Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Noshow
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:11 am

It seems to be based on lower paid pilots, significantly more expensive tickets and outlet priced ULR-aircraft. Not sure if this all will work out?
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:03 am

Lewton wrote:
I don't think that any of Airbus or Boeing need this order.


Make no mistake. The Sunrise order will be tied to a very sizeable domestic fleet renewal order, no to mention replacement aircraft for more modest long haul routes.
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
moa999
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:05 am

Not sure about narrow bodies - from previous press articles Qantas doesn't even have a team looking at that yet and they've already got an A321LR/XLR order thru to probably 2027, some of which are suspected to be heading to mainline.

But I do think Sunrise will be a multi-year order with a bunch of options/rights.

If Airbus
350-1000 now.
350neo-1000 in 7-10 years to move to sunrise routes, with the initial aircraft replacing the 333s
Possible options for an 1100/2000

If Boeing
777-9LR now.
777-8LR in 5-7 years
Options on 777-9 for A380 replacement, and conversion of some remaining 787 options for 333
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:15 am

QF744ER wrote:
Could an existing B789 reconfigured with a higher premium seat count, achieve the range required to make this project viable?

Indeed it could.

All the 787-9 needs is an extra fuel tank in the cargo hold.

The research flights with 787-9 took off with 100% fuel but around 20t below MTOW. Any extra passengers would require extra fuel as the flying weight during every stage of the flight is now heavier.

The LD3 sized fuel tanks carry 5700kg of fuel, one of these would get the job done. It should in theory allow the 787-9 to carry 140-150 passengers on average at the 254t MTOW.

Qantas could use a similar layout and density to the Singapore A350-900ULR which has 161 seats. As the 787-9 has slightly less cabin area 140-150 seats is about right. 1-2-1 in the front half and 2-4-2 recliners with extra pitch in the rear half.

That rumour about the 787-9 getting a MTOW increase to 260t. It would have the lowest trip cost of all the options.
 
gloom
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 4:24 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:40 am

RJMAZ wrote:
The LD3 sized fuel tanks carry 5700kg of fuel, one of these would get the job done. It should in theory allow the 787-9 to carry 140-150 passengers on average at the 254t MTOW.


Is that accounting increased fuel burn due to higher weight?

If you assume 20t extra (from MTOW-20t to MTOW), and we assume 0.3% increase from weight (it's been mentioned somewhere it's 0.4%, but also 0.28% I believe for A359, 0.3% seems fair assumption), you need 6% more to achieve the very same range. With over 100t fuel, seems one ACT could be short by a small margin. Probably a ton or two, so I'd say it's 20 passengers short of what you say (safe numbers).

Cheers,
Adam
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:43 am

RJMAZ wrote:
That rumour about the 787-9 getting a MTOW increase to 260t. It would have the lowest trip cost of all the options.


Yes, you keep playing that card. :sarcastic:

We’ve had two major air shows since that rumour started and we’ve heard not a peep from Boeing. Time to give it up I think.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
thepinkmachine
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:43 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:56 am

I'm not saying it's happening, but a 787LR would IMHO be a viable solution, unless there are any technical issues precluding it, which cannot by solved easily. Then again, an MTOW increase of ~6T is not that unthinkable, we have seen other airplanes grow by more then than that.

If we add some future engine efficiency gains, it just might add up to a viable solution in a couple of years.

Also, if a viable plane shows up, other airlines might be interested too. As far as I know TK is considering Aus, El-Al just announced TLV-MEL flights. I bet others would try, if only they had a proper and affordable airplane. Also, LHR-SYD is the most extreme case, the further east you move the starting point (e.g. FRA-SYD etc.), the easier to do it. I think there is potential for more than just a couple of airframes for QF...
"Tell my wife I am trawling Atlantis - and I still have my hands on the wheel…"
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 12:44 pm

gloom wrote:
Is that accounting increased fuel burn due to higher weight?

If you assume 20t extra (from MTOW-20t to MTOW), and we assume 0.3% increase from weight (it's been mentioned somewhere it's 0.4%, but also 0.28% I believe for A359, 0.3% seems fair assumption), you need 6% more to achieve the very same range. With over 100t fuel, seems one ACT could be short by a small margin. Probably a ton or two, so I'd say it's 20 passengers short of what you say (safe numbers).

Cheers,
Adam

Yes it does.

A single LD3 tank would incresse fuel capacity by 5.6%. 101,323kg to 107,020kg. Based on the fuel burn from the research flights that would nearly exactly allow the flight to make the trip at MTOW and 140-150 passengers.

I personally like the idea of having premium traffic flying non stop and having a higher density aircraft doing the kangaroo route.

The 260t MTOW would need a second ACT approximately half filled. 110,000kg of fuel would do the route with 170-180 passengers. That is getting fairly realistic. That is burning 80% of the fuel of the A350-1000 while carrying 75% of the passengers. The 787-9 burns more fuel per passenger but the lower trip burn would make it just as attractive at opening new route.

Airlines will always accept a smaller aircraft if fuel burn per passenger is the same. They will even accept a smaller aircraft with higher fuel burn per passenger providing the trip cost is lower. This means less risk when opening new routes and allows higher frequency. This is why the A380 failed. It needed a huge improvement in fuel burn per passenger to justify the size/risk. The fuel burn burn per passenger was actually the best but no where near good enough.

This is why the 787-8ER would be great for Qantas. It could open up a dozen routes new routes over 8000nm
 
moa999
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 12:53 pm

thepinkmachine wrote:
Also, LHR-SYD is the most extreme case, the further east you move the starting point (e.g. FRA-SYD etc.), the easier to do it. I think there is potential for more than just a couple of airframes for QF...


Remember these are ULH flights. Including cleaning, fuel etc they are almost 24hrs.
So a basic daily SYD-LHR, MEL-LHR, SYD-JFK is six frames.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 1:16 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
gloom wrote:
Is that accounting increased fuel burn due to higher weight?

If you assume 20t extra (from MTOW-20t to MTOW), and we assume 0.3% increase from weight (it's been mentioned somewhere it's 0.4%, but also 0.28% I believe for A359, 0.3% seems fair assumption), you need 6% more to achieve the very same range. With over 100t fuel, seems one ACT could be short by a small margin. Probably a ton or two, so I'd say it's 20 passengers short of what you say (safe numbers).

Cheers,
Adam

Yes it does.

A single LD3 tank would incresse fuel capacity by 5.6%. 101,323kg to 107,020kg. Based on the fuel burn from the research flights that would nearly exactly allow the flight to make the trip at MTOW and 140-150 passengers.

I personally like the idea of having premium traffic flying non stop and having a higher density aircraft doing the kangaroo route.

The 260t MTOW would need a second ACT approximately half filled. 110,000kg of fuel would do the route with 170-180 passengers. That is getting fairly realistic. That is burning 80% of the fuel of the A350-1000 while carrying 75% of the passengers. The 787-9 burns more fuel per passenger but the lower trip burn would make it just as attractive at opening new route.

Airlines will always accept a smaller aircraft if fuel burn per passenger is the same. They will even accept a smaller aircraft with higher fuel burn per passenger providing the trip cost is lower. This means less risk when opening new routes and allows higher frequency. This is why the A380 failed. It needed a huge improvement in fuel burn per passenger to justify the size/risk. The fuel burn burn per passenger was actually the best but no where near good enough.

This is why the 787-8ER would be great for Qantas. It could open up a dozen routes new routes over 8000nm


I really can not see how Qantas will be able to make a business case for this route with the 787+ACT. I can hardly see it with the 777 or the A350. But with Sub 200 pax? Maybe 250+ but even that is low I guess under 300 it will be really hard.

You will need about 10 flight crews for this route (2x per aircraft, 2 aircrafts, 4 resting, 2 in reserve to compensate). One crew will consist at least of 2 pilots, maybe 3 and 6-7FA due to premium heavy configuration. That are 80-100 crew members for one route. And due to the nature of the route also the ones on the top of the salary scale. That is a pretty hefty price tag.
Than the relative high fuel burn per passenger (over 600kg per passenger).
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:02 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
I really can not see how Qantas will be able to make a business case for this route with the 787+ACT. I can hardly see it with the 777 or the A350. But with Sub 200 pax? Maybe 250+ but even that is low I guess under 300 it will be really hard.

The number of seats is probably the least important factor. Fuel burn per seat is the most important. The second would be the lowest trip cost and being small enough to maintain a daily flight.

If 300 seats is the magic number to make the "business case" then an A380 can do the route with 300 passengers. We'll ignore the 254t of fuel that gets used because apparently that is not important.

Kilograms of fuel burn per passenger
787-9: 140 passengers with 107t fuel = 764kg
787-9 (260t): 180 passengers with 110t fuel = 611kg
A350-900ULR: 190 passengers with 117t of fuel = 615kg
A350-1000: 260 passengers with 140t of fuel = 538kg
777-8: 300 passengers with 150t of fuel = 500kg
777LR: 300 passengers with 160t of fuel = 533kg

Now if you want the lowest fuel burn per passenger the 777-8 wins. But if you want a premium cabin with a lower density the A350-900ULR is the best off the shelf option.

The 777LR is fairly decent. It could have been selected 10 years ago.

The 260t 787-9 would be perfect with commonality with the current fleet. They could even keep the front half of the cabin identical to the curent fleet and just fit 2-4-2 economy seats with more pitch to bring the seat count to 180.

My favourite is the 787-8ER
227t current limit: 80 passengers 98t of fuel
235t: 140 passengers 101t fuel current max fuel
254t: 240 passengers with 106t fuel that is an epic 441kg of fuel per passenger. Single ACT and pretty much a stanfard 787-9 shortened to 787-8 length.



FluidFlow wrote:
You will need about 10 flight crews for this route (2x per aircraft, 2 aircrafts, 4 resting, 2 in reserve to compensate). One crew will consist at least of 2 pilots, maybe 3 and 6-7FA due to premium heavy configuration. That are 80-100 crew members for one route. And due to the nature of the route also the ones on the top of the salary scale. That is a pretty hefty price tag.
Than the relative high fuel burn per passenger (over 600kg per passenger).

Less passengers means less FA. The pilot salary is also lower on a smaller plane so it will have a smaller wage cost.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:37 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
I really can not see how Qantas will be able to make a business case for this route with the 787+ACT. I can hardly see it with the 777 or the A350. But with Sub 200 pax? Maybe 250+ but even that is low I guess under 300 it will be really hard.

The number of seats is probably the least important factor. Fuel burn per seat is the most important. The second would be the lowest trip cost and being small enough to maintain a daily flight.

If 300 seats is the magic number to make the "business case" then an A380 can do the route with 300 passengers. We'll ignore the 254t of fuel that gets used because apparently that is not important.

Kilograms of fuel burn per passenger
787-9: 140 passengers with 107t fuel = 764kg
787-9 (260t): 180 passengers with 110t fuel = 611kg
A350-900ULR: 190 passengers with 117t of fuel = 615kg
A350-1000: 260 passengers with 140t of fuel = 538kg
777-8: 300 passengers with 150t of fuel = 500kg
777LR: 300 passengers with 160t of fuel = 533kg

Now if you want the lowest fuel burn per passenger the 777-8 wins. But if you want a premium cabin with a lower density the A350-900ULR is the best off the shelf option.

The 777LR is fairly decent. It could have been selected 10 years ago.


FluidFlow wrote:
You will need about 10 flight crews for this route (2x per aircraft, 2 aircrafts, 4 resting, 2 in reserve to compensate). One crew will consist at least of 2 pilots, maybe 3 and 6-7FA due to premium heavy configuration. That are 80-100 crew members for one route. And due to the nature of the route also the ones on the top of the salary scale. That is a pretty hefty price tag.
Than the relative high fuel burn per passenger (over 600kg per passenger).

Less passengers means less FA. The pilot salary is also lower on a smaller plane so it will have a smaller wage cost.


First thanks you wrote it way more clear than I did with the fuel. But as stated the 787 in low density has a relatively high fuel usage per passenger. That the 777-8 is the best fit is also without a doubt but will it ever be certified and built? My guess is not, as the 777-9 already struggles to get sales and investing a lot into the -8 for one? customer is doubtful.

Chances are it will be postponed until 2030 or whenever a new generation of engines will be hung under the A350/787.

In case of the FA, that is true you would only need 4 with 160 pax but premium pax in general needs more than eco. Even on a TATL with a UA (767-400) we had at least 7 could have been 8 or 9, I did not have a look up to Polaris.
 
thepinkmachine
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:43 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:05 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
In case of the FA, that is true you would only need 4 with 160 pax but premium pax in general needs more than eco. Even on a TATL with a UA (767-400) we had at least 7 could have been 8 or 9, I did not have a look up to Polaris.



As far as I know, the number of FAs must be adequate not only for the number of pax, but also for the number of exits - so for the 787 you still need 8 FAs, regardless of the number of PAX. Not to mention the extra crew required due to flight time limitations - so the point regarding less FA's is moot.
"Tell my wife I am trawling Atlantis - and I still have my hands on the wheel…"
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:28 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
First thanks you wrote it way more clear than I did with the fuel. But as stated the 787 in low density has a relatively high fuel usage per passenger. That the 777-8 is the best fit is also without a doubt but will it ever be certified and built? My guess is not, as the 777-9 already struggles to get sales and investing a lot into the -8 for one? customer is doubtful.

The 777-8 looks doubtful.

The 777-8 covers the 300 passenger requirement with the lowest fuel burn per passenger but that doesn't make it the best choice. The smaller sizes do have advantages at opening up new routes where they have a monopoly and can charge a premium. These new routes might only be able to support 200 seats a day.

I would say the following aircraft would be on equal footing in terms of CASM vs total flight cost in such a competition:
300 seat aircraft with 500kg fuel per passenger
250 seat aircraft with 550kg fuel per passenger
200 seat aircraft with 600kg fuel per passenger
150 seat aircraft with 650kg fuel per passenger

So deciding the winning aircraft would go as follows. If the 150 seater used less than 650kg per passenger it wins. If the 300 seater used less than 500kg then it wins. Any size could win. If the priority shifts to low trip cost suddenly a modified 787 comes into the picture. If CASM is the priority the bigger aircraft will win.

But it gets even more complex. The 150 seat aircraft might have lower seat density so it can charge more per seat to cover the extra fuel. 150 seats on a 787-9 would have more space per seat than 300 seats on a 777-8 so the fuel burn per passenger doesn't have to be equal.

150 seats on a 787-8 and 150 seats on a 787-9. The 787-9 might burn 5% more fuel on the trip but the 787-9 will be loeer density and might be able to charge 10% more per ticket.

The 787-8ER for example could fill the cabin up with 300 economy seats and no business class. That might not make as much profit as 150 seats in a 787-9 that woulf have a big business clads.

The 260t 787-9 is my choice. Commonality with the current fleet is 50% of my reason. Fit the aircraft with 200 seats. Block 3 rows on SYD-LHR, block 2 rows on New york westbound but have the full 200 eastbound. They could fly the full 200 seats to routes like Berlin/Chicago etc
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 4:02 pm

That is only true though if you can charge more. Even for the direct option you will reach a price point where business on one stop will be preferred over economy plus on the non stop. So you are getting limited at one point even if you have enough space to offer maximum comfort possible.

My guess? No aircraft fits at all and the project sunrise will not be launched before the next generation of engines are available for wide body aircraft.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:17 pm

thepinkmachine wrote:
I'm not saying it's happening, but a 787LR would IMHO be a viable solution, unless there are any technical issues precluding it, which cannot by solved easily. Then again, an MTOW increase of ~6T is not that unthinkable, we have seen other airplanes grow by more then than that.

If we add some future engine efficiency gains, it just might add up to a viable solution in a couple of years.

Also, if a viable plane shows up, other airlines might be interested too. As far as I know TK is considering Aus, El-Al just announced TLV-MEL flights. I bet others would try, if only they had a proper and affordable airplane. Also, LHR-SYD is the most extreme case, the further east you move the starting point (e.g. FRA-SYD etc.), the easier to do it. I think there is potential for more than just a couple of airframes for QF...


For now it would be far less certification to do a 788LR as almost all of the elements are currently flying. It is basically a 789 shrunk to the 788 length. MTOW jumps almost 30 tons to 560K lb from 502.5 with an OEW rising something like 3 tons as the 789 gear and wing are a bit heavier. So with max fuel on board a payload of around 66,000 lb. Won't carry 300 pax, but somewhere around 220 pax seems possible. Not a bad number for a premium layout.

I have my doubts if doing the 778 makes sense, its a better concept than the 77L, but the 77L did not sell enough to be worth it, except it was the 77F basically.

I feel the 77F will be staying around for a long while.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15272
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:02 pm

Mods : Can this thread please get locked after the last flight on the 16th ?

We have the same people making up data about aircraft that don’t exist and presenting it as if it were factual, and aircraft which QF have publicly dismissed. Very little discussion on the 3 actual research flights.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
VV
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 9:24 pm

zeke wrote:
Mods : Can this thread please get locked after the last flight on the 16th ?

We have the same people making up data about aircraft that don’t exist and presenting it as if it were factual, and aircraft which QF have publicly dismissed. Very little discussion on the 3 actual research flights.




Wouldn't it be more interesting if we wait until Qantas announces its decision soon?

At that point we can start another discussion thread on why Qantas would have taken that specific decision and also start another fight to discuss about which opinion has been right and which one has been wrong all along.

It would be fun.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2999
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:03 pm

zeke wrote:
Mods : Can this thread please get locked after the last flight on the 16th ?

We have the same people making up data about aircraft that don’t exist and presenting it as if it were factual, and aircraft which QF have publicly dismissed. Very little discussion on the 3 actual research flights.


You don’t have to be in this thread...
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5086
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:32 pm

moa999 wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Also, LHR-SYD is the most extreme case, the further east you move the starting point (e.g. FRA-SYD etc.), the easier to do it. I think there is potential for more than just a couple of airframes for QF...


Remember these are ULH flights. Including cleaning, fuel etc they are almost 24hrs.
So a basic daily SYD-LHR, MEL-LHR, SYD-JFK is six frames.

People keep under estimating the number of frames necessary to SYD/MEl-LHR, daily! Historically it has been 3 frames for each route. Part of the reason forr this was flight ttime but also included QFs LHR slot times and SYD curfew. A few years ago QF reduced this to about 5.5 frames by some creative timetabling between QF 1/2 & QF 9/10. I have no idea if this will be able to be continued with them becoming non stops. So SYD/MEL-LHR will require 5.5 frames, which means 6 and JFK, at least 2 maybe more as I think 2 frames will be very tight, so we are looking at 8 frames minimum and no margin so I would expect the initial order to be for 10 to 12 frames.

Gemuser
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1347
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:03 pm

It's pretty apparent now that QF has gone from choosing an aircraft, to choosing whether to move the project forward at all.
So I'm with Zeke about locking this thread, it has outlived its purpose and has become nothing more than a rumor mill and people throwing around dubious data.

When there is proper news, a new thread can be opened and the subject discussed with fresh perspectives.
 
VHOZ
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2019 12:31 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:33 pm

Would Airbus have offered buyback deals to QF on their 380's similar to Lufthansa to make their offer more attractive? Or QF will use their 380's to EOL similar to what they do with other aircraft as part of OPEX?
 
moa999
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:47 pm

You don't have to read the thread.
If it's closed another will simply pop up and the same merry go round will ensue.
With 1000 posts it's clear that people have views, some want to discuss and some just want to make statements.

May as well keep it open until either the Project is cancelled or an order is made.
 
Sparker
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:06 am

moa999 wrote:
You don't have to read the thread.
If it's closed another will simply pop up and the same merry go round will ensue.
With 1000 posts it's clear that people have views, some want to discuss and some just want to make statements.

May as well keep it open until either the Project is cancelled or an order is made.


Agreed. That is exactly what happened when the last Project Sunrise thread was closed. We're not that far away from QF's decision-point early next year, in any case, and there are a stack of events between now and then that people are going to want to discuss - the next test flight, pilot vote on the EA, inevitable leaks about A and B's response to QF, updates on the 777X program etc.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:08 am

vhtje wrote:
Lewton wrote:
I don't think that any of Airbus or Boeing need this order.


Make no mistake. The Sunrise order will be tied to a very sizeable domestic fleet renewal order, no to mention replacement aircraft for more modest long haul routes.


Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the current hold up: Airbus/Boeing are prepared to sharpen their pencil on this marquee order in return for 100 neo/MAX and 30 of whatever they're pitching to replace the A330s. Qantas are saying we'll take the revised pricing on the PS aircraft but won't commit to the others. The OEMs are saying it's a package deal, take it or leave it. Just my speculation of course.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:29 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
It is basically a 789 shrunk to the 788 length. MTOW jumps almost 30 tons to 560K lb from 502.5 with an OEW rising something like 3 tons as the 789 gear and wing are a bit heavier. So with max fuel on board a payload of around 66,000 lb. Won't carry 300 pax, but somewhere around 220 pax seems possible. Not a bad number for a premium layout.

It is definitely more than 220.

Working backwards from the 787-9. The 787-9 did the route around 20t below MTOW. In most widebody aircraft every 1000kg of added payload you generally need 500kg of extra fuel. So with 20t of MTOW left the 787-9 could add 7t fuel and 13t for payload. That is 130 extra passengers that could be added if the 787-9 had extra fuel capacity. The flight already had 40 people onboard so 140-150 passengers with 107t of fuel used is within 1% accuracy.

Now the 787-8ER would weigh around 7000kg less than the 787-9 that is 70 extra passengers. We are already at 210-220 passengers. The shorter fuselage would reduce skin drag and fuel burn at the same 254t MTOW. So if the 787-9 could do the route with 107t of fuel the 787-8 would require 102t. That is another 50 passengers bringing it up to 260-270.

Working upwards from the current 787-8 ACAP it can already carry 8t to 9500nm. Using the second kink point a MTOW of 235t is very close so we can extrapolate it to do 140 passengers at 9200nm with 101t of fuel.

Now with 19t remaining until we hit the 254t MTOW, add 3t for weight gain, 6t for fuel and 10t for payload. That is now at 240 passengers minimum. This is slightly lower result as the 787-8 ACAP does not have the same PIP engines that the 787-9 does. This would put the 787-8ER back up to 260-270 passengers.

But even with 220 passengers the fuel burn would be less than 110t. That is worst case result under 500kg of fuel per passenger. That is less than even the most optimistic A350-1000ULR or 777-8 result.

The A350-1000 acap with the 316t MTOW has the second kink point has at 8500nm with 127t of fuel and 32t payload. Now to get to 9200nm that is nearly exaxtly an hour and a half of extra fuel 9-10t. If it had the capacity that means 136-137t of fuel with 22-23t of payload. Hard to argue with that. Now bring the MTOW up to 319t and lets be optimistic and assume the A350 burns no extra fuel at the higher weight. Lets also be optimistic that the A350 gained no extra weight from the fuel capacity or MTOW upgrade. That 3t of extra MTOW then goes straight to payload bringing to to 25-26t.

Now 260 passengers with 136t of fuel is 526kg of fuel per passenger. This would be more accurate than any public available data. That is more than the worst case result for the 787-8ER.
Last edited by RJMAZ on Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:38 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the current hold up: Airbus/Boeing are prepared to sharpen their pencil on this marquee order in return for 100 neo/MAX and 30 of whatever they're pitching to replace the A330s. Qantas are saying we'll take the revised pricing on the PS aircraft but won't commit to the others. The OEMs are saying it's a package deal, take it or leave it. Just my speculation of course.


Well, of course AJ would say that publicly because he is trying to put pressure on each manufacturer.

But he would be a very poor negotiator (let alone CEO) if he didn’t use the domestic fleet renewal to wrangle a better Sunrise deal, and, of course, vice versa.

His public statement of “the two are not linked” simply doesn’t past the smell test.

Of course, if QF end up its B777s for long-haul and A320s for domestic duty (or A350s long-haul /B737-8s domestically) then we can conclude QF overplayed their hand at the negotiation tables. But I bet QF do not (they are far too savvy for that) and that the orders are, indeed, linked in the end.
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
foxtrotbravo21
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 2:52 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:16 am

In any case, the order is not that many at most between 8 to 12 aircrafts. Doubt if Airbus or Boeing will make too significant changes to their airvraft specifically for this sunrise project as the number of aircrafts in question is not many.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10394
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:25 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

...he was also clear that the a/c needed to seat 300 pax then he was also clear that the a/c did not need to seat 300 pax and he was also clear that the decision would be made this year and he is now clear that the decision will be made next year, so...stay tuned
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2286
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:49 am

RJMAZ wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
It is basically a 789 shrunk to the 788 length. MTOW jumps almost 30 tons to 560K lb from 502.5 with an OEW rising something like 3 tons as the 789 gear and wing are a bit heavier. So with max fuel on board a payload of around 66,000 lb. Won't carry 300 pax, but somewhere around 220 pax seems possible. Not a bad number for a premium layout.

It is definitely more than 220.

Working backwards from the 787-9. The 787-9 did the route around 20t below MTOW. In most widebody aircraft every 1000kg of added payload you generally need 500kg of extra fuel. So with 20t of MTOW left the 787-9 could add 7t fuel and 13t for payload. That is 130 extra passengers that could be added if the 787-9 had extra fuel capacity. The flight already had 40 people onboard so 140-150 passengers with 107t of fuel used is within 1% accuracy.

Now the 787-8ER would weigh around 7000kg less than the 787-9 that is 70 extra passengers. We are already at 210-220 passengers. The shorter fuselage would reduce skin drag and fuel burn at the same 254t MTOW. So if the 787-9 could do the route with 107t of fuel the 787-8 would require 102t. That is another 50 passengers bringing it up to 260-270.

Working upwards from the current 787-8 ACAP it can already carry 8t to 9500nm. Using the second kink point a MTOW of 235t is very close so we can extrapolate it to do 140 passengers at 9200nm with 101t of fuel.

Now with 19t remaining until we hit the 254t MTOW, add 3t for weight gain, 6t for fuel and 10t for payload. That is now at 240 passengers minimum. This is slightly lower result as the 787-8 ACAP does not have the same PIP engines that the 787-9 does. This would put the 787-8ER back up to 260-270 passengers.

But even with 220 passengers the fuel burn would be less than 110t. That is worst case result under 500kg of fuel per passenger. That is less than even the most optimistic A350-1000ULR or 777-8 result.

The A350-1000 acap with the 316t MTOW has the second kink point has at 8500nm with 127t of fuel and 32t payload. Now to get to 9200nm that is nearly exaxtly an hour and a half of extra fuel 9-10t. If it had the capacity that means 136-137t of fuel with 22-23t of payload. Hard to argue with that. Now bring the MTOW up to 319t and lets be optimistic and assume the A350 burns no extra fuel at the higher weight. Lets also be optimistic that the A350 gained no extra weight from the fuel capacity or MTOW upgrade. That 3t of extra MTOW then goes straight to payload bringing to to 25-26t.

Now 260 passengers with 136t of fuel is 526kg of fuel per passenger. This would be more accurate than any public available data. That is more than the worst case result for the 787-8ER.


I generally agree with your numbers, I was just trying to be conservative in the possible count. We both feel that the 788LR appears to be a capable plane for the route with both initial cost and trip costs in competition. To do the 788LR right, there does need to be some added fuel capacity, in either a ACT or built in added tankage, but not a crazy amount.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5086
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:23 am

foxtrotbravo21 wrote:
In any case, the order is not that many at most between 8 to 12 aircrafts. Doubt if Airbus or Boeing will make too significant changes to their airvraft specifically for this sunrise project as the number of aircrafts in question is not many.

Yes it is, for the initial PS order BUT what is being talked about above is that it is really an order for more than just the PS aircraft. Who knows what will eventually happen but don;t write iit off, YET, as only an 8 to 12 aircraft order.

Gemuser
 
Sparker
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:18 am

Gemuser wrote:
foxtrotbravo21 wrote:
In any case, the order is not that many at most between 8 to 12 aircrafts. Doubt if Airbus or Boeing will make too significant changes to their airvraft specifically for this sunrise project as the number of aircrafts in question is not many.

Yes it is, for the initial PS order BUT what is being talked about above is that it is really an order for more than just the PS aircraft. Who knows what will eventually happen but don;t write iit off, YET, as only an 8 to 12 aircraft order.

Gemuser


Agreed. Joyce has been clear in public that QF would consider additional ULH routes once it had demonstrated that PS works. This is entirely consistent with the approach that QF has been taking to its 787 options, of incrementally firming up orders once it is confident that it has a clear role for each additional frame, and so strikes me as credible.

Additionally, whichever plane wins PS would be in the box seat for the A380 replacement.

It wouldn't surprise me if QF was negotiating for an initial order of 8, to cover LHR and JFK, plus a further (say) 12 options to cover potential new routes, as well as dangling a follow-on order for a further 12 to replace the A380.

I'd also bet that QF wants Boeing to commit to manufacturing the 777X through the 2020s, as part of the package to secure it's order, to avoid being left high and dry if the program is cancelled ala the A380 and EK. I'd also bet Boeing would be reluctant on that front...
 
benjjk
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:29 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:29 am

vhtje wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the current hold up: Airbus/Boeing are prepared to sharpen their pencil on this marquee order in return for 100 neo/MAX and 30 of whatever they're pitching to replace the A330s. Qantas are saying we'll take the revised pricing on the PS aircraft but won't commit to the others. The OEMs are saying it's a package deal, take it or leave it. Just my speculation of course.


Well, of course AJ would say that publicly because he is trying to put pressure on each manufacturer.

But he would be a very poor negotiator (let alone CEO) if he didn’t use the domestic fleet renewal to wrangle a better Sunrise deal, and, of course, vice versa.

His public statement of “the two are not linked” simply doesn’t past the smell test.

Of course, if QF end up its B777s for long-haul and A320s for domestic duty (or A350s long-haul /B737-8s domestically) then we can conclude QF overplayed their hand at the negotiation tables. But I bet QF do not (they are far too savvy for that) and that the orders are, indeed, linked in the end.


You could be right, but AJ did say recently that the Sunrise resources are needed to begin the domestic fleet renewal planning process next year. It's a big jump to go from having done no work on it to being in a position to place an order in just a couple of months. Given that strong domestic performance is the only thing that saved the airline this decade, rushing this decision seems a bit risky to me.
 
Sparker
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:11 am

benjjk wrote:
vhtje wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the current hold up: Airbus/Boeing are prepared to sharpen their pencil on this marquee order in return for 100 neo/MAX and 30 of whatever they're pitching to replace the A330s. Qantas are saying we'll take the revised pricing on the PS aircraft but won't commit to the others. The OEMs are saying it's a package deal, take it or leave it. Just my speculation of course.


Well, of course AJ would say that publicly because he is trying to put pressure on each manufacturer.

But he would be a very poor negotiator (let alone CEO) if he didn’t use the domestic fleet renewal to wrangle a better Sunrise deal, and, of course, vice versa.

His public statement of “the two are not linked” simply doesn’t past the smell test.

Of course, if QF end up its B777s for long-haul and A320s for domestic duty (or A350s long-haul /B737-8s domestically) then we can conclude QF overplayed their hand at the negotiation tables. But I bet QF do not (they are far too savvy for that) and that the orders are, indeed, linked in the end.


You could be right, but AJ did say recently that the Sunrise resources are needed to begin the domestic fleet renewal planning process next year. It's a big jump to go from having done no work on it to being in a position to place an order in just a couple of months. Given that strong domestic performance is the only thing that saved the airline this decade, rushing this decision seems a bit risky to me.


Also, even if QF had the resources, I'm not sure that it is as clear-cut, that the best negotiating tactic for QF is to try to get concessions on its future NB order as part of the PS deal. Sure, if it got an package deal that was too good to refuse, then that would make sense. But, QF might equally want to run a separate competition if it expects that the loser of the PS order would bid more aggressively to avoid missing out a second time.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1675
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:04 am

Gemuser wrote:
moa999 wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Also, LHR-SYD is the most extreme case, the further east you move the starting point (e.g. FRA-SYD etc.), the easier to do it. I think there is potential for more than just a couple of airframes for QF...


Remember these are ULH flights. Including cleaning, fuel etc they are almost 24hrs.
So a basic daily SYD-LHR, MEL-LHR, SYD-JFK is six frames.

People keep under estimating the number of frames necessary to SYD/MEl-LHR, daily! Historically it has been 3 frames for each route. Part of the reason forr this was flight ttime but also included QFs LHR slot times and SYD curfew. A few years ago QF reduced this to about 5.5 frames by some creative timetabling between QF 1/2 & QF 9/10. I have no idea if this will be able to be continued with them becoming non stops. So SYD/MEL-LHR will require 5.5 frames, which means 6 and JFK, at least 2 maybe more as I think 2 frames will be very tight, so we are looking at 8 frames minimum and no margin so I would expect the initial order to be for 10 to 12 frames.

Gemuser

NZ plans to operate to EWR on a schedule that allows for a return flight AKL-East Coast Australia in between EWR rotations. On that basis I think it's well possible for QF to do the same but without an AKL stop in a 48-hour cycle. Two aircraft should definitely be enough for SYD-JFK
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:59 am

DavidByrne wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
moa999 wrote:

Remember these are ULH flights. Including cleaning, fuel etc they are almost 24hrs.
So a basic daily SYD-LHR, MEL-LHR, SYD-JFK is six frames.

People keep under estimating the number of frames necessary to SYD/MEl-LHR, daily! Historically it has been 3 frames for each route. Part of the reason forr this was flight ttime but also included QFs LHR slot times and SYD curfew. A few years ago QF reduced this to about 5.5 frames by some creative timetabling between QF 1/2 & QF 9/10. I have no idea if this will be able to be continued with them becoming non stops. So SYD/MEL-LHR will require 5.5 frames, which means 6 and JFK, at least 2 maybe more as I think 2 frames will be very tight, so we are looking at 8 frames minimum and no margin so I would expect the initial order to be for 10 to 12 frames.

Gemuser

NZ plans to operate to EWR on a schedule that allows for a return flight AKL-East Coast Australia in between EWR rotations. On that basis I think it's well possible for QF to do the same but without an AKL stop in a 48-hour cycle. Two aircraft should definitely be enough for SYD-JFK


Of course 2 frames are enough for SYD-JFK given they operate BNE-LAX-JFK-LAX-BNE with two frames. Gemuser's point (I think) is you need to add at least one additional to the total to cover maintenance etc. Pending slot times 5 is the minimum for SYD/MEL-LHR (personally I think 6 is more likely as the shorter flight times makes an evening departure from LHR unlikely) plus two for JFK, plus one spare, so 8 is the minimum order, and more likely 9.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
VV
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:06 pm

Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7535
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:08 pm

VV wrote:
Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.


What do QF need 10-18 widebodies for?
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1869
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:13 pm

VV wrote:
Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.


Why would Joyce change his publicity strategy with Sunrise now when it has been so successful by supplying no answers at all.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:37 pm

VV wrote:
Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.


Why on earth do they need to say something before next week when Joyce has already said it will be February?!? :confused:
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:43 pm

vhtje wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
Alan Joyce has made it clear that the domestic fleet renewal is an entirely separate project and that the two aren't linked in any way (from Qantas' perspective).

I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the current hold up: Airbus/Boeing are prepared to sharpen their pencil on this marquee order in return for 100 neo/MAX and 30 of whatever they're pitching to replace the A330s. Qantas are saying we'll take the revised pricing on the PS aircraft but won't commit to the others. The OEMs are saying it's a package deal, take it or leave it. Just my speculation of course.


Well, of course AJ would say that publicly because he is trying to put pressure on each manufacturer.

But he would be a very poor negotiator (let alone CEO) if he didn’t use the domestic fleet renewal to wrangle a better Sunrise deal, and, of course, vice versa.

His public statement of “the two are not linked” simply doesn’t past the smell test.

Of course, if QF end up its B777s for long-haul and A320s for domestic duty (or A350s long-haul /B737-8s domestically) then we can conclude QF overplayed their hand at the negotiation tables. But I bet QF do not (they are far too savvy for that) and that the orders are, indeed, linked in the end.


Unless you are accusing Alan Joyce of deliberately miselading the ASX I suggest you retract your statement. Qantas have made it very clear, on multiple occasions, that they have not even begun the process of considering the domestic fleet replacement, a project they intend to start in 2020.

Of course I should know better than to allow reality to get in the way of an Anet conspiracy theory.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
VV
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:11 pm

RickNRoll wrote:
VV wrote:
Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.


Why would Joyce change his publicity strategy with Sunrise now when it has been so successful by supplying no answers at all.


His strategy so far is option 1?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15272
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:14 pm

RyanairGuru wrote:
Why on earth do they need to say something before next week when Joyce has already said it will be February?!? :confused:


I could even see it being pushed back even further than next week. If the posts on the EK cancellation thread are true, the 777-8 model is at risk of never being built.

That will add risk to the PS decision, that risk will be quantified and will become part of the business case.

QF have stated this is a competition between the A350 and 777-8.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Whatsaptudo
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:24 pm

According to an internal email this morning, If they buy it, it will be the A350-1000. Time frame for an order and a deal with the pilots pushed to March.
 
 
SEU
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:33 pm

CONFIRMED - A350-1000. Personally I thought it was going to be the 787-9 but I guess you can get more PAX in the A350-1000 for the range. https://twitter.com/Airbus/status/1205252815536500738
 
qf002
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:34 pm

VV wrote:
Qantas needs to say something between now and the end of next week.

Options:
1. Announce another delay for the decision on widebody order
2. Announce to go ahead with Project Sunrise and announce an aircraft selection
3. Announce a no-go (for now) decision for Project Sunrise but announce order for 10-18 widebodies.

I think the third one is the most likely. It's my gut feel.ion for Project Sunrise but announce a 20-28 widebody orders for general use.


They basically just did all three lol
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 3710
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:36 pm

afterburner33 wrote:

Great news for Airbus, and fantastic to see that sunrise is in fact still going ahead. I’m very curious to find out what the specs/weights of the A350-1000 will be for this.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
moa999
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:57 pm

Qantas Release
Still no order.
Up to 12 aircraft
Final decision by March

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... t-sunrise/
 
VHOZ
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2019 12:31 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, Update: Final decision on PS delayed to Fe

Thu Dec 12, 2019 11:04 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
afterburner33 wrote:

Great news for Airbus, and fantastic to see that sunrise is in fact still going ahead. I’m very curious to find out what the specs/weights of the A350-1000 will be for this.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



There is a big caveat on the Qantas official release that is is the preferred aircraft if project Sunrise proceeds. https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/qantas-update-on-project-sunrise/

What sould have been the other options Airbus might have offered to make the deal attractive ? A380 buybacks or some attractive 320 NEO options for the upcoming domestic fleet renewal ?

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