they are flying now versus the boeing products (763, 744, 743 etc..)?

LACA773
 
7of9
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 8:59 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Sep 20, 2005 12:46 am

Quoting AussieA346 (Reply 24):
Hi everyone! This is my first post and would just like to know what ETOPS means...thanks

ETOPS = ENGINES TURN OR PASSENGERS SWIM......
hahaha
 
aussieA346
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:40 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:25 pm

Thanks guys...
I hope Qantas buy a variety of A/C...would be great for a SYD spotter like myself.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14029
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Sep 21, 2005 1:13 am

Wikipedia's take on ETOPS...
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9944
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Sep 21, 2005 2:47 am

The depressurised issue is a little further spread.

On the L888 route in China, there are procedure for diversions. Around PEXUN and SANLI the procedure is to go to east to south east Chengdu (ZUUU), between SAGAG and LEVBA to go to east-north east to Kunming (ZPPP). Between LUVAR and TONAX to go north to north west to Urumqi (ZWWW), from Tonax to Revki to go to Kashi (ZWSH). Lots of high terrain on the route.

Below is a list of the waypoints of L888 route (HKG-Europe through China), you will not that the minimum safe altitude for most of it is around 20000 ft / 6600 m.

Way-point
Coordinates
Distance (km)
Magnetic heading
MSA (m) {China airspace is in meters not feet)

1
BIDRU
N22 43.1 E100 57.9
153.9
345.7/165.7
4722

2
MAKUL
N24 03.4 E100 34.5
108.5
345.7/465.7
4722

3
DONEN
N25 00.0 E100 17.8 115.0
345.7/465.7
4722

4
NIVUX
N26 00.0 E100 00.0
216.5
000.8/180.8
6196

5
LEVBA
N27 56.9 E100 00.0
325.6
000.8/180.8
6592

6
PEXUN
N30 53.1 E100 00.0
124.6
000.8/180.8
6592

7
SANLI
N32 00.0 E100 00.0
115.3
306.2/126.2
6592

8
LUVAR
N32 36.1 E099 00.0
286.1
306.6/126.6
6778

9
MUMAN
N34 06.5 E096 30.0
246.5
305.9/125.9
6778

10
TEMOL
N35 23.2 E094 17.6
115.6
306.8/126.8
6778

11
LEBAK
N36 00.0 E093 15.5
335.6
305.5/125.5
6778

12
TONAX
N37 45.5 E090 11.3
158.0
305.5/125.5
6662

13
NOLEP
N38 34.5 E088 42.5
286.4
305.9/125.9
6662

14
SADAN
N40 04.6 E086 00.0
311.0
306.0/126.0
6662

15
KCA
N41 42.7 E082 59.7

Further details available from http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...3D1709+SANLI&hl=zh-CN&inlang=zh-CN

Southern Asia-Europe routes through Uzbekistan (A238), Afghanistan (A466, M881, L750) , Pakistan (P500), Tajikistan (G91, A238, A237), Kyrgyzstan (A237), have escape procedures. Also in Iran (G208, R660) around Tehran (OIII).

There is issues with twins on the Australian-Asian routes which go over Papua New Guinea due terrain.

[Edited 2005-09-20 19:52:46]
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
georgiabill
Posts: 755
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:26 am

Thanks all! However I am sorry I didnot properly word my question. If Qantas were to order the 777-200LR or 777-300ER today when could Qantas expect delivery! I still think Qantas may consider the 747ADV! Just a gut feeling. After all they operaste the 747-400ER in passenger configuration
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:19 am

I think QF are looking at getting their 777/340s from 2007.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:51 pm

Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
QFA001, you don't happen to have heard any rumours on which way the decision is leaning, have you?

Yes. The A350 & B777/787 are the only serious contenders remaining. I believe that the company is leaning Boeing, but Airbus was Down Under last week for more negotiations, too. Anything can happen, yet.

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
But I wouldn't guarantee anything at QF.

If I may say, having witnessed first hand the inner workings of QF, nothing is ever guaranteed because QF is constantly pushing for more. Anyhow, I do believe that they will have something interesting to announce next month.

Quoting Dalavia (Reply 7):
However, I hear the 777 is not preferred over the A340 option for ETOPS reasons, which are very significant for Qantas because of the Pacific routes where it would have to operate.

As I indicated above, the A340 is no longer a serious contender. QF was an ETOPS pioneer, and I would be watching out for them to lead the world on the next expansion of the ETOPS concept (ie. 240+ ETOPS).

Quoting 777ER (Reply 21):
FJ were interested in 1 or 2 B772ERs and were talking to SQ, havn't heard anything more about that thou.

FJ is still in the new airplane market. AFAIK, they are one of the airlines currently studying both A350/B787 options.

Quoting Georgiabill (Reply 31):
If Qantas were to order the 777-200LR or 777-300ER today when could Qantas expect delivery!

As I said in the 2nd reply, 1H'07.

 airplane QFA001
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3956
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Thu Sep 22, 2005 5:59 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 33):
Yes. The A350 & B777/787 are the only serious contenders remaining. I believe that the company is leaning Boeing, but Airbus was Down Under last week for more negotiations, too. Anything can happen, yet.

Would the EIS date for the A350 be a disadvantage for QF? Interesting... I am still putting my bets on 777/787. The only thing that would change it is if Airbus move the goal posts and put the A350 at better efficiency than the 787 due to the later EIS date...

Bring on next month, really...

Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
keesje
Posts: 8867
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:08 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 33):
As I indicated above, the A340 is no longer a serious contender.

I wouldn't ignore the Airbus more efficient cabin configuration. The 330/340/787 cabin size allows 4/6/8 abreast F/C/M cabins.

A Qantas 777 would probably require a 4/6/9 F/C/M from a competitive standpoint.

Specially the C class beds take a lot of room in long haul aircraft these days (increasingly F is left out) & business passengers really hate to be the ones placed in the middle seat, forcing airlines like SQ, DL, CO to go for 6 abreast.

In that respect the a346's extra 14 ft really makes a difference in comfortably housing as many passengers as possible, also in the cargo belly it makes a difference.

On the ETOPS Pacific thing : statistics & customers perception are two things. The last ones buy tickets.

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00001749.jpg

I think commonality with A330 and A380 shouldn't be ignored. Cross lincensing of a 346/a380 pilot population improves efficiency.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:15 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I think commonality with A330

Which were a total disaster for QF right from the beginning. I wouldn't harp on this point for too long.

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
keesje
Posts: 8867
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:37 am

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 25):
The A350 is simply too big for regional routes, the 787-3 is perfect.

Perhaps it is not the only alternative.

PER-BNE falls easily within the A321´s range and weighs 48k kg empty. I would not be surprised if the 787 weighs nearly twice as much, uses fuel accordingly & costs twice as much, while only carrying 50% more seats.

Maybe Airbus proposed an 245 seat A325 or so, that makes the 787-3 look a SUV for bringing the kids to school.


1 barrel $68..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2470
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:40 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 33):
The A350 & B777/787 are the only serious contenders remaining.

QFA001, what are your thoughts/impressions/knowledge on the aircraft QF is specifically evaluating?

Since the A340 is out of the running (no real surprise there), I assume the 777-300ER is nearly guaranteed. Then we are looking A350 vs. 787. Besides the rumored 787-9HGW that circulated recently, there doesn't appear to be a model breakdown in the public realm. Any help?

Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 34):
Would the EIS date for the A350 be a disadvantage for QF?

Probably not. As indicated above, QF has been publically linked to the 787-9, which has virtually the same EIS date as the A350.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I wouldn't ignore the Airbus more efficient cabin configuration.

I would, since it's nothing but marketing hype. An airline that has a decent reputation for their evaluations of aircraft and their capabilities (with the exception of the whole A330 on domestic runs fiasco) isn't going to pay much attention to either manufacturer's PR statements.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
The 330/340/787 cabin size allows 4/6/8 abreast F/C/M cabins.



Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
A Qantas 777 would probably require a 4/6/9 F/C/M from a competitive standpoint.



Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
business passengers really hate to be the ones placed in the middle seat

Yet you just said the 777 in a QF configuration wouldn't have a middle seat, and since the 777 has a much wider cross-section, that would grant both F and C classes more space. Should be a no-brainer from the passenger's perspective.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
statistics & customers perception are two things. The last ones buy tickets.

And the first one buys the aircraft. As already mentioned (by someone with a hell of a lot more industry knowledge), QF has been an ETOPS pioneer from the beginning. The idea that they are going to turn their back on it now is just plain ignorant.  banghead 

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I think commonality with A330 and A380 shouldn't be ignored. Cross lincensing of a 346/a380 pilot population improves efficiency.

The 767 & A330 fleet will eventually be replaced with either the 787 or A350 to be ordered, so I wouldn't harp on that too much. As to the cockpit commonality between the A346 and A388, there is to be about as much commonality between the 777 and 787 - so once again, a moot point.

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 36):
Which were a total disaster for QF right from the beginning.

Once QF realized the A330 wouldn't work on the domestic sectors, and placed them on the international ones, I understand QF is pleased with the airframe.


Regards,

Hamlet69
Honor the warriors, not the war.
 
airnewzealand
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 6:00 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:52 am

As A flight attendant for Qantas i recently had the boeing representative onboard, on his way to a presentation to Managers in SYD.
He didnot let on anything at all...

Also flying on both the A330-300 and 767-300, let me tell you, the A330-300 should not be on routes that are over 5hours! They donot have enough storage space for ANYTHING in the galleys as we always run out of food onbaord ie. Snacks, Noodles, Juices. It is really annoying, tho i will give the aircraft from a pax point of view a higher rating than the 767-300.

Word in the Galley is that the 777 will be ordered, but like everyone has said, it changes so frequently at QF...

Also in regards to the L888 route, we carry enough oxygen onboard for a diversion... we carry extra bottles of oxygen and have certain precautions we must take to ensure this.

Cheers
AirNewZealand
 
NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:54 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 33):
Anyhow, I do believe that they will have something interesting to announce next month.

Do you know when next month?
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
keesje
Posts: 8867
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:58 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 39):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I wouldn't ignore the Airbus more efficient cabin configuration.

I would, since it's nothing but marketing hype.

It becomes clear you´ve never been involved in a cabin specification.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 39):
QF has been an ETOPS pioneer from the beginning. The idea that they are going to turn their back on it now is just plain ignorant.

Turn their back? The required ETOPS is just not there after all those years. I think the FAA does it´s statistics.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 39):
As to the cockpit commonality between the A346 and A388, there is to be about as much commonality between the 777 and 787 - so once again, a moot point.

The A346&A380 cockpits are virtually identical to facilitate cross-crew qualification for mixed-fleet operators. What I´ve seen from the 777/787 not.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14029
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:02 am

Quoting Airnewzealand (Reply 40):
As A flight attendant for Qantas i recently had the boeing representative onboard, on his way to a presentation to Managers in SYD.
He didnot let on anything at all...

Damn, our best sources these days on A.net seem to be FAs and CSRs!
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:05 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 42):
What I´ve seen from the 777/787 not.

You may want to read Randy Baselar's blog:

http://www.boeing.com/randy/

"For instance, even though it may look a little different, the 787 flight deck operates just like the flight deck on a 777. It will take as few as five days of training for 777 pilots to qualify as 787 pilots. The pilot pool for operators of 777 / 787 mixed fleets will be the same. For an airline this is a significant cost savings. 787 pilots will spend less time training, and more time flying. "

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2470
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:16 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 42):
The required ETOPS is just not there after all those years.

Huh? I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 42):
I think the FAA does it´s statistics.

Thankfully, the industry doesn't rely on what you think and don't.

In this case, though, you're right. The FAA does do it's statistics. Which is why ETOPS has progressively increased from 60 minutes at the beginning, to today's 180, and why some operators have been granted 207 minutes.

This is also why ETOPS 240 is in the planning stages, why ETOPS 330 is being considered, and why all aircraft, regardless of number of engines, are starting to be maintained to ETOPS standards. Indeed, QF was one of the first airlines to do this. It is also why Airbus themselves are engineering a A340-200/300 replacement on a twin-engined aircraft.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 42):
The A346&A380 cockpits are virtually identical to facilitate cross-crew qualification for mixed-fleet operators. What I´ve seen from the 777/787 not.

IIRC, an A340-600 pilot requires 4 days of training to be certified for the A380 (it might be 5, but I believe it's 4). As it stands now, Boeing is designing the 787 to have a maximum 5 day training period from the 777 (or back).


Regards,

Hamlet69
Honor the warriors, not the war.
 
keesje
Posts: 8867
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:17 am

Let say this :

It´s great to hear Randy say how very important cockpit commonality is for an airline.  

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 45):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 42):
The required ETOPS is just not there after all those years.

Huh? I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about.


There will be additional 330-minute ETOPS tests in various locations in the months ahead. In total, the airplanes will record approximately 220 hours of ETOPS flying. That will involve additional engine shutdowns for 330-minutes, various system checks and simulated malfunctions to ensure the systems are working in the long-range environment.

ETOPS certification by U.S. and European regulatory authorities is slated for early next year.


From a two year old Boeing news release. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2003/q4/nr_031015g.html

[Edited 2005-09-22 23:28:03]
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2470
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:00 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 45):
ETOPS certification by U.S. and European regulatory authorities is slated for early next year.

From a two year old Boeing news release.

And it received it's ETOPS rating on schedule, with normal delivery to Air France soon after. What's your point?


Hamlet69
Honor the warriors, not the war.
 
keesje
Posts: 8867
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:08 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 46):
And it received it's ETOPS rating on schedule, with normal delivery to Air France soon after. What's your point?

No. Still not ETOPS 330. Perhaps Qantas wants to pick up the chalenge.

BTW I expected you guys to fall over the provocative a321 vs 787-3 reply 37, I guess you checked the numbers..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:51 am

Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 34):
Would the EIS date for the A350 be a disadvantage for QF?

Hamlet mentioned QF's interest in the B787-9, which is on a similar timeline to the A350. So, Airbus shouldn't be too disadvantaged. And, Airbus is the most likely OEM to be able to offer the A330 in the interim, anyway.  Wink

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I wouldn't ignore the Airbus more efficient cabin configuration. The 330/340/787 cabin size allows 4/6/8 abreast F/C/M cabins.

Keesje, do shut up. You are one reason why I would seriously consider deleting the A.net address from my favourites (another is NAV20). Why you continue to regurgitate 15 year-old Airbus marketing brochures is beyond me.

The more efficient cabin configuration can't take a full-size SkyBed. The B777/787 can. The A340 cabin can't take QF's new P-class seat that will come with the A380 without modification. The B777/787 can. Of the Airbus models, only the A350 can take the same Y-seats as the A380. Get the message?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
On the ETOPS Pacific thing : statistics & customers perception are two things. The last ones buy tickets.

Are you living in the past? Both NZ and QF (even UA) have been flying ETOPS routes across the Pacific for decades. Noone avoids the airlines because they have twinjets. Noone will avoid them in future when those airlines continue their heritage with A350s, B777s and B787s (depending on what QF buys).

So, next time you quote customer perception, at least realise the market that you're speaking about and the true perception of the customers.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 35):
I think commonality with A330 and A380 shouldn't be ignored. Cross lincensing of a 346/a380 pilot population improves efficiency.

I have told you before: at QF, the A340-600 and A380 will not be able to use the same pilot pool. Now, if you were smart enough to do some research, you'd learn why I'm qualified to tell you that and why you're not qualified to challenge it.  Yeah sure

Quoting Keesje (Reply 37):
PER-BNE falls easily within the A321´s range and weighs 48k kg empty.

QF isn't considering the A321, and it seems that the reasons will shock you:

1. QF is a B737NG operator;
2. PER-BNE vv is not within easy range of the A321 at all; and
3. The A321 is too small to replace the B767-300ER on domestic routes.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 38):
QFA001, what are your thoughts/impressions/knowledge on the aircraft QF is specifically evaluating?

Since the A340 is out of the running (no real surprise there), I assume the 777-300ER is nearly guaranteed. Then we are looking A350 vs. 787. Besides the rumored 787-9HGW that circulated recently, there doesn't appear to be a model breakdown in the public realm. Any help?

As mentioned, the focus is on the A350, B777 and B787 models. (The A340 just costs too much to run. Besides, the -500 version doesn't have the capability that QF requires.)

The model that has captured their attention the most is the B787, because it is the only 'right-sized' model to replace their domestic B767s. So long as the price is right, it will form the bulk of the order that QF will make. Also, the proposed higher MTOW -9 has blown the A350-800 out-of-the-water. So, I don't think that Airbus can prevent the B787 being ordered. But, if they throw enough money at it, things could happen for them.

The B777-300ER isn't a sure thing to be firm ordered this time around. QF is concentrating on the B767 replacement and new ULR routes. Having said that, the -200LR is the preferred ULR airplane and so the -300ER will be included as options. This would be a little similar to the NZ deal when they took -300ER options with full intent to eventually use that model to replace their B747-400s.

However, if a -300ER deal is too good to refuse...

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 40):
Do you know when next month?

Decision is due at the October Board, which is mid-month. Having said that, I think QF has until the end of the year to make its decision based on the slots that the OEMs have offered.

 airplane QFA001
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:05 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 48):
Also, the proposed higher MTOW -9 has blown the A350-800 out-of-the-water

Is this a higher MTOW variant of the original -9 proposal, or are you just referring to it being heavier than the -8? If it is the former, what is the range?
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!