DartHerald wrote:

If the A350 rumour is true, it's certainly adding to a good start to he year for the Airbus WB sales team - and with the Saudi Arabian new airline order potentially still to come! Good news for RR too.

I think they probably don't know the difference between the a35K and a359, it's just a mix up.

The article could have been referring to the a350-1000s which are indeed coming in.

It's rare for airlines to replace a330s more especially the -200 with the a359, it's possible yes but rare.

Currently even the 787-9 does a better job of being a replacement for the a332 than the a330-800 and in some cases the a330-900.

We could see an a359 order maybe, but I think XLR and 787 will be the main combination for qantas medium to long haul fleet. The a35K will be their primary ultra-long haul aircraft.

If the 787-10HGW has a decent range, it could be considered to replace some of the X -a380 routes I guess, but I am looking at XLR, 787, A35K for qantas future primary fleet.

Currently, Qantas has 10 A330-300s plus 16 passenger A330-200s (plus 2 owned frames sent out for freighter conversion). The A332 fleet is half owned and half leased (mix of 230t, 233t, and four 238t frames), while the A333 fleet is all owned (likely mostly 230t). To me, that would lend itself to 10-12 B78Xs and 16-18 B789s as well. I also don't see how QF doesn't use this opportunity to replace the ten A380s as well as this would be around 2029-2030 as well for delivery. Those could go to higher-density A35Ks around 325 seats (as opposed to the 238-seat Project Sunrise frames) for 14 frames. It could be fewer depending on how transcontinental and trans-Tasman deployment ends up going (if those go to the A321XLR).

I also suspect this is a mistake.

I just wonder if some of the current 787-9s will be brought home to replace the A330s and A359s will replace the 787s on long-haul routes. Just a thought.

Other consideration is the 380s will eventually need replacing - is imagine most likely a more dense 35K - perfect also for dense asia flying so another 10-12 35K at some point. Other option is a 787-10 if it can do MEL-LAX with the new HGW….

But I primarily see 330s being replaced by 789 from the top, and 321 below - with greater market fragmentation and P2P. QF needs more 789 for current LH expansion too- ORD,SFO,CDG, etc.

Sermons wrote:

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

They have 12 A350-1000s on order plus options. Any subsequent A359 order will neatly dovetail into a then-existing training and operations environment.

The wording looks very much like a mistake based on the way it reads.

I could see a situation that the A350-900 coming though in to replace the 787-9 on long haul routes, with the latter to take over domestic and some Asian routes. The latter would likely then be reconfigured with a higher density cabin to fulfill that mission.

The A321XLR will allow them to go narrowbody on some Asia routes though which will change the fleet needs somewhat, but we will see what their thinking is soon enough.

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Sermons wrote:

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

They have 12 A350-1000s on order plus options. Any subsequent A359 order will neatly dovetail into a then-existing training and operations environment.

As would a further 787 order.

Do we reckon we might hear an announcement from QF anytime soon re the A330 replacement?

RJMAZ wrote:

I can't see Qantas increasing the number of aircraft types. To me it seems Qantas in 10 years time will only operator the following aircraft.

A220-300
A321XLR
787-9
A350-1000ULR

That is an excellent fleet. Qantas has 90+ purchase rights for additional A321 and A220. It would not surprise me if the A330CEO gets replaced entirely with the A321XLR and the 787 does the small number of A330CEO routes.

Qantas could get back the Jetstar 787-8 aircraft which already have a domestic higher density cabin. Jetstar could go A321XLR for all the current 787-8 routes.

I would add to that list A220-500, B787-10 and A350-1000 std's next to the ULR's

JJWess wrote:

Do we reckon we might hear an announcement from QF anytime soon re the A330 replacement?

No, they have at least another 12-18 months of milking media attention by Joyce until they announce anything. QF have probably already made the decision what they actually want, but where's the fun in that.

I could see this order being split 787-9 and 350-900. With the bulk going to the 787-9 and A350-900 getting some of the orders.
787-9 needed for the smaller routes which need a 1 to 1 A330-200 replacement capacity wise / lower demand asian routes
350-900 needed for trunk Asian routes, and potential expansion for EU to PER and East Coast to USA.

I don’t see the 787-10 at Qantas as it currently can’t do BNE to LAX without restrictions as the furtherest flights for the A330-200 are BNE-LAX
A330-300 MEL-HND and the 787-10 doesn’t have the range flexibility as the a350-900. The 787-10 would only win if the price was too good.Qantas is definitely all about flexibility and pushing aircraft to the limits.

I can see at least another 787-9 configuration something with less J and no W then the current fleet and then the 350-900 being mid J with no W.

The 787-9 in low J configuration without W would be used on
BNE-LAX,BNE-HND, BNE-SIN,, SYD/BNE/MEL-PER, MEL-DEL, SYD-BLR, SYD-PVG, SYD-MNL, SYD-BKK, MEL-HND (depending if it continues to rotate with BNE), SYD-ICN, SYD-CGK, BNE-HKG,
The 350-900 be used on
MEL-SIN, SYD-SIN, SYD-HND, SYD-HKG, MEL-HKG potential route expansions to the USA from the east coast and Europe from Perth. I could also see the A350-900 be used to replace the current 787-9 fleet and the 787-9’s reconfigured so the 787-9’s can have one common configuration.

Sermons wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

IMO, not that it matters, QF should split the replacement between more 787s and A359s..

Have A359s doing medium and long haul that don't need Sunrise.. Tokyo, SFO, SIN, JNB, HKG, SCL, some Euro destinations from Perth and secondary US cities from SYD/MEL like SEA and maybe even LAS..

The additional 787s can do regional or long and thin routes like BNE to the US and some domestic turns like the A330s do now.

Well to get the best deal, Qantas would need to stick with only one OEM. It would probably be an order of only 15 to 20 aircraft anyways and replacing the a330 with the a350 is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

You do realize Sunrise will be A35Ks right? So they will have economies of scale either way. A split wouldn't affect them but they could also go with a single supplier.. QF likes to buy from both and they gave the Sunrise and NB order to Airbus, so they might select more 787s to keep fleet balance..

The A350-900 will complement the A350-1000 very well, and is likely more flexible than the 787-10 in my opinion, but both have their pros and cons.

IndianicWorld wrote:

The A350-900 will complement the A350-1000 very well, and is likely more flexible than the 787-10 in my opinion, but both have their pros and cons.

It will be too big for some of the Asian routes that currently use the 332. A 788 is a perfect match, while a 789 provides reasonable (ie not excessive) capacity upgrades as compared the 350.

Airbus order to lose unless Boeing makes them an unbeatable deal.

ILNFlyer wrote:

Airbus order to lose unless Boeing makes them an unbeatable deal.

I don’t think it’s anyone’s order to lose. It’s 50/50 either way. You can make compelling arguments for both and there is nothing to suggest Airbus has an edge.

Polot wrote:

ILNFlyer wrote:

Airbus order to lose unless Boeing makes them an unbeatable deal.

....there is nothing to suggest Airbus has an edge.

For one, no reason to think QF won't do a split order.

For two, given QF has already gotten 20 A321XLRs on order, I think that means Airbus is guaranteed on the narrowbody side, especially given QF's options across A220 and A320neo families.

As I see it, the A330s will be replaced by a mix of A321XLRs and regionally-configured (say 28 to 30J, 21PE, around 200-220E) 787-9s. Regional 787-9s could also provide supplemental/less-premium frequencies to North America so they can be moved around the network as needed.

The first 20 A321XLRs may be given a short-haul layout but I think that's just temporary until QF get A321neos for domestic. Then the XLRs become equipped with flatbed business class and a touch more legroom for international duties.

Simple, clean, efficient, no additional aircraft types or models (just one type having two LOPAs), no new pilot pools, etc. Keeps Boeing happy (with 787-9s), keeps Airbus happy (with the narrowbodies), allows more frequencies and a wider arrange of point-to-point flights between Australia and South-East Asia. Very elegant and zen.

StudiodeKadent wrote:

Polot wrote:

ILNFlyer wrote:

Airbus order to lose unless Boeing makes them an unbeatable deal.

....there is nothing to suggest Airbus has an edge.

For one, no reason to think QF won't do a split order.

For two, given QF has already gotten 20 A321XLRs on order, I think that means Airbus is guaranteed on the narrowbody side, especially given QF's options across A220 and A320neo families.

As I see it, the A330s will be replaced by a mix of A321XLRs and regionally-configured (say 28 to 30J, 21PE, around 200-220E) 787-9s. Regional 787-9s could also provide supplemental/less-premium frequencies to North America so they can be moved around the network as needed.

The first 20 A321XLRs may be given a short-haul layout but I think that's just temporary until QF get A321neos for domestic. Then the XLRs become equipped with flatbed business class and a touch more legroom for international duties.

Simple, clean, efficient, no additional aircraft types or models (just one type having two LOPAs), no new pilot pools, etc. Keeps Boeing happy (with 787-9s), keeps Airbus happy (with the narrowbodies), allows more frequencies and a wider arrange of point-to-point flights between Australia and South-East Asia. Very elegant and zen.

Ironic the XRL may be stealing sales from the A330NEO, the NEO was designed to be the replacement for the thousands of A330s operating today. But if Qantas is using the A330 for the range on a given route the XRL makes perfect sense for them.

Sermons wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

IMO, not that it matters, QF should split the replacement between more 787s and A359s..

Have A359s doing medium and long haul that don't need Sunrise.. Tokyo, SFO, SIN, JNB, HKG, SCL, some Euro destinations from Perth and secondary US cities from SYD/MEL like SEA and maybe even LAS..

The additional 787s can do regional or long and thin routes like BNE to the US and some domestic turns like the A330s do now.

Well to get the best deal, Qantas would need to stick with only one OEM. It would probably be an order of only 15 to 20 aircraft anyways and replacing the a330 with the a350 is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

That they aren't familiar and have never operated one doesn't seem to have been an issue when selecting and ordering the A35K for Sunrise. Given that they already have 787s and the A35K is locked in, a split is not any huge issue.

QF A333 has 297 seats (28J+269Y) and the A332 has 251 seats (27J+224Y) - are they looking at similar capacity?

Is Premium economy a priority at QF for new aircraft? If so, the B789 may be too small as it currently has 236 seats with PY, unless they cut down on the huge galleys and remove a few J seats. The B787-10 will be more suitable for 3-class 275-300 seats.

The A359 is a powerhouse of versatility so if they get that they'll be set for decades, JAL fly them on 2-hour flights in Japan and SQ fly them on 18-hour flights SIN-NYC and everyone else use them on everything in between. The B789 does this too but it is smaller than the A359 and QF might need the seats.

MrHMSH wrote:

Sermons wrote:

DCA350 wrote:

IMO, not that it matters, QF should split the replacement between more 787s and A359s..

Have A359s doing medium and long haul that don't need Sunrise.. Tokyo, SFO, SIN, JNB, HKG, SCL, some Euro destinations from Perth and secondary US cities from SYD/MEL like SEA and maybe even LAS..

The additional 787s can do regional or long and thin routes like BNE to the US and some domestic turns like the A330s do now.

Well to get the best deal, Qantas would need to stick with only one OEM. It would probably be an order of only 15 to 20 aircraft anyways and replacing the a330 with the a350 is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

That they aren't familiar and have never operated one doesn't seem to have been an issue when selecting and ordering the A35K for Sunrise. Given that they already have 787s and the A35K is locked in, a split is not any huge issue.

Look I do agree that there is possibility of an a350-900, but we are not talking about replacing a 777-200ER fleet but rather an a330 fleet that is dominated by the smaller -200.

Even Hawaiian who have a a330 fleet dominated by the -200 went for the 787-9, after previously showing interest in the a338/ a358 not the a359 ( as far as I know)

The a35K was chosen purely because it was currently the only option that could unlock the potential of project sunrise but they won't get their first aircraft untill 2025 ( something like that) .

All I'm saying is going from an a332/a333 to an a350 is a bit of a stretch and Qantas order for the XLR has shown that they are looking towards a smaller simpler fleet.

I mean who knows, some of the a330-200 routes could be taken up by the a321- XLR and the remaining by additional 787-9s coming in. That doesn't leave much for the larger, more expensive a359.

Some do rule out the 787-10, that's fair enough but if it's HGW upgrades could allow for a Melbourne to LA trip with little or no restrictions, then it might be a great candidate for an a380 replacement. I mean qantas replaced their 747s with the 789, didn't they?

Look I'm not saying this is what is going to happen , this is just what I think

CRJ900 wrote:

QF A333 has 297 seats (28J+269Y) and the A332 has 251 seats (27J+224Y) - are they looking at similar capacity?

Is Premium economy a priority at QF for new aircraft? If so, the B789 may be too small as it currently has 236 seats with PY, unless they cut down on the huge galleys and remove a few J seats. The B787-10 will be more suitable for 3-class 275-300 seats.

The A359 is a powerhouse of versatility so if they get that they'll be set for decades, JAL fly them on 2-hour flights in Japan and SQ fly them on 18-hour flights SIN-NYC and everyone else use them on everything in between. The B789 does this too but it is smaller than the A359 and QF might need the seats.

The 789s currently have 42 J seats and is configured for ULH use, you can’t really directly compare total number of seats to QF’s A330s. If they order more to replace the A330s they will likely be in a less premium layout with more Y. The 789 has similar floor area as the A333.

With a layout similar to AA (30J, 21W) they would have around ~280-290 seats.

Sermons wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

Sermons wrote:

Well to get the best deal, Qantas would need to stick with only one OEM. It would probably be an order of only 15 to 20 aircraft anyways and replacing the a330 with the a350 is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

15 to 20 is too small to split, and get a great deal at the same time.

They are not familiar with the a350, never operated one. This is an order for Boeing to lose

That they aren't familiar and have never operated one doesn't seem to have been an issue when selecting and ordering the A35K for Sunrise. Given that they already have 787s and the A35K is locked in, a split is not any huge issue.

Look I do agree that there is possibility of an a350-900, but we are not talking about replacing a 777-200ER fleet but rather an a330 fleet that is dominated by the smaller -200.

Even Hawaiian who have a a330 fleet dominated by the -200 went for the 787-9, after previously showing interest in the a338/ a358 not the a359 ( as far as I know)

The a35K was chosen purely because it was currently the only option that could unlock the potential of project sunrise but they won't get their first aircraft untill 2025 ( something like that) .

All I'm saying is going from an a332/a333 to an a350 is a bit of a stretch and Qantas order for the XLR has shown that they are looking towards a smaller simpler fleet.

I mean who knows, some of the a330-200 routes could be taken up by the a321- XLR and the remaining by additional 787-9s coming in. That doesn't leave much for the larger, more expensive a359.

Some do rule out the 787-10, that's fair enough but if it's HGW upgrades could allow for a Melbourne to LA trip with little or no restrictions, then it might be a great candidate for an a380 replacement. I mean qantas replaced their 747s with the 789, didn't they?

Look I'm not saying this is what is going to happen , this is just what I think

Sure, there are reasons why they might not take the A359, and especially as an A330 replacement, but you're saying 15-20 aircraft is too small to split to get a good deal. I don't think that's a reason why they'd pass on the A359, why they've chosen the A35K (availability and capability) isn't overly relevant, fact is that the A35K will join the fleet, at which point the A359 is a pretty seamless introduction.

As a side note, even with MTOW upgrades I don't think the 78X gets quite enough oomph to be a compelling option on the TPAC routes. It's certainly doable, but as it is the 78X's payload drops off around 4500nm (still air), assuming this is nudged to around 5000nm that still leaves it a long way short of the 6507nm of SYD-LAX with full passenger load and cargo. Simply put, I don't see any reason to use it there ahead of the 789 or potentially A359. To Asia is a different question.

MrHMSH wrote:

As a side note, even with MTOW upgrades I don't think the 78X gets quite enough oomph to be a compelling option on the TPAC routes. It's certainly doable, but as it is the 78X's payload drops off around 4500nm (still air), assuming this is nudged to around 5000nm that still leaves it a long way short of the 6507nm of SYD-LAX with full passenger load and cargo. Simply put, I don't see any reason to use it there ahead of the 789 or potentially A359. To Asia is a different question.

Well Qantas 787-9s seat around 236, Qatar Airways 787-9s go beyond 300 seats.

I'm guessing, having less seats could be able to give you a little bit more range due to less bags and passengers.

Assuming a less dense seating for 787-10 is adopted ( if they ever order it) , wouldn't it give it a little more to cover such a route, provided the HGW upgrades are decent enough?

I would be unsurprised if they elect to just convert the A35K to A359. Sunrise is a vanity project they can’t afford, and the derivative is unlikely to sell more frames for Airbus. Qantas has lost huge amounts of money, and still has the same size fleet as before pandemic with half the pax miles.

If the 321XLR is in play, that could mean great things for Perth. 4500nmi from PER would include Madagascar, India, Korean Peninsula, and a swath of South Pacific islands.

Sermons wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

As a side note, even with MTOW upgrades I don't think the 78X gets quite enough oomph to be a compelling option on the TPAC routes. It's certainly doable, but as it is the 78X's payload drops off around 4500nm (still air), assuming this is nudged to around 5000nm that still leaves it a long way short of the 6507nm of SYD-LAX with full passenger load and cargo. Simply put, I don't see any reason to use it there ahead of the 789 or potentially A359. To Asia is a different question.

Well Qantas 787-9s seat around 236, Qatar Airways 787-9s go beyond 300 seats.

I'm guessing, having less seats could be able to give you a little bit more range due to less bags and passengers.

Assuming a less dense seating for 787-10 is adopted ( if they ever order it) , wouldn't it give it a little more to cover such a route, provided the HGW upgrades are decent enough?

Less dense layout could work... but at the cost of making the aircraft less-suited to Asia/high density routes, which is the 78X's main selling point. A 789 or A359 give you the flexibility to put in more seats while still offering great lifting power for those TPACs.

If QF go for the 78X, I would not expect to see it take over what the 789 does in any meaningful way. It would likely, after all, be an A330 replacement, and the A333s don't go much beyond 10hr flights as far as I can see (SYD-ICN at 10+hrs or so seems to be the longest.).

TWA772LR wrote:

If the 321XLR is in play, that could mean great things for Perth. 4500nmi from PER would include Madagascar, India, Korean Peninsula, and a swath of South Pacific islands.

I don't think the XLR is going to have ETOPS330 for Madagascar. It will be interesting to see if airlines actually put the XLR on 10 hour routes.

JohanTally wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

If the 321XLR is in play, that could mean great things for Perth. 4500nmi from PER would include Madagascar, India, Korean Peninsula, and a swath of South Pacific islands.

I don't think the XLR is going to have ETOPS330 for Madagascar. It will be interesting to see if airlines actually put the XLR on 10 hour routes.

It'd be cool to see but I agree a kangaroo-tailed A321 will probably not be Antananarivo. But it is impressive range nonetheless and it bodes well for places like Darwin and Adelaide for new service. Probably more likely to see them in the Indian subcontinent though than the likes of ICN, PEK, and the Solomon Islands from Perth. Still, the prospect of these ervices based off of the airplanes capabilities alone is still fun to observe.

TWA772LR wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

If the 321XLR is in play, that could mean great things for Perth. 4500nmi from PER would include Madagascar, India, Korean Peninsula, and a swath of South Pacific islands.

I don't think the XLR is going to have ETOPS330 for Madagascar. It will be interesting to see if airlines actually put the XLR on 10 hour routes.

It'd be cool to see but I agree a kangaroo-tailed A321 will probably not be Antananarivo. But it is impressive range nonetheless and it bodes well for places like Darwin and Adelaide for new service. Probably more likely to see them in the Indian subcontinent though than the likes of ICN, PEK, and the Solomon Islands from Perth. Still, the prospect of these ervices based off of the airplanes capabilities alone is still fun to observe.

I completely agree and truly hope the XLR unlocks routes worldwide that weren't feasible with widebody aircraft. Being in CLT I hope AA finds exciting routes to utilize XLRs on.

Polot wrote:

CRJ900 wrote:

QF A333 has 297 seats (28J+269Y) and the A332 has 251 seats (27J+224Y) - are they looking at similar capacity?

Is Premium economy a priority at QF for new aircraft? If so, the B789 may be too small as it currently has 236 seats with PY, unless they cut down on the huge galleys and remove a few J seats. The B787-10 will be more suitable for 3-class 275-300 seats.

The A359 is a powerhouse of versatility so if they get that they'll be set for decades, JAL fly them on 2-hour flights in Japan and SQ fly them on 18-hour flights SIN-NYC and everyone else use them on everything in between. The B789 does this too but it is smaller than the A359 and QF might need the seats.

The 789s currently have 42 J seats and is configured for ULH use, you can’t really directly compare total number of seats to QF’s A330s. If they order more to replace the A330s they will likely be in a less premium layout with more Y. The 789 has similar floor area as the A333.

With a layout similar to AA (30J, 21W) they would have around ~280-290 seats.

If QF go for the 789, then I could see something similar as the 30J, 21W as you mention like AA does. These would make more sense for Asian routes (existing and maybe new ones if they order enough aircraft) and will do well on routes like BNE-North America. Would also be a good replacement for flights to HNL and could unlock year round SYD-YVR as well

I see a mix of A359 and A35K with the 789 and 787-10. Some A321 XLR for thinner regional or domestic routes. The 787-10 would be perfect for high density regional routes(exampe: SYD-ICN, SYD-TYO, or SYD-HGK. The A35K to eventually replace the A380's.

ElroyJetson wrote:

I see a mix of A359 and A35K with the 789 and 787-10. Some A321 XLR for thinner regional or domestic routes. The 787-10 would be perfect for high density regional routes(exampe: SYD-ICN, SYD-TYO, or SYD-HGK. The A35K to eventually replace the A380's.

Sydney-Tokyo is almost 10 hours of flying and Hong Kong is 9,5 hours. I don't call that regional. That's like saying Los Angeles is regional to Amsterdam or something.

But I do see the possibility of a split order!

Cheers!

LifelinerOne wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

I see a mix of A359 and A35K with the 789 and 787-10. Some A321 XLR for thinner regional or domestic routes. The 787-10 would be perfect for high density regional routes(exampe: SYD-ICN, SYD-TYO, or SYD-HGK. The A35K to eventually replace the A380's.

Sydney-Tokyo is almost 10 hours of flying and Hong Kong is 9,5 hours. I don't call that regional. That's like saying Los Angeles is regional to Amsterdam or something.

But I do see the possibility of a split order!

Cheers!

To folks Australia that is regional. Europe and North America are long haul. Regardless 8-11 hours flights are right in the 787-10 wheelhouse. North America and Europe are better served by the A350 family or 789 depending on gauge needed imho.

CRJ900 wrote:

QF A333 has 297 seats (28J+269Y) and the A332 has 251 seats (27J+224Y) - are they looking at similar capacity?

Is Premium economy a priority at QF for new aircraft? If so, the B789 may be too small as it currently has 236 seats with PY, unless they cut down on the huge galleys and remove a few J seats. The B787-10 will be more suitable for 3-class 275-300 seats.

The A359 is a powerhouse of versatility so if they get that they'll be set for decades, JAL fly them on 2-hour flights in Japan and SQ fly them on 18-hour flights SIN-NYC and everyone else use them on everything in between. The B789 does this too but it is smaller than the A359 and QF might need the seats.

Prior to Covid - QF were on record saying Premium economy doesn’t sell overly well AU to Asia, I think CX said the same, pax will pay all the way through to EU via Asia but stand alone not a strong seller thus why the 330s were never refitted, also likely to increase their domestic flexibility. Uncertain if current economic times have changed that dynamic? US and EU premium is a stronger proposition!

But I’d suggest we may still see the occasional widebody do transcon and on the Tasman, albeit at greatly reduced number with the 321 taking over most of that role, but some flexibility.

I could see this order going to the 789 with not just the 330 replacements but some further LH and ULH config frames too maybe 8? . The 35K fleet will be 25 odd frames anyway once the 380s get replaced. They’d be mad to replace the 380s with 77x and add a new fleet type.

texl1649 wrote:

I would be unsurprised if they elect to just convert the A35K to A359. Sunrise is a vanity project they can’t afford, and the derivative is unlikely to sell more frames for Airbus. Qantas has lost huge amounts of money, and still has the same size fleet as before pandemic with half the pax miles.

QF's business has been eaten up by SQ (and CX in a smaller way) over decades, and more recently by the ME3. QF cannot realistically compete with those "hub" carriers on the Europe routes. Sucks to be at the far end of the world.

Sunrise is an attempt to take back premium passengers and let the hub carriers keep the lower yielding ones. If it doesn't work, oh well, 12 A35K to be reconfigured to replace 10 (?) A380.

So QF will give Sunrise a go. But 'plan B' for the A35K must play into their thinking on the A330 replacement project.

ElroyJetson wrote:

To folks Australia that is regional. Europe and North America are long haul. Regardless 8-11 hours flights are right in the 787-10 wheelhouse. North America and Europe are better served by the A350 family or 789 depending on gauge needed imho.

I can't believe what I am reading here. I don't think anyone I know in Australia would think SYD/PER/BNE to HKG/TYO is regional. Even SYD/PER to BKK is considered as long haul to many. To some rural Australians, even Singapore is too far to be called 'mid-haul'. It is in another continent for God's sake. When you think regional, you might be thinking east coast to Auckland (obviously not for Ozzie' from Perth or Cairns or even Adelaide), Queenstown, Fiji, Port Moresby and as far as Bali. Try to tell the poor chap flying from Alice Spring - Brisbane - Tokyo that someone on A.net thinks he is flying 'regional'. I am sure he will use some colourful language to show what he thinks of the A.netter.

Just another thing, when you tell 'folks' in Australia that someone is flying 'regional', most people would quote Waga Waga, Mt. Pleasant ...etc. as regional.

And Europe is not long haul, it is called Ultra Long Haul. ULH is used by aviation industry for this very reason.

To Australians, everything outside Singapore and New Zealand is bloody long haul or F(language filter) (translate: ultra) long haul.

Seems to me that there's a lot of adding 2 + 2 here, and coming up with 5,6 or 7 with the number reached being equal to the poster's favourite type - and because this is a predominantly USA--centred readership for the most part, it's the 787 in its various forms. Qantas are an Australian airline, though, and may have other preferences, we'll just have to wait for an announcement to be find out!

chonetsao wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

To folks Australia that is regional. Europe and North America are long haul. Regardless 8-11 hours flights are right in the 787-10 wheelhouse. North America and Europe are better served by the A350 family or 789 depending on gauge needed imho.

I can't believe what I am reading here. I don't think anyone I know in Australia would think SYD/PER/BNE to HKG/TYO is regional. Even SYD/PER to BKK is considered as long haul to many. To some rural Australians, even Singapore is too far to be called 'mid-haul'. It is in another continent for God's sake. When you think regional, you might be thinking east coast to Auckland (obviously not for Ozzie' from Perth or Cairns or even Adelaide), Queenstown, Fiji, Port Moresby and as far as Bali. Try to tell the poor chap flying from Alice Spring - Brisbane - Tokyo that someone on A.net thinks he is flying 'regional'. I am sure he will use some colourful language to show what he thinks of the A.netter.

Just another thing, when you tell 'folks' in Australia that someone is flying 'regional', most people would quote Waga Waga, Mt. Pleasant ...etc. as regional.

And Europe is not long haul, it is called Ultra Long Haul. ULH is used by aviation industry for this very reason.

To Australians, everything outside Singapore and New Zealand is bloody long haul or F(language filter) (translate: ultra) long haul.

It is a little about semantics though isn't it? Yes, we all understand regional domestic, but more than one Asian carrier uses "regional" configurations into Australian ports, and QF A330 has at times been a more "regional" than LH config.

As an Aussie, I just laugh at people who think of crossing the North Atlantic as long haul. For many Australian (and NZ) travellers, home to SIN/HKG/NRT etc has been the shorter leg of their full trip.

In a world where you can fly from Singapore to New York in a single flight, Singapore-Australia has become medium-haul.
SIA uses its "Regional" A350 on Australian routes.

This RFP is going to be interesting what the mission is for. Currently the A330 fleet does the smallest to the longest of missions.
It needs to do missions as short as SYD-MEL, SYD-PER/CNS/DRW, MEL/BNE-PER all the way to BNE-LAX. Whatever is the replacement will have to cover short all the way to very long routes. The question is will the 321XLR takeover some of the A330-200 domestic routes or will they still be using the 330-200 as I don’t think they can downguage too much based on demand if they’re already flying an A330-200 they’re not going to cut capacity down just to cede it to Virgin Australia/Rex.

Kent350787 wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

ElroyJetson wrote:

To folks Australia that is regional. Europe and North America are long haul. Regardless 8-11 hours flights are right in the 787-10 wheelhouse. North America and Europe are better served by the A350 family or 789 depending on gauge needed imho.

I can't believe what I am reading here. I don't think anyone I know in Australia would think SYD/PER/BNE to HKG/TYO is regional. Even SYD/PER to BKK is considered as long haul to many. To some rural Australians, even Singapore is too far to be called 'mid-haul'. It is in another continent for God's sake. When you think regional, you might be thinking east coast to Auckland (obviously not for Ozzie' from Perth or Cairns or even Adelaide), Queenstown, Fiji, Port Moresby and as far as Bali. Try to tell the poor chap flying from Alice Spring - Brisbane - Tokyo that someone on A.net thinks he is flying 'regional'. I am sure he will use some colourful language to show what he thinks of the A.netter.

Just another thing, when you tell 'folks' in Australia that someone is flying 'regional', most people would quote Waga Waga, Mt. Pleasant ...etc. as regional.

And Europe is not long haul, it is called Ultra Long Haul. ULH is used by aviation industry for this very reason.

To Australians, everything outside Singapore and New Zealand is bloody long haul or F(language filter) (translate: ultra) long haul.

It is a little about semantics though isn't it? Yes, we all understand regional domestic, but more than one Asian carrier uses "regional" configurations into Australian ports, and QF A330 has at times been a more "regional" than LH config.

As an Aussie, I just laugh at people who think of crossing the North Atlantic as long haul. For many Australian (and NZ) travellers, home to SIN/HKG/NRT etc has been the shorter leg of their full trip.

Yeah I agree -as an Aussie having lived in PER/MEL/SYD - I’ve never considered Asia longhaul, not even NRT. To me that’s mid-haul/regional especial south east Asia - DPS, MNL, KUL. 13hrs plus maybe longhaul, 14/16hrs yeah probs. Living in Perth everyone thought of Southeast Asia as regional. PER-DPS is often quicker than SYD/MEL, maybe even SIN/KUL?

To me Longhaul is East Coast US, JNB and EU. Ultra longhaul is DFW/IAH/JFK and EU - nonstop. If it has a stop it’s just longhaul. But that’s just subjective.

What are the chances that down there line the 737 fleet is replaced entirely with XLRS? I know some mentioned earlier that QF may get the A321/320NEO’s… but won’t having XLR’s make it a very flexible fleet? (I.e. can do some domestic hops one day, then a flight out into Asia the next)

flyingisthebest wrote:

This RFP is going to be interesting what the mission is for. Currently the A330 fleet does the smallest to the longest of missions.
It needs to do missions as short as SYD-MEL, SYD-PER/CNS/DRW, MEL/BNE-PER all the way to BNE-LAX. Whatever is the replacement will have to cover short all the way to very long routes. The question is will the 321XLR takeover some of the A330-200 domestic routes or will they still be using the 330-200 as I don’t think they can downguage too much based on demand if they’re already flying an A330-200 they’re not going to cut capacity down just to cede it to Virgin Australia/Rex.

The first 20 321s already have been announced as having a domestic config. I don’t think the 330s do a huge amount of golden triangle flying these days, more peaks and international repositioning. They do a fair amount of Transcon though. ZL don’t fly Transcon and VA only fly 738 atm. So not massive risk.

QF during the peak also flying SYD-MEL (world busiest air route again!) every 15mins, BNE close behind. I’d say this will reduce slightly with the 321s, and increased capacity, which frees up some slots to add frequency to PER, and CNS, which will help them compete against VA in these markets. Frequency is King on the triangle - but moving from 15mins to 20mins won’t hamper them too much, along with repositioning widebodies.

QF have also massively increased their domestic freight capacity with 321 P2F - not sure how many they have on property atm, but they have just announced a further 3 for a total of 9. With one of the new 330F to be dedicated to domestic. I’m sure they could also convert some JQ 321 to P2F if they felt the need and they leave the fleet. So freight space has reshaped the market too - particularly for PER, CNS, DRW flying where it was a key contributor in the Wet.

So to echo another poster - very different market and fleet structure now, there is no need for a like for like replacement. Makes it more exciting tbh!

JJWess wrote:

What are the chances that down there line the 737 fleet is replaced entirely with XLRS? I know some mentioned earlier that QF may get the A321/320NEO’s… but won’t having XLR’s make it a very flexible fleet? (I.e. can do some domestic hops one day, then a flight out into Asia the next)

OF has often preferred to "underuse" fleet capability for commonality across its widebody fleets. The A330 fleet is broadly the same layout, even though they are regualrly used on SYD-MEL and SYD-PER.

There could be a rethink, but the A321 is too much plane for a bunch of QF ports. Leaving aside the west (hi to my family in WA, hope you like those QFLink A320s)), the QF narrowbody fleet has moved to 738 since 2002. Across the QF group, the narrowbody fleet is slightly more Airbus.

tvh wrote:

quote="RJMAZ"]To me it seems Qantas in 10 years time will only operator the following aircraft.

A220-300
A321XLR
787-9
A350-1000ULR

I would add to that list A220-500, B787-10 and A350-1000 std's next to the ULR's[/quote]
I doubt the A220-500 will ever exist.

As the A350-1000ULR will have a small MTOW boost it is unlikely Qantas will want standard A350-1000 with a lower MTOW. The higher MTOW on non sunrise routes will allow for extra cargo in the hold.

The 787-10 is interesting. I guess it works on heavy freight routes in the region.

Kent350787 wrote:

JJWess wrote:

What are the chances that down there line the 737 fleet is replaced entirely with XLRS? I know some mentioned earlier that QF may get the A321/320NEO’s… but won’t having XLR’s make it a very flexible fleet? (I.e. can do some domestic hops one day, then a flight out into Asia the next)

OF has often preferred to "underuse" fleet capability for commonality across its widebody fleets. The A330 fleet is broadly the same layout, even though they are regualrly used on SYD-MEL and SYD-PER.

There could be a rethink, but the A321 is too much plane for a bunch of QF ports. Leaving aside the west (hi to my family in WA, hope you like those QFLink A320s)), the QF narrowbody fleet has moved to 738 since 2002. Across the QF group, the narrowbody fleet is slightly more Airbus.

They have ordered A220s remember. 75 738s and 20 717s could end up as 80 A321LRs some XLRS? And 40-50 A220s.

My hunch is there will be when launched some A225s in between the 200 seats A321 and 120 seat A221.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

JJWess wrote:

What are the chances that down there line the 737 fleet is replaced entirely with XLRS? I know some mentioned earlier that QF may get the A321/320NEO’s… but won’t having XLR’s make it a very flexible fleet? (I.e. can do some domestic hops one day, then a flight out into Asia the next)

OF has often preferred to "underuse" fleet capability for commonality across its widebody fleets. The A330 fleet is broadly the same layout, even though they are regualrly used on SYD-MEL and SYD-PER.

There could be a rethink, but the A321 is too much plane for a bunch of QF ports. Leaving aside the west (hi to my family in WA, hope you like those QFLink A320s)), the QF narrowbody fleet has moved to 738 since 2002. Across the QF group, the narrowbody fleet is slightly more Airbus.

They have ordered A220s remember. 75 738s and 20 717s could end up as 80 A321LRs some XLRS? And 40-50 A220s.

My hunch is there will be when launched some A225s in between the 200 seats A321 and 120 seat A221.

I had actually forgotten the A220 order, or at least regarded it as 717 one-for-one. I'm still not clear why the A225 would be more logical that a A320/321 mix?