tullamarine wrote:

PER-SIN could even run as a 737 / A220 combo.

It could, but not with a domestic J class given SQ serves PER up to 3 or 4 times a day with a A359 or 78J.

I thought QF already operated 737s to SIN previously out of PER?

tullamarine wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Regarding the A321XLR and A220-300 orders, Qantas has also put out a couple infographics on range of each from the 4 main gateways, any suggestions of potential routes?

A220-300



A321XLR



https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... ts-future/

Given the initial A321s are being configured with 200 seats including 20 recliner J seats, it seems they will only be operating on domestic and Tasman services currently operated by A332s or 738s so could have been done with a standard A321NEO.

The A321XLRs definitely have the range to open up new routes but it would seem unlikely until they have a subfleet fitted with something approaching an international standard J seat offering with total seating of between 120 and 160 if AA and JetBlue's A321s are a guide.

Still can’t wrap my head around the XLR need but anyway- would the first 20 be sufficient for Golden Triangle peak capacity, Transcon, Tasman, NAN and DPS? Or would 20 be excess to their needs? May not be much flying left for Asia? Maybe another wave once flying Into Asia recovers a bit more. Ahhh we finally get the domestic 767 replacement

Alternatively I also wonder how the QF PR machine churns and thinks - are they not ready to reveal their 321 config and new J seat, and in 4-6 months when the good news has dried up, and they are in trouble again, if it will be time for a 220 and 321 cabin reveal? Or am I being cynical?

tullamarine wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

It could, but not with a domestic J class given SQ serves PER up to 3 or 4 times a day with a A359 or 78J.

I thought QF already operated 737s to SIN previously out of PER?

The did but, due to customer pressure, swapped this to an A332. Even then, the frequency was way short of that offered by SQ.

At the time 737's were operating between 10-14 weekly, IIRC it was more to do with moving aircraft around 737's moved elsewhere, an A330 was taken off a SYD-PER run and replaced with a 747 instead. Since the A330 there have been additional seasonal flights to SIN using 737's

I cant see why PER-SIN cant be operated by an A321XLR at a higher frequency, maybe back to 10-14 weekly. Additionally in recent months many on here have said that (a) Qantas doesnt need to offer a lie flat domestically as VA doesnt have A330's anymore and (b) that A321XLR's will replace the A332's (early built ones) that not only fly domestically but used on Asian routes up to about 8 hours which include SIN, DPS, CGK along with trans tasman routes.

Additionally I do not see Qantas having different configurations for the A321XLR or any other fleet type for that matter as they were quite clear when they went through the first transformation many years ago operating sub fleets in various configurations isnt efficient, at that particular time they had about 5 different configurations for the A330 fleet and another 7 for the 747 fleet

smi0006 wrote:

Still can’t wrap my head around the XLR need but anyway- would the first 20 be sufficient for Golden Triangle peak capacity, Transcon, Tasman, NAN and DPS? Or would 20 be excess to their needs? May not be much flying left for Asia? Maybe another wave once flying Into Asia recovers a bit more. Ahhh we finally get the domestic 767 replacement

Alternatively I also wonder how the QF PR machine churns and thinks - are they not ready to reveal their 321 config and new J seat, and in 4-6 months when the good news has dried up, and they are in trouble again, if it will be time for a 220 and 321 cabin reveal? Or am I being cynical?

I'll have a stab: the indicative charts showing the B737-800 compared to the A321 XLR are not showing the range of the aircraft with a full revenue payload. The higher MTOW of the XLR will give it a much better revenue payload on routes like SYD-DPS (2,500nm). While it varies substantially based on aircraft configuration, engine selection, etc, the fuel load starts to eat into revenue payload from about 2,000nm onwards on a Boeing 737-800. It may not be consequential on all routes depending on revenue payload potential, but even though the B737-800 can operate routes closer to 3,000nm, the trade-off between revenue payload and fuel payload starts to lick-in from 2,000nm stage length. The A321 neo has that inflection point a little higher, around 2,300nm, whereas the A321 XLR is a monster ... the higher MTOW allows a full revenue payload up to 3,000nm.

So basically, you can't take a full passengers and cargo load on SYD-DPS/NAD while carrying all your fuel on a B737-800 or A321neo, but you can on an A321 XLR. There are probably several other routes that this will be useful on.

Something else that has been mentioned by aircraft lessors is that the A321 XLR gives airlines huge flexibility at low risk. With delivery several years out they still have the option to do many things, and even after delivery they can reconfigure the aircraft, network or needs with much less cost and risk since the worst case scenario since the aircraft is just as capable on a one hour sector as a six hour sector.

RyanairGuru wrote:

Just a thought, but both UA and DL use domestic configured 757s (DL) and 737MAXes (UA) on more leisure oriented Trans-Atlantic routes such as KEF (DL) and PGD (UA), with the domestic ‘first class’ cabin sold as Premium Economy rather than Business so that the product matches customer expectations. I wonder if Qantas would consider something similar on routes such as NAN and DPS? Their domestic business class soft product is basically identical to international premium economy as it is.

DL use the 763 to KEF (with DeltaOne/Int'l Business), UA haven't started PDL yet (I assume you meant Ponta Delgada and not Punta Gorda?) but they have Domestic F sold as Business. FI use the Max8 to ORD, YYZ, IAD, BOS and MSP, again with recliners in Business.

QF would need a sub-fleet of A321's for leisure routes, and they don't have enough aircraft coming to justify that.

BNEFlyer wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Just a thought, but both UA and DL use domestic configured 757s (DL) and 737MAXes (UA) on more leisure oriented Trans-Atlantic routes such as KEF (DL) and PGD (UA), with the domestic ‘first class’ cabin sold as Premium Economy rather than Business so that the product matches customer expectations. I wonder if Qantas would consider something similar on routes such as NAN and DPS? Their domestic business class soft product is basically identical to international premium economy as it is.

DL use the 763 to KEF (with DeltaOne/Int'l Business), UA haven't started PDL yet (I assume you meant Ponta Delgada and not Punta Gorda?) but they have Domestic F sold as Business. FI use the Max8 to ORD, YYZ, IAD, BOS and MSP, again with recliners in Business.

QF would need a sub-fleet of A321's for leisure routes, and they don't have enough aircraft coming to justify that.

If it’s not this summer then 100% Delta have flown domestic 757s to KEF in the past. IIRC MSP-KEF at one point, and BOS-KEF more recently.

And United is definitely selling PDL (good pickup) as PremiumPlus (aka Premium Economy), not Business as they do to LatAm. To make sure I wasn’t crazy I went and did a dummy booking.

Edit: Delta was flying domestic First 757s on both BOS-KEF and MSP-KEF in summer 2021, sold as Premium Select. They used one of the ex-TWA 757s on JFK-KEF, sold as Delta One. Source: https://economyclassandbeyond.boardinga ... o-iceland/

With the A321LR coming to Jetstar soon and them potentially get some XLR's, could there be a chance they install some "Business Class" seat recliners up the front for the leisure destinations in Asia when they potentially replace the 787. Also easier to justify compared to Qantas flying recliners against much better competitors.

tullamarine wrote:

Of course, there is always room for cynicism. My question is, why do you need A321XLRs for domestic services when a standard A321NEO would do? I get not fitting a lie-flat J seat in a domestic bird which is pretty much a waste of everyone's time but if you are going to end up with 2 sub-fleets, one domestic/trans-Tasman and 1 medium haul international fitted out differently, why wouldn't you just get the A321NEO for the former?

Firstly, I think QF like to favour fleet commonality as opposed to differing sub-types. The A321XLR appears to be a one size fits all in the 737/767 space.

Secondly, I personally see QF adopting a more BA style of Euro approach when it comes to cabins in that short haul replaces domestic and is used for both domestic and international routes. The ranges of the A223 and the A321XLR give them a lot of opportunities outside of Australia.

I think the days of a lie-flat bed for transcon flights are probably over.

Cheers

utaussiefan wrote:

With the A321LR coming to Jetstar soon and them potentially get some XLR's, could there be a chance they install some "Business Class" seat recliners up the front for the leisure destinations in Asia when they potentially replace the 787. Also easier to justify compared to Qantas flying recliners against much better competitors.

As a LCC (or possibly an ULCC), I thought it strange that JQ introduced their Star Class. I can see why they'd use it as an opportunity to grab some more dollars of passengers for some of their longer flights. But even though their Business Class, which is more like a Premium Economy product, I think has limited growth. In situations where both QF and JQ service the same O&D's, it would be too much of a competition between their brands.

Cheers

utaussiefan wrote:

With the A321LR coming to Jetstar soon and them potentially get some XLR's, could there be a chance they install some "Business Class" seat recliners up the front for the leisure destinations in Asia when they potentially replace the 787. Also easier to justify compared to Qantas flying recliners against much better competitors.

JQ’s A321LR will just have Economy sadly:

https://www.jetstar.com/au/en/inspirati ... t-features

kriskim wrote:

utaussiefan wrote:

With the A321LR coming to Jetstar soon and them potentially get some XLR's, could there be a chance they install some "Business Class" seat recliners up the front for the leisure destinations in Asia when they potentially replace the 787. Also easier to justify compared to Qantas flying recliners against much better competitors.

JQ’s A321LR will just have Economy sadly:

https://www.jetstar.com/au/en/inspirati ... t-features

But the from 2024 XLRs might be different.
And will start arriving at a time when QFs 333s begin hitting the 20-yr point.

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

Of course, there is always room for cynicism. My question is, why do you need A321XLRs for domestic services when a standard A321NEO would do? I get not fitting a lie-flat J seat in a domestic bird which is pretty much a waste of everyone's time but if you are going to end up with 2 sub-fleets, one domestic/trans-Tasman and 1 medium haul international fitted out differently, why wouldn't you just get the A321NEO for the former?

Firstly, I think QF like to favour fleet commonality as opposed to differing sub-types. The A321XLR appears to be a one size fits all in the 737/767 space.

Secondly, I personally see QF adopting a more BA style of Euro approach when it comes to cabins in that short haul replaces domestic and is used for both domestic and international routes. The ranges of the A223 and the A321XLR give them a lot of opportunities outside of Australia.

I think the days of a lie-flat bed for transcon flights are probably over.

Cheers

Problem for QF when it comes to international into Asia is they’re competing with the Asian legacy carriers operating widebodys with state of the art international premium cabins. So if they don’t have a sub fleet of lie flats for some of these routes, assuming they plan to use the XLR on them, they are putting themselves at a significant product disadvantage which will mean they can’t capture the highest yield pax due to lower pricing reflecting the inferior product, or they rely on their ff base and brand to capture these higher end pax but will soon develop a reputation of a poor value proposition and arrogance for trying to say it competes.

I remain to be convinced by the QF 321XLR. Obviously its makes DPS easier and cheaper to operate, but I cant for the life of me seeing QF buying a plane just for Bali. PER can do SIN with A320 or B737 just fine, so its not for us. Unless they have plans to offer more frequency on SIN and HKG from SYD/MEL/BNE. Personally I’d love a bit more frequency on PER/SIN and would happily trade down to the 737 for it, even though I love the A330.

Maybe it will enable SYD/MEL/BNE to the “non-core” destinations of CGK, KUL, BKK, etc to be offered daily?

And if it frees up more expensive 787s for transpacific flying then winner winner chicken dinner.

qf2220 wrote:

On the QF Bendigo-Sydney flights - any news of how theyre going?

Could this be another candidate for a direct BNE connection with Qantaslink (like Albury has)?

They are going well, but not well enough to support a BNE service. The newly launched WGA-BNE is absolutely loaded though! ABX will be getting seasonal ADL flights so I'm wondering if WGA will be next.

redroo wrote:

I remain to be convinced by the QF 321XLR. Obviously its makes DPS easier and cheaper to operate, but I cant for the life of me seeing QF buying a plane just for Bali. PER can do SIN with A320 or B737 just fine, so its not for us. Unless they have plans to offer more frequency on SIN and HKG from SYD/MEL/BNE. Personally I’d love a bit more frequency on PER/SIN and would happily trade down to the 737 for it, even though I love the A330.

Maybe it will enable SYD/MEL/BNE to the “non-core” destinations of CGK, KUL, BKK, etc to be offered daily?

And if it frees up more expensive 787s for transpacific flying then winner winner chicken dinner.

I agree with you and you don't even need the XLR for DPS, the LR will do it easy enough. Actually, you'd probably be able to do DPS with a standard 321NEO without any problems.

QF don't fly to KUL at all, so any service there would be a resumption, which probably wouldn't be daily to start with from any of the Australian ports. BKK was daily from SYD with a 330 and has always had solid cargo loads, which you'll sacrifice if you send a 321 up and what do you do with the rest of the Australian ports. MNL was building up to daily from SYD before covid, it might be a possibility. There are so many options available, but when you really look at them, are they really viable even with the 321 ? Do QF suddenly start to fragment the route network with flight options from more than one or two Australian ports ? But doing this will bring them into competition with the home Asian airline offering good business classes, so as has been mentioned, a decent business class will need to be offered to be competitive.

The whole 321NEO/LR/XLR order for QF raises so many questions. They fit better at JQ, but for QF, especially if they're only going to have one configuration, the 321LR would seem a more logical choice. Anyway, it's not my cash, so I don't really care, they're all going to look the same, so no variety there (at least after the initial excitement) and having just done a 5 hour FJ sector in a MAX, that's about the limit I'm going to travel on a narrow body aircraft on a full service carrier.

LTEN11 wrote:

I agree with you and you don't even need the XLR for DPS, the LR will do it easy enough. Actually, you'd probably be able to do DPS with a standard 321NEO without any problems.

The A321neo certainly can reach DPS from SYD/MEL/BNE, but the A321 LR and XLR can reach there with a larger revenue payload without having to add a new fleet type or significantly larger trip cost.

evanb wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

I agree with you and you don't even need the XLR for DPS, the LR will do it easy enough. Actually, you'd probably be able to do DPS with a standard 321NEO without any problems.

The A321neo certainly can reach DPS from SYD/MEL/BNE, but the A321 LR and XLR can reach there with a larger revenue payload without having to add a new fleet type or significantly larger trip cost.

What extra revenue is the LR or XLR going to pick up going to DPS from SYD/MEL/BNE if they all have the same configuration ? It's not going to be cargo, the LR and XLR lose space to accommodate the extra fuel tanks and it would be doubtful a standard 321NEO in QF configuration wouldn't be able to reach DPS without restrictions in anything other than the worst of conditions. PR already send their standard 321NEO to each of those cities from MNL, a longer flight, though I'm not sure how they are configured.

I'm not arguing that the LR and XLR would have their niches for QF, however I struggle to find too many that the XLR would excel over the LR, especially if they are all configured the same.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

On the QF Bendigo-Sydney flights - any news of how theyre going?

Could this be another candidate for a direct BNE connection with Qantaslink (like Albury has)?

They are going well, but not well enough to support a BNE service. The newly launched WGA-BNE is absolutely loaded though! ABX will be getting seasonal ADL flights so I'm wondering if WGA will be next.

Does Bendigo have airport screening? I know the Q300 seems to be the largest on the SYD-BXG route. Q400 wouldn't be able to fly there with no screening. Q300 could still do BXG-BNE but would be a little longer flight time.

LTEN11 wrote:

redroo wrote:

I remain to be convinced by the QF 321XLR. Obviously its makes DPS easier and cheaper to operate, but I cant for the life of me seeing QF buying a plane just for Bali. PER can do SIN with A320 or B737 just fine, so its not for us. Unless they have plans to offer more frequency on SIN and HKG from SYD/MEL/BNE. Personally I’d love a bit more frequency on PER/SIN and would happily trade down to the 737 for it, even though I love the A330.

Maybe it will enable SYD/MEL/BNE to the “non-core” destinations of CGK, KUL, BKK, etc to be offered daily?

And if it frees up more expensive 787s for transpacific flying then winner winner chicken dinner.

I agree with you and you don't even need the XLR for DPS, the LR will do it easy enough. Actually, you'd probably be able to do DPS with a standard 321NEO without any problems.

QF don't fly to KUL at all, so any service there would be a resumption, which probably wouldn't be daily to start with from any of the Australian ports. BKK was daily from SYD with a 330 and has always had solid cargo loads, which you'll sacrifice if you send a 321 up and what do you do with the rest of the Australian ports. MNL was building up to daily from SYD before covid, it might be a possibility. There are so many options available, but when you really look at them, are they really viable even with the 321 ? Do QF suddenly start to fragment the route network with flight options from more than one or two Australian ports ? But doing this will bring them into competition with the home Asian airline offering good business classes, so as has been mentioned, a decent business class will need to be offered to be competitive.

The whole 321NEO/LR/XLR order for QF raises so many questions. They fit better at JQ, but for QF, especially if they're only going to have one configuration, the 321LR would seem a more logical choice. Anyway, it's not my cash, so I don't really care, they're all going to look the same, so no variety there (at least after the initial excitement) and having just done a 5 hour FJ sector in a MAX, that's about the limit I'm going to travel on a narrow body aircraft on a full service carrier.

I wonder what the trade off freight/cargo-wise if, for example, QF were to offer more than daily (say 10-12 weekly) on the A321XLR on the non-core SE Asia routes (e.g CGK, MNL, BKK, etc) across all the East Coast ports (for example daily SYD-MNL and 4x weekly MEL-MNL).

Of course it would free up a A330 for elsewhere, but it seems there are plenty of factors into it.

tullamarine wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

They are going well, but not well enough to support a BNE service. The newly launched WGA-BNE is absolutely loaded though! ABX will be getting seasonal ADL flights so I'm wondering if WGA will be next.

Does Bendigo have airport screening? I know the Q300 seems to be the largest on the SYD-BXG route. Q400 wouldn't be able to fly there with no screening. Q300 could still do BXG-BNE but would be a little longer flight time.

BXG-BNE would be at least a 3 hour flight on a Q300. Of course, security screening in BXG could be an issue but this type of route would be more suited to a commuter jet. Maybe QF can convince Alliance to add some secondhand E175s to their Embraer fleet.

Going forward that might be the go. When the all the A220's arrive at QF there will be no use for E190. E175s would be a good fit on those longer thin Q400 routes.

tullamarine wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

They are going well, but not well enough to support a BNE service. The newly launched WGA-BNE is absolutely loaded though! ABX will be getting seasonal ADL flights so I'm wondering if WGA will be next.

Does Bendigo have airport screening? I know the Q300 seems to be the largest on the SYD-BXG route. Q400 wouldn't be able to fly there with no screening. Q300 could still do BXG-BNE but would be a little longer flight time.

BXG-BNE would be at least a 3 hour flight on a Q300. Of course, security screening in BXG could be an issue but this type of route would be more suited to a commuter jet. Maybe QF can convince Alliance to add some secondhand E175s to their Embraer fleet.

The operating costs of E175s will likely be uneconomic on routes such as BNE-BXG. The Dash 8 is much cheaper to operate, and unlike the E190 there aren’t many (any?) distressed E175s out there as they are still very much in demand by the US airlines. Alliance were opportunistic in buying E190s for pennies on the dollar. One of the few rational decisions Borghetti made at VA was to replace the E170s with ATR-72s.

I agree though that BNE-BXG is too far to be realistically operated by a non-Q400 Dash 8. It is 70% further than SYD-LDH.

SCFlyer wrote:

I wonder what the trade off freight/cargo-wise if, for example, QF were to offer more than daily (say 10-12 weekly) on the A321XLR on the non-core SE Asia routes (e.g CGK, MNL, BKK, etc) across all the East Coast ports (for example daily SYD-MNL and 4x weekly MEL-MNL).

Of course it would free up a A330 for elsewhere, but it seems there are plenty of factors into it.

Id say that would be a major boost to the QF Freight operational capability which would be very attractive to shippers.

qf2048 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

Does Bendigo have airport screening? I know the Q300 seems to be the largest on the SYD-BXG route. Q400 wouldn't be able to fly there with no screening. Q300 could still do BXG-BNE but would be a little longer flight time.

BXG-BNE would be at least a 3 hour flight on a Q300. Of course, security screening in BXG could be an issue but this type of route would be more suited to a commuter jet. Maybe QF can convince Alliance to add some secondhand E175s to their Embraer fleet.

Going forward that might be the go. When the all the A220's arrive at QF there will be no use for E190. E175s would be a good fit on those longer thin Q400 routes.

The E190 is quite a bit smaller than the A220 (and 717 for that matter) so there could still be a niche for them. More importantly, depending on their agreement with Alliance, very cheap E190s will obviously have much lower capital costs than brand new A220s, and therefore probably still attractive to keep around.

Look at the 717 utilisation during April compared to March and May. All sorts of random routes, such as BNE-LST and CBR-CNS were operated for 2-3 weeks, plus additional capacity on routes such as BNE-PPP. Adding extra seasonal capacity, with low utilisation off-peak, is only realistic with aircraft which are largely paid off. They couldn’t schedule the A220s like this.

SCFlyer wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

redroo wrote:

I remain to be convinced by the QF 321XLR. Obviously its makes DPS easier and cheaper to operate, but I cant for the life of me seeing QF buying a plane just for Bali. PER can do SIN with A320 or B737 just fine, so its not for us. Unless they have plans to offer more frequency on SIN and HKG from SYD/MEL/BNE. Personally I’d love a bit more frequency on PER/SIN and would happily trade down to the 737 for it, even though I love the A330.

Maybe it will enable SYD/MEL/BNE to the “non-core” destinations of CGK, KUL, BKK, etc to be offered daily?

And if it frees up more expensive 787s for transpacific flying then winner winner chicken dinner.

I agree with you and you don't even need the XLR for DPS, the LR will do it easy enough. Actually, you'd probably be able to do DPS with a standard 321NEO without any problems.

QF don't fly to KUL at all, so any service there would be a resumption, which probably wouldn't be daily to start with from any of the Australian ports. BKK was daily from SYD with a 330 and has always had solid cargo loads, which you'll sacrifice if you send a 321 up and what do you do with the rest of the Australian ports. MNL was building up to daily from SYD before covid, it might be a possibility. There are so many options available, but when you really look at them, are they really viable even with the 321 ? Do QF suddenly start to fragment the route network with flight options from more than one or two Australian ports ? But doing this will bring them into competition with the home Asian airline offering good business classes, so as has been mentioned, a decent business class will need to be offered to be competitive.

The whole 321NEO/LR/XLR order for QF raises so many questions. They fit better at JQ, but for QF, especially if they're only going to have one configuration, the 321LR would seem a more logical choice. Anyway, it's not my cash, so I don't really care, they're all going to look the same, so no variety there (at least after the initial excitement) and having just done a 5 hour FJ sector in a MAX, that's about the limit I'm going to travel on a narrow body aircraft on a full service carrier.

I wonder what the trade off freight/cargo-wise if, for example, QF were to offer more than daily (say 10-12 weekly) on the A321XLR on the non-core SE Asia routes (e.g CGK, MNL, BKK, etc) across all the East Coast ports (for example daily SYD-MNL and 4x weekly MEL-MNL).

Of course it would free up a A330 for elsewhere, but it seems there are plenty of factors into it.

Can the 321XLR handle ULDs? I know PR doesn't use ULDs down to AU, but this could because of weight also - not sure if the extra fuel tank means ULDs won't fit or the aircraft won't trim? Could be an issue for freight forwarded who like to assemble their own pallets and ULDs.

Will be interesting to see how many 321 and 330 Freighters QF ends up with, again very streamlined fleet. Will the 330s replace the 767?

RyanairGuru wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

BXG-BNE would be at least a 3 hour flight on a Q300. Of course, security screening in BXG could be an issue but this type of route would be more suited to a commuter jet. Maybe QF can convince Alliance to add some secondhand E175s to their Embraer fleet.

Going forward that might be the go. When the all the A220's arrive at QF there will be no use for E190. E175s would be a good fit on those longer thin Q400 routes.

The E190 is quite a bit smaller than the A220 (and 717 for that matter) so there could still be a niche for them. More importantly, depending on their agreement with Alliance, very cheap E190s will obviously have much lower capital costs than brand new A220s, and therefore probably still attractive to keep around.

Look at the 717 utilisation during April compared to March and May. All sorts of random routes, such as BNE-LST and CBR-CNS were operated for 2-3 weeks, plus additional capacity on routes such as BNE-PPP. Adding extra seasonal capacity, with low utilisation off-peak, is only realistic with aircraft which are largely paid off. They couldn’t schedule the A220s like this.

I can't wait to see where the A220 ends up, the 717 is a bit of an oddball isn't it, how many do they currently have east vs west? Operating here there and everywhere! Certainly a number of routes that will benefit from a A220 conversion, I see strong A220 presence for ADL, HBA, CBR for capitals, but interesting to see to your point where else they can send them. Internationally I can see WLG, ZQN PER-CGK. Whilst QF can still get parts wouldn't surprise me if the A220 don't replace 717s 1 for 1 - but replace a couple of 738 on smaller routes first, and E190, etc bit more dynamic than 1 for 1.

Amazing looking at those range maps to think the 717 could reach NZ - surely that's on vapor, and no chance they have life rafts etc onboard.

smi0006 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

Going forward that might be the go. When the all the A220's arrive at QF there will be no use for E190. E175s would be a good fit on those longer thin Q400 routes.

The E190 is quite a bit smaller than the A220 (and 717 for that matter) so there could still be a niche for them. More importantly, depending on their agreement with Alliance, very cheap E190s will obviously have much lower capital costs than brand new A220s, and therefore probably still attractive to keep around.

Look at the 717 utilisation during April compared to March and May. All sorts of random routes, such as BNE-LST and CBR-CNS were operated for 2-3 weeks, plus additional capacity on routes such as BNE-PPP. Adding extra seasonal capacity, with low utilisation off-peak, is only realistic with aircraft which are largely paid off. They couldn’t schedule the A220s like this.

I can't wait to see where the A220 ends up, the 717 is a bit of an oddball isn't it, how many do they currently have east vs west? Operating here there and everywhere! Certainly a number of routes that will benefit from a A220 conversion, I see strong A220 presence for ADL, HBA, CBR for capitals, but interesting to see to your point where else they can send them. Internationally I can see WLG, ZQN PER-CGK. Whilst QF can still get parts wouldn't surprise me if the A220 don't replace 717s 1 for 1 - but replace a couple of 738 on smaller routes first, and E190, etc bit more dynamic than 1 for 1.

Amazing looking at those range maps to think the 717 could reach NZ - surely that's on vapor, and no chance they have life rafts etc onboard.

The 717 fleet is now only in the East, West went to 100% Network F100s and A320s in 2020. That might be why utilisation is so low. 2 717s are still in storage, and the remainder have quite a lot of down time (outside of school holidays). Presumably utilisation would be higher without the E190s, which makes me wonder whether the Alliance contract is so cheap that the 717 is economically undesirable in comparison? I was also wondering whether NationalJet were struggling with pilots.

The A220s are going to be fascinating to watch. I would assume that they would replace 717s on the high end (MEL-CBR, SYD/MEL-HBA etc) and 737s on the low end (some ADL, and routes such as SYD-OOL/MCY which are a mix of 717s and 737s).

That could mean that there is still scope for the 12 E190s to replace 717s on the low end.

Qantas will bring forward resumption of PER-LHR to 23 May instead of 19 June

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/qan ... r-planned/

I havent seen this before today but it seems that Qantas is also intending of upgrading PER-LHR to A350-1000 from 2026

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa/up- ... -c-6668296

More trouble for Qantas

Qantas has lost its appeal in the Federal Court over outsourcing ground handling. Further remedy hearings are to take place to determine compensation and penalties against Qantas. The TWU is also calling for the sacking of Alan Joyce and Andrew David

https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/markets ... 85d7b394bc

Qantas statement, plans to appeal to High Court

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... rt-appeal/

Air Canada will use 77W on YVR-SYD between 10 and 16 May 22

https://aeroroutes.com/eng/220503-acmay22syd

Meanwhile Bamboo is planning on increasing SGN-MEL to 3 weekly from 28 June 22

https://aeroroutes.com/eng/220503-qhjun22intl

qf789 wrote:

More trouble for Qantas

Qantas has lost its appeal in the Federal Court over outsourcing ground handling. Further remedy hearings are to take place to determine compensation and penalties against Qantas. The TWU is also calling for the sacking of Alan Joyce and Andrew David

https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/markets ... 85d7b394bc

Qantas statement, plans to appeal to High Court

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/featu ... rt-appeal/

Both sides lost today. Qantas lost their appeal that they acted unlawfully in retrenching their grand handling agents and aircraft cleaners, but the TWU also lost their cross-appeal that the former employees should be reinstated.

As Tullamarine said, they only winners are the lawyers.

Today's QF64 has come via Durban. It seems yesterday's did as well. Is there some backstory I've missed to this? Or is it a required tech stop?

benjjk wrote:

Today's QF64 has come via Durban. It seems yesterday's did as well. Is there some backstory I've missed to this? Or is it a required tech stop?

Probably a refuelling stop as JNB airport has been experiencing fuel shortages

Notice A380 VH-OQB is back in rotation after sitting in Sydney for 3 months. Does anyone know the reason? was it the refurb of seating?

LTEN11 wrote:

What extra revenue is the LR or XLR going to pick up going to DPS from SYD/MEL/BNE if they all have the same configuration ? It's not going to be cargo, the LR and XLR lose space to accommodate the extra fuel tanks and it would be doubtful a standard 321NEO in QF configuration wouldn't be able to reach DPS without restrictions in anything other than the worst of conditions. PR already send their standard 321NEO to each of those cities from MNL, a longer flight, though I'm not sure how they are configured.

I'm not arguing that the LR and XLR would have their niches for QF, however I struggle to find too many that the XLR would excel over the LR, especially if they are all configured the same.

The original post I was responding to raised Bali, hence I continued to use that as the example. That said, I think the freight market would be more lucrative to the Pacific and other Asian destinations which utilise A330s likely for freight volume, and possibly even some longer domestic/regional sectors from MEL/SYD-DRW/CNS/AKL where cargo on A330s flight often for cargo.

That said, I think your assumption regarding DPS not having cargo demand is entirely false, and naive. Thankfully, we don't need to make assumptions in this regard since we have data. The BITRE data for January 2019 (last full non-COVID month) shows 739t of freight ex-DPS for Australia and 914t ex-Australia for DPS. That is actually quite substantial, probably using passenger belly volume to feed into the rest of the country/region. I'm sure QF would love to be able to carry a bigger chunk of that on A321s XLRs.

More terrific service from Qantas

Passengers in London have been waiting days for bags to arrive after they were left behind in DRW, no or little communication from QF on the matter

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/i-l ... 5ai9y.html

FADZ777 wrote:

Notice A380 VH-OQB is back in rotation after sitting in Sydney for 3 months. Does anyone know the reason? was it the refurb of seating?

Maintenance. Heard upon completing todays QF17 SYDLAX service the aircraft is heading to AUH/DRS to under go refurb/reconfigure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

evanb wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

What extra revenue is the LR or XLR going to pick up going to DPS from SYD/MEL/BNE if they all have the same configuration ? It's not going to be cargo, the LR and XLR lose space to accommodate the extra fuel tanks and it would be doubtful a standard 321NEO in QF configuration wouldn't be able to reach DPS without restrictions in anything other than the worst of conditions. PR already send their standard 321NEO to each of those cities from MNL, a longer flight, though I'm not sure how they are configured.

I'm not arguing that the LR and XLR would have their niches for QF, however I struggle to find too many that the XLR would excel over the LR, especially if they are all configured the same.

The original post I was responding to raised Bali, hence I continued to use that as the example. That said, I think the freight market would be more lucrative to the Pacific and other Asian destinations which utilise A330s likely for freight volume, and possibly even some longer domestic/regional sectors from MEL/SYD-DRW/CNS/AKL where cargo on A330s flight often for cargo.

That said, I think your assumption regarding DPS not having cargo demand is entirely false, and naive. Thankfully, we don't need to make assumptions in this regard since we have data. The BITRE data for January 2019 (last full non-COVID month) shows 739t of freight ex-DPS for Australia and 914t ex-Australia for DPS. That is actually quite substantial, probably using passenger belly volume to feed into the rest of the country/region. I'm sure QF would love to be able to carry a bigger chunk of that on A321s XLRs.

The freight figure for DPS, is that from SYD, or all Australian ports, just QF, or all carriers combined ? If it's for all carriers, from all Australian ports, your looking at 15-20 flights everyday. Taking the lowest figure of 15 flights a day, the average cargo uplift per flight is just under 2t per flight and I would wager most of that is fresh produce and again that most went on the GA and JQ widebody aircraft.

The XLR won't have the ability to carry much cargo anyway, you lose space for the extra fuel tanks and if the aircraft has a full passenger load, most positions will be taken up with baggage, similar problem to what the 380 has. It will be a great people mover, but will have little space left over for revenue cargo. That problem will be worse on the JQ fleet with the higher seat counts.

utaussiefan wrote:

With the A321LR coming to Jetstar soon and them potentially get some XLR's, could there be a chance they install some "Business Class" seat recliners up the front for the leisure destinations in Asia when they potentially replace the 787. Also easier to justify compared to Qantas flying recliners against much better competitors.

I doubt JQ will install a J class on the 321s. As for QF flying recliners to Asia... they did that for a long time with the 767s even when flat beds were the norm for other carriers.

I'm wondering that with the announced specification of the A35K, and specifically the new F suites, what relevance F class has on the A380?

It seems almost ludicrous to sell this as an F product compared to the A350 suites and also the offerings from SQ, EK, etc. So do they rebrand this as a "Business Premium/Plus" or look into another refurb' of the A380?

I don't see QF making another more premium product with the likes of showers. So if they're still wanting a 4 class plane, I would consider another refurb to:
10-12 (A35K grade) F Suites on the upper deck in a 1-1-1 config';
80~ J seats on the upper deck in 1-2-1;
64~ W seats on the front end of the main deck in a 2-4-2;
350~ Y seats on the main deck, 3-4-3.
Making a 504 seat config'.

But if fuel costs remain high, then making a 3 class A388 is a more practicable solution:
90~ J seats on the upper deck, 1-2-1;
28~ W seats on the rear of the upper deck, 2-3-2;
48~ W seats at the front of the main deck, 2-4-2;
400~ Y seats in 3-4-3.
Making a 566 seat config'.

The latter seems more appropriate for routes like SYD-SIN-LHR.

Cheers.