• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:15 am

I presume this has to do with recent events in HKG, CX has reduced PER-HKG to daily temporarily not have operated the 3 weekly A333 since the 5th and will resume on the 14th

VA is currently operating MEL-HKG 6 weekly this week down to 5 weekly next week while SYD-HKG is only operating 4 times this week
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
CraigAnderson
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:28 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:17 am

I was reading Scurrah commenting on how he wants to make Virgin "the best value airline" for leisure and business travellers. I really think he should ditch Tiger completely, ditch HKG and apart from LAX and NZ just focus on the domestic market. Roll out US-style 'Basic Economy' fares where it's just a seat and a carry-on bag, then have your Economy and Economy X seats and of course business class. Ditch the expensive sponsorships like Fashion Week and Australian Chamber Orchestra and Sydney Dance Company which all came from Borghetti's ego tripping. Just get back to the basics of being a good value alternative to Qantas.
 
smi0006
Posts: 2316
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:30 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
I was reading Scurrah commenting on how he wants to make Virgin "the best value airline" for leisure and business travellers. I really think he should ditch Tiger completely, ditch HKG and apart from LAX and NZ just focus on the domestic market. Roll out US-style 'Basic Economy' fares where it's just a seat and a carry-on bag, then have your Economy and Economy X seats and of course business class. Ditch the expensive sponsorships like Fashion Week and Australian Chamber Orchestra and Sydney Dance Company which all came from Borghetti's ego tripping. Just get back to the basics of being a good value alternative to Qantas.


I fully agree - a simple seats to suit product like NZ have on the Tasman. And potentially look for some cost savings in domestic transcon business. QF only aligned their transcon product with international as VA upped the product first. Before VA QF ran reclining business seats on old 767 with no IFE.

If they are looking to align TT management with VA the brand must be staying. Perhaps have TT take over some of the PI and some Tasman routes. TT would better compete with JQ, than VA compete with NZ/QF.

Get back to basic, get back to being Virgin, be authentic and unique. Not a QF wanna be. I’d imagine they will cut, cut, cut and be reborn with a light brand refresh, or end the virgin licence.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:09 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
I was reading Scurrah commenting on how he wants to make Virgin "the best value airline" for leisure and business travellers. I really think he should ditch Tiger completely, ditch HKG and apart from LAX and NZ just focus on the domestic market. Roll out US-style 'Basic Economy' fares where it's just a seat and a carry-on bag, then have your Economy and Economy X seats and of course business class. Ditch the expensive sponsorships like Fashion Week and Australian Chamber Orchestra and Sydney Dance Company which all came from Borghetti's ego tripping. Just get back to the basics of being a good value alternative to Qantas.


I would also add that the A332's should be ditched when their leases expire, by that time they will have a number of 737MAX10's in the fleet which could accommodate the short fall with a few schedule adjustments here and there. I still think TT has a role to play, though there is duplication between VA, VARA and TT which Scurrah is addressing through the cuts announced a couple of weeks ago. TT is also getting another 738 next month and that will be the last one till the 737MAX arrives. On the sponsorships while I agree with you on ditching the ones mentioned if there are contracts tied to these which may not make it easy to cut them. Also I think we need to give Scurrah time as in some instances he has one hand tied behind his back with a leg amputated while being blindfolded thanks to Borghetti.
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:34 am

Seeing that SQ had just recently signed a codeshare agreement with GA, what are the chances of SQ 'loosening' some control over 'who can VA partner and not partner with'? This also follows with the airline alliances survey that VA sent out after SQ/EY 'allegedly' were previously opposed to VA joining any of the major airline alliances.

A GA/VA codeshare agreement for the Australia-bali route in general would allow VA to still offer Bali as a non-stop destination on GA as a codeshare should VA decide to pull out.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:54 am

SCFlyer wrote:
Seeing that SQ had just recently signed a codeshare agreement with GA, what are the chances of SQ 'loosening' some control over 'who can VA partner and not partner with'? This also follows with the airline alliances survey that VA sent out after SQ/EY 'allegedly' were previously opposed to VA joining any of the major airline alliances.

A GA/VA codeshare agreement for the Australia-bali route in general would allow VA to still offer Bali as a non-stop destination on GA as a codeshare should VA decide to pull out.

We don't really know that SQ has ever blocked anyone though that was the rumour. I'm not sure what the status of Bali flights is; for a long time I think the yields were pretty terrible for everyone on the route. Maybe the lowering of capacity by TT/VA has helped those remaining but airlines such as Malindo and Batik have entered so I can't imagine it is a goldmine for anyone.

Having said that, a partnership makes infinite sense for both VA and GA and not just to DPS but throughout Indonesia. GA currently offers domestic interlining on both QF and VA so a partnership would help VA locally assuming they became exclusive whilst GA could gain good flow of Velocity customers to DPS, CGK and beyond. As a regular traveller to Indonesia and Jakarta in particular, I can say that GA offers a good product and for anyone outside Sydney the most regular and direct services. To get to CGK from MEL on QF often involves flying via SIN with a backtrack on 3K which adds hours to the journey; GA has direct services to CGK 4 times a week and a good connecting service via DPS on the other days.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
Obzerva
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:48 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:25 am

openskies88 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
You're joking. A) The 77Ws are only 70% full on 9-abreast guzzlers.


Yes, let's just ignore the BITRE data and come up with our own statistics. :roll:


Agree, I'm trying to work out how adding more seats to a plane that isn't full to make it a more uncomfortable passenger experience is going to help any airline!
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 7900
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:09 am

Like QF-UA, the QF-GA interline is one of those ones that neither carrier widely publicises but adds value to both carriers. In addition to QF feeding GA in Australia, QF flows traffic to GA for connections over CGK (and to a lessor extent DPS) to destinations like SUB, JOG, UPG etc. While the secondary Indonesian cities aren't huge markets from Australia there is some traffic, and between them GA and QF lock up this market pretty well. In comparison VA don't feed any traffic onto GA via DPS* so GA would probably.be hesitant to do a deal with them outside of a comprehensive two-way agreement that adds some value to them beyond the domestic feed that they are already getting.

*Before someone states the obvious, I'm sure that some passengers self-connect, but there are no interline through-fares.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
D7A330
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 2:12 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:39 am

qf789 wrote:
TT is also getting another 738 next month and that will be the last one till the 737MAX arrives.


For anyone interested, VH-VUX is the next 738 to be transferred. Positioned to TSV Sunday as VA9939.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3205
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:48 am

I honestly think that VA have no idea what to do with TT, given that they have talked up the idea of the later taking over some international flying, but other than the mess that was their DPS attempt nothing has come from it.

VA’s brand proposition has been a mess for a long time, even before in its form as DJ. The new world carrier that it tried to become was exactly what Air Berlin had moved into (a carrier for everything) and that didn’t end up well.

They need to find a piece of the market that they can get their costs to better match the revenue, right sizing where required and better streamlining their resources. I don’t envy the new CEO’s job though untangling what was constructed.
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:00 pm

TBH, IMO I'd just shut down TT and transfer the 738s back to mainline.

TT/XR's A320s and the Fokkers should be merged into the 1 AOC as the 1-class branded with "Regional" added to the branding of VARA. VARA a/c (Fokkers & Airbuses) would be Economy Class only with unbundled fares.

In addition to FIFO work, VARA a/c would be sent onto routes that would not be able to support J class otherwise (e.g BNE-MKY, BNE-TSV, ADL-ASP, ADL-DRW), or compliment routes at certain times of the day where J may not be needed (e.g SYD-OOL, MEL-OOL). The only complimentary part would be the Water/Tea/Juice.
 
getluv
Posts: 519
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:27 pm

tullamarine wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:
Seeing that SQ had just recently signed a codeshare agreement with GA, what are the chances of SQ 'loosening' some control over 'who can VA partner and not partner with'? This also follows with the airline alliances survey that VA sent out after SQ/EY 'allegedly' were previously opposed to VA joining any of the major airline alliances.

A GA/VA codeshare agreement for the Australia-bali route in general would allow VA to still offer Bali as a non-stop destination on GA as a codeshare should VA decide to pull out.

We don't really know that SQ has ever blocked anyone though that was the rumour. I'm not sure what the status of Bali flights is; for a long time I think the yields were pretty terrible for everyone on the route. Maybe the lowering of capacity by TT/VA has helped those remaining but airlines such as Malindo and Batik have entered so I can't imagine it is a goldmine for anyone.

Having said that, a partnership makes infinite sense for both VA and GA and not just to DPS but throughout Indonesia. GA currently offers domestic interlining on both QF and VA so a partnership would help VA locally assuming they became exclusive whilst GA could gain good flow of Velocity customers to DPS, CGK and beyond. As a regular traveller to Indonesia and Jakarta in particular, I can say that GA offers a good product and for anyone outside Sydney the most regular and direct services. To get to CGK from MEL on QF often involves flying via SIN with a backtrack on 3K which adds hours to the journey; GA has direct services to CGK 4 times a week and a good connecting service via DPS on the other days.


Batik and Malindo has had no affect on JQ or QF, and looking at the BITRE figures it would be GA feeling it the most from agnostic passengers. QF/JQ have incrementally increased capacity to DPS with QF now using 333s on some days between SYD-DPS. JQ has a very, very small base in PER so it is not in a position to expand to other parts of Indonesia out of PER.

CGK is a different beast. It does well. However, like MNL, QF would prefer these destinations remain low risk and to filling seats with the Australian business community and Government delegations out of SYD.
I'm that bad type.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3205
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:50 pm

SCFlyer wrote:
TBH, IMO I'd just shut down TT and transfer the 738s back to mainline.

TT/XR's A320s and the Fokkers should be merged into the 1 AOC as the 1-class branded with "Regional" added to the branding of VARA. VARA a/c (Fokkers & Airbuses) would be Economy Class only with unbundled fares.

In addition to FIFO work, VARA a/c would be sent onto routes that would not be able to support J class otherwise (e.g BNE-MKY, BNE-TSV, ADL-ASP, ADL-DRW), or compliment routes at certain times of the day where J may not be needed (e.g SYD-OOL, MEL-OOL). The only complimentary part would be the Water/Tea/Juice.


The reality is that once the TT A320’s go, the VARA ones should too. No point having a couple of aircraft only. I’m sure that there would be a couple of 737’s they could use that aren’t being utilised once network changes are made.

Moving forward, whether they need the A332’s will be interesting to see. Without HKG, PER routes would be about all they are used for, and with a change of strategy, having such a luxurious business class offering for those routes may be seen as not necessary.

With a fleet of the following they would certainly streamline costs:

- B737 (VA and TT)
- B777 (VA)
- F100 (VARA)

All depends on the lease agreements I guess though.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:10 pm

Obzerva wrote:
openskies88 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
You're joking. A) The 77Ws are only 70% full on 9-abreast guzzlers.


Yes, let's just ignore the BITRE data and come up with our own statistics. :roll:


Agree, I'm trying to work out how adding more seats to a plane that isn't full to make it a more uncomfortable passenger experience is going to help any airline!

Then you need to re-take microeconomics. Unless customers complain of low comfort, the comfort argument is a paper tiger. Most airlines have gotten along with 10-abreast just fine. Qantas lacks the capacity to get all Aussies to LAX, and they charge a premium for it too.

When you make products cheaper, more of them sell. if you increase economy seat availability by 11%, decrease the price 8%, and sell 7% more tickets, you just turned a profit increase of 5%. However, if you just make the 9-abreast seats cheaper instead of refurbishing for 10-abreast, well you basically come out with a wash. Demand to vacation in Australia is rising thanks to the lousy AUD, which shows no signs of recovering anytime soon. Qantas' business-oriented time slots at LAX will get less valuable for Aussie fliers, but leisure will surge, which Qantas' planes are not really equipped for.

VA is equipped with the right aircraft in the wrong seating config at the wrong price point to get their leisure travel cash.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:13 pm

IndianicWorld wrote:

The reality is that once the TT A320’s go, the VARA ones should too. No point having a couple of aircraft only. I’m sure that there would be a couple of 737’s they could use that aren’t being utilised once network changes are made.

Moving forward, whether they need the A332’s will be interesting to see. Without HKG, PER routes would be about all they are used for, and with a change of strategy, having such a luxurious business class offering for those routes may be seen as not necessary.

Is Perth slot-restricted or something? I've noticed most of the flights out there from the other capitals are only once or twice-daily A330s. I thought business travelers preferred more frequent flights.
 
bwwt
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:07 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
IndianicWorld wrote:

The reality is that once the TT A320’s go, the VARA ones should too. No point having a couple of aircraft only. I’m sure that there would be a couple of 737’s they could use that aren’t being utilised once network changes are made.

Moving forward, whether they need the A332’s will be interesting to see. Without HKG, PER routes would be about all they are used for, and with a change of strategy, having such a luxurious business class offering for those routes may be seen as not necessary.

Is Perth slot-restricted or something? I've noticed most of the flights out there from the other capitals are only once or twice-daily A330s. I thought business travelers preferred more frequent flights.


Nope, it is not - it was a marketing ploy by both QF and VA to offer 'international service' on transcons. It has definitely died down from it's early 2010s hey day though.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:12 pm

bwwt wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
Is Perth slot-restricted or something? I've noticed most of the flights out there from the other capitals are only once or twice-daily A330s. I thought business travelers preferred more frequent flights.


Nope, it is not - it was a marketing ploy by both QF and VA to offer 'international service' on transcons. It has definitely died down from it's early 2010s hey day though.

Alright, then the A321 and 737 MAX 10 can cover that well enough. Gives QF and VA one more reason to nix the less efficient A330 CEO from their fleets.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:44 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
bwwt wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
Is Perth slot-restricted or something? I've noticed most of the flights out there from the other capitals are only once or twice-daily A330s. I thought business travelers preferred more frequent flights.


Nope, it is not - it was a marketing ploy by both QF and VA to offer 'international service' on transcons. It has definitely died down from it's early 2010s hey day though.

Alright, then the A321 and 737 MAX 10 can cover that well enough. Gives QF and VA one more reason to nix the less efficient A330 CEO from their fleets.

You seem to be under some delusion that the A330 is inefficient. A middle aged A330 has total operating costs less than or equal to a brand new 787 when depreciation/finance costs are considered. The A330 remains the workhorse of Asia Pacific not just with QF but also airlines such as CX, GA, MH PR and a whole gamut of Chinese airlines. Until the 787 came along, it had unbeatable economics and now, when finance costs are considered, remains competitive.

I don't doubt that A321s and MAX-10s will eventually take a significant part of trans-continental flying but SYD curfew means there will always be significant peaks out of PER in the afternoon at around 4PM. I imagine the economics of operating a single A330 remain superior to wingtip flying 2 A321s or 73Js. Regardless the new larger narrowbodies are still a few years away by which time QF's oldest A332s will be nearing retirement and VA's A332s coming off lease.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:02 pm

tullamarine wrote:
You seem to be under some delusion that the A330 is inefficient.

15-20% higher passenger-seat-mile cost is not a trivial difference on the balance sheet, in case you've never had to manage liquidity and treasury for any company.

A middle aged A330 has total operating costs less than or equal to a brand new 787 when depreciation/finance costs are considered.


*Insert Bender laughing meme*
No, just no. The reduced C and D maintenance checks alone from lacking Aluminum frames and surfaces easily counterbalance this. The 787 has lower takeoff and landing fees, lower frame maintenance requirements, and (as long as you operate the GEnx) vastly lower cost per passenger seat mile on much longer range.

The A330 remains the workhorse of Asia Pacific not just with QF but also airlines such as CX, GA, MH PR and a whole gamut of Chinese airlines. Until the 787 came along, it had unbeatable economics and now, when finance costs are considered, remains competitive.
It remains their workhorse for multiple reasons. The CN3 get access to Europe by buying European wide bodies, and they get access to the U.S. by buying lots of 737s. Geopolitics trumps economics of a single industry in that case. However, when arguing about the present and actions in it, point me to a recent CEO order. And how many airlines have simply scooped up the 787 in place of the A330 NEO altogether? Qantas is just one. The only way they'll pick up the A330N is if they get it ultra cheap as a package deal with AB on Project Sunrise. Hawaiian is another.

The CEOs are expensive to run for the given missions. The 737 MAX and A320 NEO families are already wiping out the load factors on those TC and 6 to 8-hour A330 flights in a number of cases for the FSCs.

I don't doubt that A321s and MAX-10s will eventually take a significant part of trans-continental flying but SYD curfew means there will always be significant peaks out of PER in the afternoon at around 4PM. I imagine the economics of operating a single A330 remain superior to wingtip flying 2 A321s or 73Js. Regardless the new larger narrowbodies are still a few years away by which time QF's oldest A332s will be nearing retirement and VA's A332s coming off lease.


The Sydney curfew won't last forever. With the end of the A380 and 777-300ER in sight, the 777X is quiet enough people won't mind it flying in late from 2030 on (though if Aussies had proper noise and weather insulation in all of their buildings you'd only just hear a 777-300ER overhead if you were 40 stories up anyway and it wouldn't be a problem currently).

And depending on who wins PS, that plane from Perth to Sydney will either be a Boeing 787/797, or it'll be an Airbus A350 most likely with the A330N, again, only going to happen if AB wins Project Sunrise and makes an offer on them too good to refuse.
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1686
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:15 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
tullamarine wrote:
You seem to be under some delusion that the A330 is inefficient.

15-20% higher passenger-seat-mile cost is not a trivial difference on the balance sheet, in case you've never had to manage liquidity and treasury for any company.

A middle aged A330 has total operating costs less than or equal to a brand new 787 when depreciation/finance costs are considered.


*Insert Bender laughing meme*
No, just no. The reduced C and D maintenance checks alone from lacking Aluminum frames and surfaces easily counterbalance this. The 787 has lower takeoff and landing fees, lower frame maintenance requirements, and (as long as you operate the GEnx) vastly lower cost per passenger seat mile on much longer range.

The A330 remains the workhorse of Asia Pacific not just with QF but also airlines such as CX, GA, MH PR and a whole gamut of Chinese airlines. Until the 787 came along, it had unbeatable economics and now, when finance costs are considered, remains competitive.
It remains their workhorse for multiple reasons. The CN3 get access to Europe by buying European wide bodies, and they get access to the U.S. by buying lots of 737s. Geopolitics trumps economics of a single industry in that case. However, when arguing about the present and actions in it, point me to a recent CEO order. And how many airlines have simply scooped up the 787 in place of the A330 NEO altogether? Qantas is just one. The only way they'll pick up the A330N is if they get it ultra cheap as a package deal with AB on Project Sunrise. Hawaiian is another.

The CEOs are expensive to run for the given missions. The 737 MAX and A320 NEO families are already wiping out the load factors on those TC and 6 to 8-hour A330 flights in a number of cases for the FSCs.

I don't doubt that A321s and MAX-10s will eventually take a significant part of trans-continental flying but SYD curfew means there will always be significant peaks out of PER in the afternoon at around 4PM. I imagine the economics of operating a single A330 remain superior to wingtip flying 2 A321s or 73Js. Regardless the new larger narrowbodies are still a few years away by which time QF's oldest A332s will be nearing retirement and VA's A332s coming off lease.


The Sydney curfew won't last forever. With the end of the A380 and 777-300ER in sight, the 777X is quiet enough people won't mind it flying in late from 2030 on (though if Aussies had proper noise and weather insulation in all of their buildings you'd only just hear a 777-300ER overhead if you were 40 stories up anyway and it wouldn't be a problem currently).

And depending on who wins PS, that plane from Perth to Sydney will either be a Boeing 787/797, or it'll be an Airbus A350 most likely with the A330N, again, only going to happen if AB wins Project Sunrise and makes an offer on them too good to refuse.


Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?
 
redroo
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:35 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
IndianicWorld wrote:

The reality is that once the TT A320’s go, the VARA ones should too. No point having a couple of aircraft only. I’m sure that there would be a couple of 737’s they could use that aren’t being utilised once network changes are made.

Moving forward, whether they need the A332’s will be interesting to see. Without HKG, PER routes would be about all they are used for, and with a change of strategy, having such a luxurious business class offering for those routes may be seen as not necessary.

Is Perth slot-restricted or something? I've noticed most of the flights out there from the other capitals are only once or twice-daily A330s. I thought business travelers preferred more frequent flights.


Perth isnt slot restricted but there are natural times that are convenient for flying east due to distance and time zones. You leave at 6am and you land 13ish. Last chance to get out is 15/16 before curfew. The 10am departure is usually the busiest as it lands at a reasonable hour in Sydney and Melbourne.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:41 pm

qf2220 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
tullamarine wrote:
You seem to be under some delusion that the A330 is inefficient.

15-20% higher passenger-seat-mile cost is not a trivial difference on the balance sheet, in case you've never had to manage liquidity and treasury for any company.

A middle aged A330 has total operating costs less than or equal to a brand new 787 when depreciation/finance costs are considered.


*Insert Bender laughing meme*
No, just no. The reduced C and D maintenance checks alone from lacking Aluminum frames and surfaces easily counterbalance this. The 787 has lower takeoff and landing fees, lower frame maintenance requirements, and (as long as you operate the GEnx) vastly lower cost per passenger seat mile on much longer range.

The A330 remains the workhorse of Asia Pacific not just with QF but also airlines such as CX, GA, MH PR and a whole gamut of Chinese airlines. Until the 787 came along, it had unbeatable economics and now, when finance costs are considered, remains competitive.
It remains their workhorse for multiple reasons. The CN3 get access to Europe by buying European wide bodies, and they get access to the U.S. by buying lots of 737s. Geopolitics trumps economics of a single industry in that case. However, when arguing about the present and actions in it, point me to a recent CEO order. And how many airlines have simply scooped up the 787 in place of the A330 NEO altogether? Qantas is just one. The only way they'll pick up the A330N is if they get it ultra cheap as a package deal with AB on Project Sunrise. Hawaiian is another.

The CEOs are expensive to run for the given missions. The 737 MAX and A320 NEO families are already wiping out the load factors on those TC and 6 to 8-hour A330 flights in a number of cases for the FSCs.

I don't doubt that A321s and MAX-10s will eventually take a significant part of trans-continental flying but SYD curfew means there will always be significant peaks out of PER in the afternoon at around 4PM. I imagine the economics of operating a single A330 remain superior to wingtip flying 2 A321s or 73Js. Regardless the new larger narrowbodies are still a few years away by which time QF's oldest A332s will be nearing retirement and VA's A332s coming off lease.


The Sydney curfew won't last forever. With the end of the A380 and 777-300ER in sight, the 777X is quiet enough people won't mind it flying in late from 2030 on (though if Aussies had proper noise and weather insulation in all of their buildings you'd only just hear a 777-300ER overhead if you were 40 stories up anyway and it wouldn't be a problem currently).

And depending on who wins PS, that plane from Perth to Sydney will either be a Boeing 787/797, or it'll be an Airbus A350 most likely with the A330N, again, only going to happen if AB wins Project Sunrise and makes an offer on them too good to refuse.


Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?

He hasn't been able to support any of the assertions he has made so he is unlikely to start now. He now claims to be a Top 100 treasury expert; maybe we should help him and tell him costs don't appear on a balance sheet, they're on the profit and loss statement.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Tue Sep 10, 2019 11:55 pm

tullamarine wrote:
qf2220 wrote:

Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?

He hasn't been able to support any of the assertions he has made so he is unlikely to start now. He now claims to be a Top 100 treasury expert; maybe we should help him and tell him costs don't appear on a balance sheet, they're on the profit and loss statement.

I've sourced every single claim of facts for the last 3 pages and I'd suggest you look before you leap. As for predictions, that's anyone's game and I gave my reasoning for each prediction and why I'd toss Scurrah out on his tail end.

I did not claim to be a top 100 or X00 or Y000 treasurer. I said I have experience managing liquidity of a business' treasury, in multiple industries in fact. And if you want to make the balance sheet look good, you manage your money well. No one cares about profit & loss as long as it has sound business reasoning behind it. Take Suncorp's recent sale of its Life Insurance arm to Tal Daichi. While the projected loss on face value may sour some novice investors' face, the truth is life insurance would have bled Suncorp dry, the world knew it, and Suncorp was negotiating from a position of weakness. Yes, it's a bad loss, but it's one-off and was managed properly. Good, healthy business with the reserves to continue being both a good bank and good insurance company.

If you want the ABILITY to grow and shrink reliably, you keep your yield high when you can, which means keeping liability (fuel) costs down, starting in the good years (like now when VA actually has the money to maneuver). Asset upkeep costs such as labor force in the airline industry are the face of your brand. You don't miserate them, you don't grossly underpay them, and that investment pays dividends for the hard years when fuel prices skyrocket or competition ramps up.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:04 am

qf2220 wrote:

Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?


Which ones do you not find to be public knowledge other than the ones behind the curfew not lasting forever? Noise reduction of the GE9x is a whopping 10.5 decibels as recorded by the wonderful you tubers who've been at Renton for the rejected takeoff tests. It's practically half as loud as the GE90-115B, and before you make a common mistake, decibels are a base-10 logarithmic scale.

https://www.noisehelp.com/decibel-scale.html

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law. There's no reason for it to exist if your building codes keep up with the U.S. and Europe. I'm directly in the landing path of Cathay's 777-300ERs less than 40 miles from EWR and 33 stories up. If Aussies made double-glaze glass windows and doors standard and used what they call R8 insulation (which is still rarely up to spec in most U.S. states), no one would need a curfew. Only way you'd be woken up by these modern birds is if you had acute hearing or if you left the window open in your bedroom 30+ stories up.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:06 am

openskies88 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
*Insert Bender laughing meme*


Ugh, cringe. And again, swathes of conjecture and not a shred of evidence to back it up. :roll:

I have all the evidence in the world, whereas my opponent has none. Other than up-front purchase cost which is only 30 million USD lower on paper, every other cost metric is in the 787's favor.

Seriously, claim by claim what are you asking for evidence on that isn't either public knowledge or something you can't find on Boeing's and Airbus' own websites?
 
moa999
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:11 am

Virgin 330s came in 2012-14..
With a typical 12yr lease they've still got 5-7 years to run, so no short-term fix.
And I'm not sure if there is much demand to take over ceos nowadays
 
sierrakilo44
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:38 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:34 am

patrickjp93 wrote:

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law.


Well there has been, according to you a “common sense”, Liberal party government in power federally for the last 6 years and at the state level in NSW for the last 8 years and neither have any policy or indication they support lifting the curfew whatsoever. Some very marginal electorates lie underneath those flight paths and as we say in Australia you have Buckley’s chance (ie basically zero) of getting those restrictions lifted.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:50 am

sierrakilo44 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law.


Well there has been, according to you a “common sense”, Liberal party government in power federally for the last 6 years and at the state level in NSW for the last 8 years and neither have any policy or indication they support lifting the curfew whatsoever. Some very marginal electorates lie underneath those flight paths and as we say in Australia you have Buckley’s chance (ie basically zero) of getting those restrictions lifted.


And are the quieter, more efficient frames in the skies over Sydney yet? No? Then that's hardly an argument.

It's a simple affair to have a few experiments run to gauge noise complaint, at least for the latest narrow bodies, and they can even change it by one hour to see public reaction. You'd have to be stupid to try lifting it all at once, but there's a very easy path to getting the curfew lifted, at least in part, in the near future for a growth-oriented government. Now, the Fokkers and Dash Q400s especially are nasty, noisy beasts for their size and even in general, but I guarantee you flew an A320 NEO over Sydney's head at 10:30 PM no one would bloody notice. And even if they did, it's a simple case-in-point argument to fix Australia's last-century building codes.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:22 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
sierrakilo44 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law.


Well there has been, according to you a “common sense”, Liberal party government in power federally for the last 6 years and at the state level in NSW for the last 8 years and neither have any policy or indication they support lifting the curfew whatsoever. Some very marginal electorates lie underneath those flight paths and as we say in Australia you have Buckley’s chance (ie basically zero) of getting those restrictions lifted.


And are the quieter, more efficient frames in the skies over Sydney yet? No? Then that's hardly an argument.

It's a simple affair to have a few experiments run to gauge noise complaint, at least for the latest narrow bodies, and they can even change it by one hour to see public reaction. You'd have to be stupid to try lifting it all at once, but there's a very easy path to getting the curfew lifted, at least in part, in the near future for a growth-oriented government. Now, the Fokkers and Dash Q400s especially are nasty, noisy beasts for their size and even in general, but I guarantee you flew an A320 NEO over Sydney's head at 10:30 PM no one would bloody notice. And even if they did, it's a simple case-in-point argument to fix Australia's last-century building codes.

There is little to no chance of the curfew being lifted at SYD; Sydney will get a curfew free airport when SWZ opens and it will be interesting to see who uses this capacity at the time. As was correctly pointed out, there are numerous marginal seats over the north shore (Liberal) and inner west (Labor) that ensures neither party has the appetite to try to prosecute the case for a curfew-free SYD even if it was only paper-gliders arriving after 11PM. SYD itself is no longer pressing this case and is more interested in the 85 movements an hour being averaged over the airport opening times rather than a strict per hour cap.

You talk about amended building codes but what you suggest is monstrously expensive. Already over $3B has been spent on noise minimisation on houses near SYD, typically in inner-west suburbs such as Marrickville etc. What you suggest is probably a $30B+ exercise(just a guess); it just isn't going to happen. Sure, the US has double glazing etc but it was not originally done due to aircraft noise, it was because it is so bloody cold in winter. AU has incredibly mild winters in comparison so the need for double glazing, whilst very worthy and desirable from an energy point of view, isn't pressing at all.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
Obzerva
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:48 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:23 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
sierrakilo44 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law.


Well there has been, according to you a “common sense”, Liberal party government in power federally for the last 6 years and at the state level in NSW for the last 8 years and neither have any policy or indication they support lifting the curfew whatsoever. Some very marginal electorates lie underneath those flight paths and as we say in Australia you have Buckley’s chance (ie basically zero) of getting those restrictions lifted.


And are the quieter, more efficient frames in the skies over Sydney yet? No? Then that's hardly an argument.

It's a simple affair to have a few experiments run to gauge noise complaint, at least for the latest narrow bodies, and they can even change it by one hour to see public reaction. You'd have to be stupid to try lifting it all at once, but there's a very easy path to getting the curfew lifted, at least in part, in the near future for a growth-oriented government. Now, the Fokkers and Dash Q400s especially are nasty, noisy beasts for their size and even in general, but I guarantee you flew an A320 NEO over Sydney's head at 10:30 PM no one would bloody notice. And even if they did, it's a simple case-in-point argument to fix Australia's last-century building codes.


You are correct in the facts that aircraft are getting quieter, no issues there, but facts have nothing to do with politics.

You could present every fact and evidence based argument to those that would be impacted by a lifting of the curfew and they would be roundly ignored, the political campaign to stop a curfew being lifted would be so intense it would be political suicide for any government of any level to attempt to remove it.

Just look at the campaign to have a curfew on SWZ, which hopefully won't happen as greater Sydney should ideally have a curfew free airport, and the best chance of that is SWZ not SYD.
(a curfew free SWZ would actually make SWZ more attractive to a few international carriers too).
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1686
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:27 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
whereas my opponent has none....
Seriously, claim by claim what are you asking for evidence on that isn't either public knowledge or something you can't find on Boeing's and Airbus' own websites?


1. We are not opponents here. We are forum colleagues who seek to educate each other through reasoned discussion and debate. We are not interested in scoring points over one another.
2. If you are going to make an assertion, we appreciate you helping us find the information that you are asserting by providing references if we request them.
3. This is perhaps one of the best threads on airliners.net and we are known to have a brilliant culture of comraderie and support in our quest to learn more about the industry we are fascinated by\. Perhaps take some time to read back through the thread and see how we conduct ourselves and see what you can contribute.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2409
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:34 am

+1.
I see patrickjp93 you have only been a member for 2 weeks yet most of your posts are rude/aggressive. Unfortunately, your track record with facts has not been convincing (your recent EK 777 DXB-SIN-BNE-AKL trip the best example) in spite of many AU based members politely reminding you some sectors no longer exist/different equipment. A word of advice- please tone done the attitude (re-read before you submit) otherwise you stand a very good chance of getting banned from here.
 
TN486T
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:18 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:46 am

^^well said qf2220. I kinda bristled when I read the "opponent" word.^^
 
F100Flyer
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 5:50 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:06 am

Talking of Virgins A332s, VA690 PER-MEL is currently taking a rather unusual route over the interior...
 
User avatar
rtav
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:10 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:32 am

F100Flyer wrote:
Talking of Virgins A332s, VA690 PER-MEL is currently taking a rather unusual route over the interior...

Must be ETOPS constraints - has to fly within range of YBAS.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:10 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
. . .there's a very easy path to getting the curfew lifted, at least in part, in the near future. . .

I don't know what your skills are (not clear from your posts) but they certainly don't include any political understanding. I'm not even an Australian but I know enough about Aus politics to know that your ideas about the SYD curfew are just laughable.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
JBusworth
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:55 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:42 am

On the topic of SYD curfew removal, it will never happen. I live right under the flight path when Runway 25 is in use, 7 km from SYD. I accept that planes fly over my house and honestly don't care. The airport and the flight path have existed longer than I've been alive. The issue here is that I live a very marginal electoral district, where it changed parties at the last election over a few bus route changes and late running light rail line construction. There are literally people who want the airport shut down or at the very least planes to be forced to only fly over Botany Bay, imagine the outrage if the curfew was lifted. There would be mass protests and petitions that would get tens of thousands of signatures. It would literally be the downfall of the government that tried to do it.

SWZ will be opening soon enough and probably wont be curfew restricted. If you want to fly curfew free, fly into SWZ. But who in there right mind would pick a 2am arrival into SWZ when you could arrive at 7am into SYD.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4995
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:23 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
qf2220 wrote:

Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?


Which ones do you not find to be public knowledge other than the ones behind the curfew not lasting forever? Noise reduction of the GE9x is a whopping 10.5 decibels as recorded by the wonderful you tubers who've been at Renton for the rejected takeoff tests. It's practically half as loud as the GE90-115B, and before you make a common mistake, decibels are a base-10 logarithmic scale.

https://www.noisehelp.com/decibel-scale.html

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law. There's no reason for it to exist if your building codes keep up with the U.S. and Europe. I'm directly in the landing path of Cathay's 777-300ERs less than 40 miles from EWR and 33 stories up. If Aussies made double-glaze glass windows and doors standard and used what they call R8 insulation (which is still rarely up to spec in most U.S. states), no one would need a curfew. Only way you'd be woken up by these modern birds is if you had acute hearing or if you left the window open in your bedroom 30+ stories up.

NO government in Sydney, Liberal or Labor can ax the curfew law, it is a Commonwealth law!

You are also spitting into the wind with your assertations about the quiter aircraft allowing the curfew law to be changed. Not that you are wrong about the decrease in the noise levels BUT the curfew was introduced in the late 1950s because of the noise of the B707-138 [NOT 138B] the straight turbo jet version. Since then aircraft have got much quiter and yet the curfew has been made law in the 2010's before that it was an administrative directive, so he chances of the curfew being lifted even with newer quiter aircraft is pretty remote. In fact I think it will be a battle to keep SWZ curfew free once it gets into full operation. The airport curfew is a political thing, not something you can argue about with facts.

Gemuser
 
Captdasbomb
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:08 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:00 pm

Gemuser wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
qf2220 wrote:

Can you source any of the assertions you are making in this and all your other posts?


Which ones do you not find to be public knowledge other than the ones behind the curfew not lasting forever? Noise reduction of the GE9x is a whopping 10.5 decibels as recorded by the wonderful you tubers who've been at Renton for the rejected takeoff tests. It's practically half as loud as the GE90-115B, and before you make a common mistake, decibels are a base-10 logarithmic scale.

https://www.noisehelp.com/decibel-scale.html

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law. There's no reason for it to exist if your building codes keep up with the U.S. and Europe. I'm directly in the landing path of Cathay's 777-300ERs less than 40 miles from EWR and 33 stories up. If Aussies made double-glaze glass windows and doors standard and used what they call R8 insulation (which is still rarely up to spec in most U.S. states), no one would need a curfew. Only way you'd be woken up by these modern birds is if you had acute hearing or if you left the window open in your bedroom 30+ stories up.

NO government in Sydney, Liberal or Labor can ax the curfew law, it is a Commonwealth law!

You are also spitting into the wind with your assertations about the quiter aircraft allowing the curfew law to be changed. Not that you are wrong about the decrease in the noise levels BUT the curfew was introduced in the late 1950s because of the noise of the B707-138 [NOT 138B] the straight turbo jet version. Since then aircraft have got much quiter and yet the curfew has been made law in the 2010's before that it was an administrative directive, so he chances of the curfew being lifted even with newer quiter aircraft is pretty remote. In fact I think it will be a battle to keep SWZ curfew free once it gets into full operation. The airport curfew is a political thing, not something you can argue about with facts.

Gemuser


If Heathrow has a curfew & what makes Sydney so special?
 
NZ516
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:36 pm

It's not the case of Sydney being special. But both Heathrow and Sydney airports have large residential population around them that want the curfew to remain in place forever.
 
bwwt
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:30 pm

No double glazing please. We don't want our buildings turning into the ovens of Europe and NA during summer.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:21 am

CZ381/382 CAN-BNE A359 replaces A333 from 29 Dec 19

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11sep19/
Forum Moderator
 
Obzerva
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:48 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:29 am

qf789 wrote:
CZ381/382 CAN-BNE A359 replaces A333 from 29 Dec 19

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11sep19/



Hoping to pick up some transfer traffic that might have previously gone via HKG maybe?
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 8934
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:39 am

Obzerva wrote:
qf789 wrote:
CZ381/382 CAN-BNE A359 replaces A333 from 29 Dec 19

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11sep19/



Hoping to pick up some transfer traffic that might have previously gone via HKG maybe?


Now you mention that it would be an ideal time for CZ to exploit the ongoing problems at HKG. CX has already announced they will reduce capacity for NW19/20 and have already cut or reduced some European and US routes, I do wonder what Australian services will be impacted. I suspect the 3 weekly CX133/142 to PER is likely to be chopped, we are also suppose to be seeing the A359 upgraded to A35K at the end of next month but wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't go ahead, their loads recently haven't been all that good, its clear the ongoing tensions in HKG is having an impact, we have already seen QF downgrade A333's to A332's and VA has reduced HKG flying. Could we see BNE, MEL or SYD with capacity reductions over the coming months?
Forum Moderator
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:56 am

qf789 wrote:
Obzerva wrote:
qf789 wrote:
CZ381/382 CAN-BNE A359 replaces A333 from 29 Dec 19

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11sep19/



Hoping to pick up some transfer traffic that might have previously gone via HKG maybe?


Now you mention that it would be an ideal time for CZ to exploit the ongoing problems at HKG. CX has already announced they will reduce capacity for NW19/20 and have already cut or reduced some European and US routes, I do wonder what Australian services will be impacted. I suspect the 3 weekly CX133/142 to PER is likely to be chopped, we are also suppose to be seeing the A359 upgraded to A35K at the end of next month but wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't go ahead, their loads recently haven't been all that good, its clear the ongoing tensions in HKG is having an impact, we have already seen QF downgrade A333's to A332's and VA has reduced HKG flying. Could we see BNE, MEL or SYD with capacity reductions over the coming months?

Obviously, CX is suffering most but you'd expect to see both QF and VA dial back their flights into HKG if demand is tumbling which it appears to be. It is possible that VA will reduce their MEL flights and funnel through SYD until things stabilise. QF may do similar; they have seasonally increased capacity to HKG using A380s or 744s particularly over Chinese New Year. They will probably wait another few months before deciding whether they will do it again next year.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
oskarclare
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:08 am

qf789 wrote:
CZ381/382 CAN-BNE A359 replaces A333 from 29 Dec 19

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11sep19/


Also increasing to 10x weekly over DEC-FEB so starting to add capacity to BNE quite a bit.
 
Pcoder
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:44 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:23 am

In regards to the curfew at SYD, although the airport started just after WWI, it was really only a small airfield and only became a large jet port towards the end of the 1950s. People have been living in the airport flight paths longer than the airport has existed.

In regards to airport curfews in believe that it should be a first come, first served into how they are applied. If the airport was first, then the residents should have to put up with it, but if the residents were there first, accommodations should be made to soften the impact of the airport.

If SWZ was not being built, then some adjustments to the curfew could be made but since they'll be a second curfew free airport, there's no need to as if SWZ is able to become a competitor to SYD, it should hopefully improve outcomes for the travelling public.
 
Captdasbomb
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:08 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:26 am

rtav wrote:
F100Flyer wrote:
Talking of Virgins A332s, VA690 PER-MEL is currently taking a rather unusual route over the interior...

Must be ETOPS constraints - has to fly within range of YBAS.

Doesn't A332 have a 4 hrs ETOPS? Would have thought YPKG would be a nearer alternate
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3431
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:43 am

Captdasbomb wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:

Which ones do you not find to be public knowledge other than the ones behind the curfew not lasting forever? Noise reduction of the GE9x is a whopping 10.5 decibels as recorded by the wonderful you tubers who've been at Renton for the rejected takeoff tests. It's practically half as loud as the GE90-115B, and before you make a common mistake, decibels are a base-10 logarithmic scale.

https://www.noisehelp.com/decibel-scale.html

So with that scientific backing in mind, a common-sense liberal government in Sydney will eventually ax the curfew law. There's no reason for it to exist if your building codes keep up with the U.S. and Europe. I'm directly in the landing path of Cathay's 777-300ERs less than 40 miles from EWR and 33 stories up. If Aussies made double-glaze glass windows and doors standard and used what they call R8 insulation (which is still rarely up to spec in most U.S. states), no one would need a curfew. Only way you'd be woken up by these modern birds is if you had acute hearing or if you left the window open in your bedroom 30+ stories up.

NO government in Sydney, Liberal or Labor can ax the curfew law, it is a Commonwealth law!

You are also spitting into the wind with your assertations about the quiter aircraft allowing the curfew law to be changed. Not that you are wrong about the decrease in the noise levels BUT the curfew was introduced in the late 1950s because of the noise of the B707-138 [NOT 138B] the straight turbo jet version. Since then aircraft have got much quiter and yet the curfew has been made law in the 2010's before that it was an administrative directive, so he chances of the curfew being lifted even with newer quiter aircraft is pretty remote. In fact I think it will be a battle to keep SWZ curfew free once it gets into full operation. The airport curfew is a political thing, not something you can argue about with facts.

Gemuser


If Heathrow has a curfew & what makes Sydney so special?


Can I just expand on what Gemuser has said above.

When the parallel runway was constructed at SYD the Government of the day did an EIS. The problem with that EIS is, essentially, it was flawed because the parties that did it used both incorrect data in parts and incomplete data in others. So the noise impacts of the 3rd runway were massively under-stated. (There was a 4 Corners Special Investigation on it in the early 90's) The mis-trust that flawed process generated in the communities directly around the airport is still manifest today when you talk to older residents in the affected areas. So there is no political appetite for removing the curfew and the Sydneysiders on this board can pretty confidently say that there never will be due to the nature of the electorates under the flight paths.

Where there is room to manouver is on the number of fligths allowed into and out of the airport during shoulder periods and on the flight paths aircraft take. The decision to allow aircraft to land between 5am and 6am is a political one and there should be more aircraft, espeically international flights, landing from the South at that time. Unfortunately the relevant Ministers over the past few years have reduced these numbers down and they should not have. On top of that you have the ATC policies which, due to the noise abatement process, require ATC to spread out the noise. That results in inefficient approach paths which, ironically, produce more noise. So there are quite a few simple things that could be done to both allow SYD to handle their morning peak more efficiently and to reduce noise but unfortunately our politicians are deaf to them.
 
User avatar
rtav
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:10 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - September 2019

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:45 am

Captdasbomb wrote:
rtav wrote:
F100Flyer wrote:
Talking of Virgins A332s, VA690 PER-MEL is currently taking a rather unusual route over the interior...

Must be ETOPS constraints - has to fly within range of YBAS.

Doesn't A332 have a 4 hrs ETOPS? Would have thought YPKG would be a nearer alternate

It normally would have something like ETOPS 240 but because of engine issues or constraints it probably had it reduced to 90mins which is recommended by ICAO
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12

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