a320fan wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Regarding QF's announcement about acquiring A319's, wondering if EasyJet could be a good option as they are retiring about 40% of their A319's over the next 2-3 years

https://simpleflying.com/easyjet-retire ... 1677771625

EZY would be the most plentiful source of used A319s on the market surely, however would QF want to add CFM powered A32xs to the fleet when the rest of the JQ and QF birds are IAE?

I think it would come down to cost and quantity, if they get them for a good price in an decent quantity. That make off-set the costs of having two engine types.

With PER being close to SIN, like they would just outside the maintaince on these frames to Asia.

EK413 wrote:

YSSYplanespoter wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

Not slagging on JQ, but what actually is the issue with their 787-8s? I fly JQ plenty of times yearly and am one of the lucky ones that manage to slip through without ever having an issue. But working in the ROC for the group regional, I still haven't managed to figure out why the operational reliability on them is so poor and nor can anyone else I work with...

Wasn't there a rumour that when the JQ A330s came to QF, the QF maintenance guys were shocked at how they were maintained? Or am I just making that up? If so, then perhaps that might be one piece of the clue. I also suspect that part of the reason that is because there aren't any spare frames, there is a massive knock-on effect when one flight gets delayed. There basically isn't any breathing space.

Wasn’t the JQ A330 fleet maintained by QF engineering?

I believe the issue JQ are presently experiencing would be the lack of engineers.

Correct, QF Engineering did all the fleet management and work on the A330 fleet, so the rumour seems to be a political fantasy.

More than engineering labour shortages, it seems to be the lack of spares and long lead times for them is the big issue for the 788 fleet, plus them pushing every little bit of utilisation they can. Joycey is on record saying that on 787 windows they are waiting up to three weeks for replacements when they used to be a couple of days pre-pandemic.

Back in the mid-/late-2000s when QF Group was doing the planning for their 100+ 787 order, the idea was that the 788s at JQ would be a stopgap between the A330s and then 787-9s, which would allow JQ to do one-stops to Europe and get the benefit of lower CASK. QF would then get the 788s as A330 replacements. Of course, everything has changed now and the 789s are ULH birds, but I think the 788s won't be leaving the QF Group anytime soon, given they tried to sell them before and got no takers.

NZ516 wrote:

Jetstar is voted 3rd most unpopular airline in the world. Interesting that Tap Portugal is second with Go First India taking out the top spot.

https://www.travelweekly.com.au/article ... -reveallin

I saw this, but immediately felt the source is a bit dubious - all this (unknown) company did was scour twitter for tweets regarding airlines and an algorithm decided if the tweet was positive or negative. Hardly a very scientific survey.

Goodbye wrote:

NZ516 wrote:

Jetstar is voted 3rd most unpopular airline in the world. Interesting that Tap Portugal is second with Go First India taking out the top spot.

https://www.travelweekly.com.au/article ... -reveallin

I saw this, but immediately felt the source is a bit dubious - all this (unknown) company did was scour twitter for tweets regarding airlines and an algorithm decided if the tweet was positive or negative. Hardly a very scientific survey.

You're probably right. It's ridiculous to think any airline could be worse than Jetstar.

tullamarine wrote:

Goodbye wrote:

NZ516 wrote:

Jetstar is voted 3rd most unpopular airline in the world. Interesting that Tap Portugal is second with Go First India taking out the top spot.

https://www.travelweekly.com.au/article ... -reveallin

I saw this, but immediately felt the source is a bit dubious - all this (unknown) company did was scour twitter for tweets regarding airlines and an algorithm decided if the tweet was positive or negative. Hardly a very scientific survey.

You're probably right. It's ridiculous to think any airline could be worse than Jetstar.

Yet millions of people keep flying them each year, all when there are other choices..... go figure.

a320fan wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Regarding QF's announcement about acquiring A319's, wondering if EasyJet could be a good option as they are retiring about 40% of their A319's over the next 2-3 years

https://simpleflying.com/easyjet-retire ... 1677771625

EZY would be the most plentiful source of used A319s on the market surely, however would QF want to add CFM powered A32xs to the fleet when the rest of the JQ and QF birds are IAE?

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

a320fan wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Regarding QF's announcement about acquiring A319's, wondering if EasyJet could be a good option as they are retiring about 40% of their A319's over the next 2-3 years

https://simpleflying.com/easyjet-retire ... 1677771625

EZY would be the most plentiful source of used A319s on the market surely, however would QF want to add CFM powered A32xs to the fleet when the rest of the JQ and QF birds are IAE?

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

LTEN11 wrote:

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

a320fan wrote:

EZY would be the most plentiful source of used A319s on the market surely, however would QF want to add CFM powered A32xs to the fleet when the rest of the JQ and QF birds are IAE?

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

I could be wrong but I think they were the same engines and could more or less be substituted.

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

I could be wrong but I think they were the same engines and could more or less be substituted.

But the 747's had RR and GE engines too....so, still mixed engine fleets.

LTEN11 wrote:

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

a320fan wrote:

EZY would be the most plentiful source of used A319s on the market surely, however would QF want to add CFM powered A32xs to the fleet when the rest of the JQ and QF birds are IAE?

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

7 ex-BA RR B767’s -ZXA,B,C,D,E,F,G & they had approximately 36 B747 9 GE powered with the remainder RR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

Chipmunk1973 wrote:

Agree, commonality is beneficial, but QF have had mixed engines previously. The majority of their 767 fleet was GE powered but they did acquire some ex BA 767's that had RR engines. Can't recall the exact number though.

I guess it depends on how long QF expect to maintain them and what sort of maintenance deals they can get.

Cheers.

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

I could be wrong but I think they were the same engines and could more or less be substituted.

It was 10 RB211 763 from BA, a sub fleet for orange tail Australian Airlines, which then migrated to mainline after that short lived venture. They were first retired, and the RB211 was common with a chunk of rhe 747 fleet the whole time.

Kent350787 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

I could be wrong but I think they were the same engines and could more or less be substituted.

It was 10 RB211 763 from BA, a sub fleet for orange tail Australian Airlines, which then migrated to mainline after that short lived venture. They were first retired, and the RB211 was common with a chunk of rhe 747 fleet the whole time.

Australian Airlines flew 5 GE powered 767s, OGI, J, L, K and V.

The RR birds didn’t leave until 2013. Most are still flying with Eastern Airlines in the US.

Kent350787 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

There was a caveat with the RR 767's though, mainly the existing RR powered 744's in the QF fleet at the time.

I could be wrong but I think they were the same engines and could more or less be substituted.

It was 10 RB211 763 from BA, a sub fleet for orange tail Australian Airlines, which then migrated to mainline after that short lived venture. They were first retired, and the RB211 was common with a chunk of rhe 747 fleet the whole time.

As others have said, there were only 7 ex BA 763's. I believe there may have been an option to take 3 more from BA, but they were not taken up.

I have a photo of 3 QF 767's each with different engine types, a 762 with PW, and 2 763's with the GE and RR.

The RBs were a nice change.

Issue with NTLs runway tonight that saw lots of cancellations.

ben175 wrote:

Issue with NTLs runway tonight that saw lots of cancellations.

Comments under NTLs Facebook update say it all. It was absurd at work, with no real way to manage flights. NTL wasn’t giving any details and they were changing publications to air services left right and centre.

Very poor handling and somewhat dangerous, especially given some crews were told a displacement threshold and some weren’t as an example of what went on between the port and flights.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

ben175 wrote:

Issue with NTLs runway tonight that saw lots of cancellations.

Comments under NTLs Facebook update say it all. It was absurd at work, with no real way to manage flights. NTL wasn’t giving any details and they were changing publications to air services left right and centre.

Very poor handling and somewhat dangerous, especially given some crews were told a displacement threshold and some weren’t as an example of what went on between the port and flights.

Ops are to resume 4th of March pending runway repair works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NZ516 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Qantas 787-9 VH-ZNK has exited maintenance at SIN and is currently being ferried SIN-SYD as QF6013

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/vh-znk

They will certainly be pleased to have it back ready for the NW23: season.

Northern winter or northern summer?

Has QF ever said anything about Brisbane and any Sunrise potential?

qf2220 wrote:

Has QF ever said anything about Brisbane and any Sunrise potential?

The only mention of BNE in the Sunrise material was the early promotional route map of BNE being linked to LHR and JFK alongside SYD and MEL. Since then, there hasn't been any mention since then. An updated route map (The Research Map) before the 789 trials removed references to the Eastern State Capitals, suggesting it'll primarily be SYD and MEL.

Saying that, BNE would be well down the priority list (if any) on Sunrise routes, and if they do get one, I'd tip it'll be LHR.

The only chance IMO of BNE getting Sunrise routes early, is if (of course) the State of Queensland steps in with AAIF money in partnership with the BAC (BNE Airport).

Source (via SamChui.com) https://samchui.com/2021/02/07/qantas-c ... t-sunrise/

qf2220 wrote:

Has QF ever said anything about Brisbane and any Sunrise potential?

QF currently only have access to 4 slot pairs at LHR so pretty unlikely given SYD,MEL, PER and SYD-SIN would use all of these.

I could see a BNE 'originator' to LHR post-Sunrise, possibly via PER based on two assumptions that; 1. 789s will be sticking around on PER-LHR for a while during the first phase of Sunrise, and 2. The A330s on BNE-LAX is replaced by the 789s by then.

The other alternative is a 'direct' (same flight number) BNE-SIN-LHR, but I suspect that would be a 'gauge change' in SIN similar to the old QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BOM service where the BNE-SIN leg was operated by the 744 for that period, and the A330 on the BOM-SIN leg actually came from the ADL flight.

tullamarine wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Has QF ever said anything about Brisbane and any Sunrise potential?

QF currently only have access to 4 slot pairs at LHR so pretty unlikely given SYD,MEL, PER and SYD-SIN would use all of these.

There's always Gatwick!

I am sure they could pick up slots somehow. They have the money... it all depends how well SYD-SIN-LHR continues to work after Sunrise. If everyone switches to the direct services, it may mean that SIN-LHR can be cancelled and BNE or another SYD/MEL could be added.

Interesting times ahead, that's for sure!

ClassicLover wrote:

tullamarine wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Has QF ever said anything about Brisbane and any Sunrise potential?

QF currently only have access to 4 slot pairs at LHR so pretty unlikely given SYD,MEL, PER and SYD-SIN would use all of these.

There's always Gatwick!

I am sure they could pick up slots somehow. They have the money... it all depends how well SYD-SIN-LHR continues to work after Sunrise. If everyone switches to the direct services, it may mean that SIN-LHR can be cancelled and BNE or another SYD/MEL could be added.

Interesting times ahead, that's for sure!

Not going to happen but what about AU-Helsinki? AY cover the rest of Europe very well.

qf2048 wrote:

Not going to happen but what about AU-Helsinki? AY cover the rest of Europe very well.

Right now theres a few extra hours of flying time because of Russias invasion of Ukraine. Finnair has to go through the Black Sea and up over Poland instead of a direct route over Moscow and surrounds. So its doubly not going to happen on that basis given the great circle route dynamics!

SCFlyer wrote:

I could see a BNE 'originator' to LHR post-Sunrise, possibly via PER based on two assumptions that; 1. 789s will be sticking around on PER-LHR for a while during the first phase of Sunrise, and 2. The A330s on BNE-LAX is replaced by the 789s by then.

The other alternative is a 'direct' (same flight number) BNE-SIN-LHR, but I suspect that would be a 'gauge change' in SIN similar to the old QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BOM service where the BNE-SIN leg was operated by the 744 for that period, and the A330 on the BOM-SIN leg actually came from the ADL flight.

If for nothing else, a BNE-PER-LHR originator makes sense to me because im betting the QF9/10 flight numbers get used for MEL-LHR, meaning new numbers are needed for the PER-LHR sector. Though it would need that a 789 base be reestablished in BNE, (but this might not be impossible once the A350s arrive and some clarity on the A330 plans is given).

qf2220 wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

Not going to happen but what about AU-Helsinki? AY cover the rest of Europe very well.

Right now theres a few extra hours of flying time because of Russias invasion of Ukraine. Finnair has to go through the Black Sea and up over Poland instead of a direct route over Moscow and surrounds. So its doubly not going to happen on that basis given the great circle route dynamics!

Yeah I new about the detours. I'm on AY in Sept ICN to HEL. looks like we'll be going towards Alaska and the North Pole.

SCFlyer wrote:

The other alternative is a 'direct' (same flight number) BNE-SIN-LHR, but I suspect that would be a 'gauge change' in SIN similar to the old QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BOM service where the BNE-SIN leg was operated by the 744 for that period, and the A330 on the BOM-SIN leg actually came from the ADL flight.

This is what I suspect might happen. Given that the A380s are expected to be part of the fleet for at least 5 or so years post project sunrise, I can see SIN-LHR remaining a A380 as long as they are in fleet and being used to carry the non premium passengers that PS is aimed at. Obviously an A380 BNE-SIN isn’t going to happen. I can see QF51/52 being BNE-SIN-LHR and return , with the BNE/SIN/BNE an A330 and an A380 coming from SYD or MEL as a QF81/82 or QF35/36 service. Or they could just use the one set of flight numbers and keep QF51/52 as it is.

vhqpa wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

The other alternative is a 'direct' (same flight number) BNE-SIN-LHR, but I suspect that would be a 'gauge change' in SIN similar to the old QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BOM service where the BNE-SIN leg was operated by the 744 for that period, and the A330 on the BOM-SIN leg actually came from the ADL flight.

This is what I suspect might happen. Given that the A380s are expected to be part of the fleet for at least 5 or so years post project sunrise, I can see SIN-LHR remaining a A380 as long as they are in fleet and being used to carry the non premium passengers that PS is aimed at. Obviously an A380 BNE-SIN isn’t going to happen. I can see QF51/52 being BNE-SIN-LHR and return , with the BNE/SIN/BNE an A330 and an A380 coming from SYD or MEL as a QF81/82 or QF35/36 service. Or they could just use the one set of flight numbers and keep QF51/52 as it is.

They could always Operate BNE-LHR via Cairo, it’s one of the largest cities in the world and would be a great place to top up the plane with passengers on the way to LHR….

qf789 wrote:

Refuelers at MEL will be going on 24 hr strike on Wednesday, it seems that it will effect QF flights both domestic and international

https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1 ... 16192?s=20

Probably a lot of tankering going on, will likely affect internationals and longer domestic flights more than golden triangle and other shorter flights.

a320fan wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Refuelers at MEL will be going on 24 hr strike on Wednesday, it seems that it will effect QF flights both domestic and international

https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1 ... 16192?s=20

Probably a lot of tankering going on, will likely affect internationals and longer domestic flights more than golden triangle and other shorter flights.

Long-haul will stop for top-ups in SYD, ADL or DRW. Domestics will carry more fuel so can avoid the need for refuelling in MEL. I remember this happening to me about 30 years ago on an Ansett Express F28 from MCY and stopping in ABX for a topup.

qf2048 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

qf2048 wrote:

Not going to happen but what about AU-Helsinki? AY cover the rest of Europe very well.

Right now theres a few extra hours of flying time because of Russias invasion of Ukraine. Finnair has to go through the Black Sea and up over Poland instead of a direct route over Moscow and surrounds. So its doubly not going to happen on that basis given the great circle route dynamics!

Yeah I new about the detours. I'm on AY in Sept ICN to HEL. looks like we'll be going towards Alaska and the North Pole.

I did HEL-ICN in November. Went south and across the north of China. Felt very remote! The returns were going over the pole, which is something I wish I was able to do.

a320fan wrote:

vhqpa wrote:

SCFlyer wrote:

The other alternative is a 'direct' (same flight number) BNE-SIN-LHR, but I suspect that would be a 'gauge change' in SIN similar to the old QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BOM service where the BNE-SIN leg was operated by the 744 for that period, and the A330 on the BOM-SIN leg actually came from the ADL flight.

This is what I suspect might happen. Given that the A380s are expected to be part of the fleet for at least 5 or so years post project sunrise, I can see SIN-LHR remaining a A380 as long as they are in fleet and being used to carry the non premium passengers that PS is aimed at. Obviously an A380 BNE-SIN isn’t going to happen. I can see QF51/52 being BNE-SIN-LHR and return , with the BNE/SIN/BNE an A330 and an A380 coming from SYD or MEL as a QF81/82 or QF35/36 service. Or they could just use the one set of flight numbers and keep QF51/52 as it is.

They could always Operate BNE-LHR via Cairo, it’s one of the largest cities in the world and would be a great place to top up the plane with passengers on the way to LHR….

Brilliant post

Thanks for the Sunshine and BNE answers. Agreed, i dont see BNE being Sunrise, except a remote chance to LHR in a second tranche of A350s. But hadn't seen any reference to it in my digging.

Another qeuestion - any spectulation on what competitor response there might be to Sunrise? I cant see the cream skimming by QF lead to anything major (eg a competitor launching their own Sunrises) but could we see frequency drops, down gauges etc? Or will the market grow around it?

Or too soon to tell?

I don't see BNE-LHR happening, or any sunrise flights originating from BNE until the 2040s.

To be fair to BNE, I'd argue MEL also won't get much attention apart from LHR. I'd say at best if MEL-JFK takes off it'll only be 3x a week and only when a 2nd tranche of A350s are delivered.

I see PER-LHR being A350'd before MEL-LHR launches because QF9 is prone to having seats blocked and QF would like to sell the extra premium seats on PER-LHR.

With BNE and MEL, QF is better off focussing on VFR track and building on direct fights to destinations QF currently serve from SYD in Asia/North America/South Africa/South America.

Based on previous posts, aren't the original 12 more or less allocated as below? SYD and MEL both getting LHR and JFK services?

2- SYD-LHR
2- SYD-JFK
2- MEL-LHR
2- MEL-JFK
2- SYD-DFW
2- MEL-DFW

qf2220 wrote:

Based on previous posts, aren't the original 12 more or less allocated as below? SYD and MEL both getting LHR and JFK services?

2- SYD-LHR
2- SYD-JFK
2- MEL-LHR
2- MEL-JFK
2- SYD-DFW
2- MEL-DFW

Nothing has been actually confirmed in schedules, however SYD has been nominated for LHR/JFK, while MEL services seem more speculative

Agreed. I'd tip that QF will concentrate primarily on SYD for Sunrise during the first tranch. MEL-LHR may possibly be 3rd or even 4th in priority on the guess that SYD-DFW may push ahead in the queue based on the larger AA hub. MEL-JFK does seem speculative at this stage too.

SCFlyer wrote:

Agreed. I'd tip that QF will concentrate primarily on SYD for Sunrise during the first tranch. MEL-LHR may possibly be 3rd or even 4th in priority on the guess that SYD-DFW may push ahead in the queue based on the larger AA hub. MEL-JFK does seem speculative at this stage too.

I see the A350 on MEL-DFW before JFK. How much premium O&D demand is there daily between these cities. Having a 3 weekly schedule doesnt bring much, may as well have daily from SYD.