Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:57 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 149):
Zeke, go to hell. You're a blubbering fool and not worth the time.

I see you not capable of a rational articulated response, I think you lost the plot. QF1 seems to be an apt name you bestowed upon yourself.

So what is it, you did an aviation degree at Uni, couldn't get a job as a pilot so working a ground job at QF hoping one day to fly for them ?

Your "three studies"...were they assignments/thesis for your uni course ?

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 149):
Technically speaking, QF's A330 options aren't convertible to A380s. However, that doesn't mean that Airbus won't agree to do that if QF decides to buy more A380s. OTOH, QF also holds A380 options that they could convert, too.

Kewel, didnt know that. What is the breakdown for them ? 332/333/388 ? Could they be converted to A350s ?

What 737 & 744 options do thye have ?

Have any of the got fixed slots or delivery dates for the options ?

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 114):
Quoting Zeke (Reply 112):
I have never said I am always right, I am willing to learn. I do see some 777s being ordered, I just don’t know if they will be 772,773,773ER,772ER, 772LR, and with respect I don’t think any other poster here know the configuration either.

Although your respect is noted, it is also faulty. I am not about to name the usernames, but I know at least three A.net users whom are privvy to that information.

You still stand by your comments that three a.net users knew on oct 12 the configuration of the QF order, even before it had board approval, or CEO sign off ?
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Sun Oct 16, 2005 3:05 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 148):
Did you know its an industry joke, whenever a QF makes a mistake we say there is QF1 again. Sure you remember the golf course at BKK. Glad to see you keep the joke alive.

Well then, you must be familiar with the Mitsubishi A6M "Zero" fighter of WWII, aka "Zeke"? It was a maneuverable little fighter but under-powered, under-weaponed and under-ranged compared to its more formidable competitors. Sound familiar?  scratchchin 

Cheers

iwok
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:56 pm

Zeke, you stated this on the thread "QF moving toward 787/777 buy" not too long ago.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 136):
I get challenged daily at work with everything I say and do, I am used to it. I get challenged not because I am necessarily wrong or unsafe because there maybe another way to do things, or personal preference, comes down to what factors people deem important over others.

You have tried to discredit several outstanding members of this forum including Hamlet69 and QFA001. By your own comments, it looks like you are accustomed to getting raked over the coals often. Now we can understand why. I cannot believe you will not accept (among other things) a simple mathematical concept that you are obviously and blatantly wrong about. Sir, I cannot speak on behalf of the others on this thread, but to me, you have lost any little credibility you had. Good day to you.

-N60659
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:03 am

Interesting comments today...

Quote:
MARGARET JACKSON, Qantas Chairman: We don’t have the ability to replicate the Singapore Airlines route structure. We want to increase our flights to London. We have no more rights to land in London, we have no more slots and we have no more rights. We would like to fly from Australia to London via Shanghi, we can’t get the rights.

Makes you wonder about the much hyped direct ULH service to LHR, is this saying its will not happen to LHR ? or are they leaving the door open for flights to LGW, STN, and MAN ?

I thought QF still had an unused slot at LHR at the moment ?

Quoting N60659 (Reply 152):
By your own comments, it looks like you are accustomed to getting raked over the coals often.

That’s the way I feel about simulator sessions, lots of ways of handling an emergency or an abnormal situation, the actual checklists actions are black and white, the way you manage communication out of the cockpit, diversion or holding considerations, or set up for an approach, overshoot etc. Each time I come out of a simulator session I learn something, which is the point of having them.

Quoting N60659 (Reply 152):
I cannot believe you will not accept (among other things) a simple mathematical concept that you are obviously and blatantly wrong about.

The actual key questions I asked of QF1 are still unanswered, the level of discount Boeing is offering Qantas for the 777, and the configuration of the order.

To detract from offering any substance QF1 and others fired broadsides at me, doesn’t concern me in the slightest I have dealt with many people before that don’t answer simple questions asked of them, rather come back with what they do know something about.

If you look back on my posts you will see several questions directed to them which remain unanswered. If they don’t know the answer to a question, “I don’t know” or “Unable to disclose that at this time” would have been perfectly acceptable to me, instead I got a lot of words and little in substance in return.

It would have been a mistake if I said 25% discount...but I didn’t. Gave several examples of exactly what I meant. The actual question was fairly simple, what is the level of discount Boeing is offering Qantas ?
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:32 am

According to this article, it says it will have a "tender offer" by the end of this month..

"Qantas has hinted it could move a large chunk of maintenance work to Asia to service its incoming fleet of A380 superjumbos and the 60 to 100 aircraft it is expected to put out a tender for later this month. The airline is looking at acquiring Airbus A350s or Boeing 787s.

It is speculated some of these long-range aircraft could be used to expand its low-cost Jetstar operations into the US and Europe."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/...3/1128796650286.html?oneclick=true
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:51 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 153):
It would have been a mistake if I said 25% discount...but I didn't.

What! Zeke, you just won't admit that you had made a gross error, will you? It's in black and white that was what you said:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 116):
See SQ paid 200 mil for each of its 773ERs, thats 25% below list for ordering 18/18 options, what discount they offering for 6/6 ? 10% ?

200m is 20% below 250m. As simple as that. 250m is 25% above 200m, but that was clearly not what you said.

Let me tell you this, more often than not, contractual detail will not be released for public consumption, because that's the business protocol. If you believe SQ only get 20% discount, you obviously don't know this business at all.

You are acting like a clown. I thank you for your entertainment!  sarcastic 
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:36 am

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 155):
200m is 20% below 250m. As simple as that. 250m is 25% above 200m,

I agree totally, and I think you know exactly what I was getting at, so does QF1.... You have come closest to answering the actual question asked, thank you.

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 145):
Quoting Zeke (Reply 144):
Not when it comes time for a consumer to buy something duty free, they don’t pay 90% of they price, they pay 1/1.1 of the price. Again looking at the consumers point of view, its 10% off below the list price, not 90% of the list price.

Direction, Zeke, direction. Yes, the buyer gets 10% below list price, but the seller gives 10% below list price. Therefore, 10% is saved.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 148):
Yes the buyer gets it for 10% below list the seller discounts it by 9.9099%. I said "thats 25% below list", not 25% discount, I asked what sort of discount QF would be receiving for 6/6.

I am sorry everyone seems to jumping onto the band wagon and detracting from the question asked..........what discount will Qantas get ?

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 155):
If you believe SQ only get 20% discount, you obviously don't know this business at all.

What level of discount do you think SQ would attract ? I freely admit I haven’t got a spare 200 mil under the bed to buy a 777, so I haven’t taken much notice of what specials are available.

Quoting Iwok (Reply 151):
Well then, you must be familiar with the Mitsubishi A6M "Zero" fighter of WWII, aka "Zeke"? It was a maneuverable little fighter but under-powered, under-weaponed and under-ranged compared to its more formidable competitors. Sound familiar?

Yep know of it, in my case Zeke is from the Old Testament Ezekiel, which was around way before WWII. The Zero was given the US military code name ZEKE in 1942 by the US air intelligence team. I don’t know much about them, this link tends to paint a different picture of the Zero than you listed … http://www.chuckhawks.com/zero_A6M.htm
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:56 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 154):
"It is speculated some of these long-range aircraft could be used to expand its low-cost Jetstar operations into the US and Europe."

If JQ Int'l expands to that level, that is going to be one interesting business model. Arguably, the longer a sector is, the more difficult it is for an LCC to leverage any inherent cost-advantage or product differentiation. So, if QF expands JQ into Europe/USA, then we are probably going to see a whole range of new destinations added between those places and Australia.

Such a change in network structure promoted by JQ could cannabalise a lot of routes in and out of Australia through fragmentation. So, Dixon's "hub-busting" philosophy may ultimately cause hub disruption to QF, too.

Why did I bring this up? Because a release of growth pressure on QF's key ports of LAX or LHR may delay their intent to buy more A380s; and steer the airline towards a more immediate A350/B777/B787 requirement.

Interesting times ahead.

 airplane QFA001
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:20 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 157):
Because a release of growth pressure on QF's key ports of LAX or LHR may delay their intent to buy more A380s;

I am missing your point, I would appreciate if you would kindly expand on it.

Thanks
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:19 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 156):
agree totally, and I think you know exactly what I was getting at, so does QF1....

We all do, and we all know you got it wrong. Not a single person came to your defense. Why do you think that's the case. You either need to polish your math skill or your language skill.

Quote:

You have come closest to answering the actual question asked, thank you.

You thanked the wrong person.

Quote:

I am sorry everyone seems to jumping onto the band wagon and detracting from the question asked..........what discount will Qantas get ?

If anyone knows the actual number through proper channel, then he will not be able to disclose it because it's competitive sensitive information. What you fail to understand is this will not be a 777-only deal. Since the number of aircraft involved in the total package will be sizable, QF will likely get good discount from Boeing if QF decides to go with the 777 and 787. If you think they will get only 10% discount off list price, you absolutely have no clue of the business.

Quote:
I haven’t taken much notice of what specials are available.

Engaging in a discussion of a subject that you don't have any knowledge of, you bound to make a fool out of yourself.  sigh 
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:58 am

The Qantas plan to expand Jetstar to long haul deals with a number of issues.

Firstly. It is a response to a serious decline in the proportion of passengers flying in premium cabins and actually paying for them.

This deterioration has been gradually going on for years, and not just at Qantas or in these markets, but in general, while business travel is important and indeed growing strongly on some routes, the willingness or capacity to pay premium fares is in decline.

Secondly. A long range Jetstar will address routes that Qantas has abandoned or neglected in terms of flying its own aircraft. They are likely to include Manchester, Amsterdam, Rome and Honolulu. This has the material strategic value of also attacking part of the base load traffic in EK,SQ and TG who have all intelligently and diligently worked up a good franchise in one stop flights to leisure or low yield destinations that require a transfer over London if flown by Qantas, rendering price matching those deals a loss making exercise.

Thirdly. The new carrier will develop new routes. It may even try to make Darwin or Perth to Frankfurt/Munich work, simply because EK now dominates the German inbound market, and is threatening to use a high capacity format in an A380 to Adelaide where it just happens to have unlimited traffic rights.

I note that one of the national aviation writers has discovered that half the Germans who fly to Australia each year spend half their time in the red centre and top end and really couldn't give a potatoe dumpling if they arrive and depart from a secondary airport as they are going to 'do' Sydney, Melbourne and the Gold Coast anyhow in trips surveyed as lasting between 6-12 weeks.

Fourthly. The long haul Jetstar will be used to collapse the benefits and unsatisfactory productivity of mainline Qantas long haul (in the opinion of management), just as Jetstar domestic is now entering the crunch phase of migrating its work practices but please the Almightly not all of its propduct standards to core domestic city pairs. Prediction. Significant Jetstar long haul maintenance and staffing will be offshored.

Fifthly. Jetstar long haul will in time seek to fly non-stop to Vancouver which has pathetic business travel support, and it will pay close attention to cheap flights pout of Brisbane to destroy and demoralise any Virgin Blue plan to capitalise on its Air Queensland stature as a launch pad for trans Pacific services. I'm inclined to the view that it will in fact destroy any desire by the Virgin Blue board to enter the long haul market through a new subsidiary.

Sixthly. The long haul jetstar isn't going to take much pressure off the core A380 routes to London, since the passengers that Qantas is seeking to recapture with the new division aren't flying on its jets to Heathrow anyhow, and in many cases will be smart enough not to do so twice if they have to make a transfer there to get to some other destination.

Fine print. I may be wrong about all of the above...but I don't think so and I have reasonable grounds for coming to these views.

Antares
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:56 am

Quoting Antares (Reply 160):
Fine print. I may be wrong about all of the above...but I don't think so and I have reasonable grounds for coming to these views.


I would think NZ would be watching the expansion of Jetstar as you outline with interest. It would not be too difficult to imagine a siphoning off of NZ to and fro traffic by crossing the Tasman to make price attractive connections to Jetstar international services.
Maybe long term Freedom Air has a bigger role to play than a trans-Tasman and nearby Pacific Island LCC.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:50 pm

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 159):
If you think they will get only 10% discount off list price, you absolutely have no clue of the business.

I have never claimed I buy aircraft for a living, I operate them. If you or anyone else who claim to know about buying aircraft could indicate the order of discount given without listing the particular carrier it would be appreciated.

I had realized the RFP included more than just a 300-350 seat size aircraft, just that size aircraft would be delivered first.

Quoting Antares (Reply 160):
The Qantas plan to expand Jetstar to long haul deals with a number of issues.

In a Business Sunday interview yesterday

Quote:
ROSS GREENWOOD: What is also highly likely is that Qantas and joint venture partners will rapidly role out a range of other Jet Stars throughout Asia. Thailand is a possibility, Hong Kong another.

GEOFF DIXON: We do have some options and have had some discussions about the potential to move the Jet Star Asia brand further within that part of the world.

Would you see that as being a Thai or Hong Kong based Jetstar taking the passengers to Manchester, Amsterdam, Rome ? Would you see Jetstar in Australia flying to a hub of an Asian Jetstar (which would have a lower cost base) then transferring ?

Quoting Antares (Reply 160):
I note that one of the national aviation writers has discovered that half the Germans who fly to Australia each year spend half their time in the red centre and top end and really couldn't give a potatoe dumpling if they arrive and depart from a secondary airport as they are going to 'do' Sydney, Melbourne and the Gold Coast anyhow in trips surveyed as lasting between 6-12 weeks.

I had heard that a lot of Germans tend to enter Australia in Darwin and exit via Melbourne, that explains it. Thanks.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:28 pm

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 158):
Quoting QFA001 (Reply 157):
Because a release of growth pressure on QF's key ports of LAX or LHR may delay their intent to buy more A380s;

I am missing your point, I would appreciate if you would kindly expand on it.

I will illustrate using arbitrary numbers and LHR.

Let's say that the LHR market as it is currently served (ie. as a hub) grows at 5% per annum. However, it's 2010 and QF has three LHR slots served with A380s and two with B747-400s. QF could consider growing the remaining two B747-400s into A380s to increase capacity on that route.

Some of the markets near LHR, such as CDG, FRA or MAD are growing at 10% per annum. Then, to "release pressure" on the LHR hub, QF could offer LHR bypass. That is, direct CDG, FRA or MAD services (I am completely making up the other cities, here). Therefore, LHR slots can be used for London O&D traffic, but the airline can continue to grow by adding multiples of direct routes into other cities. If so, then the impetus to replace the last two B747-400 flights with A380s is reduced until the London O&D market is large enough to support the larger airplane.

Quoting Antares (Reply 160):
This deterioration has been gradually going on for years, and not just at Qantas or in these markets, but in general, while business travel is important and indeed growing strongly on some routes, the willingness or capacity to pay premium fares is in decline.

IMO, what also makes the JQ/QF scenario super-interesting is that the A350 or B787 will be more or less able to match the seat-mile costs of the A380. At least, they won't be too far off. Traditionally, hubs grow at much slower rates than direct routes. So, if you can grow more successfully with a business model based on smaller airplanes... Food for thought, I hope.

 airplane QFA001
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:52 pm

I think I should clarify my thoughts on Jetstar long haul concern what the papers began by calling Jetstar 'heavy'. This is 'heavy' as in wide bodied jets, not the A320 based Jetstar (Australia) and Jetstar Asia entities.

These long haul Jetstar routes will have to conform to the bilateral rules applicable to an Australian flag carrier. I think we would be getting a bit ahead of the liberalisation timetable to assume such routes could be initiated by a Jetstar Thailand, although in the medium term, anything is possible.

Jetstar long haul would give Qantas a vehicle for taking back some of the secondary port business lost to other carriers, as well as the incredibly important opportunity to develop new business. I've heard various suggestions as to how the new airline might be resourced beyond perhaps the transfer of the four A322s, but some of the suggestions have been too way out to come from me.

Antares

Antares
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:20 pm

Quoting Antares (Reply 164):
Jetstar long haul would give Qantas a vehicle for taking back some of the secondary port business lost to other carriers, as well as the incredibly important opportunity to develop new business.

You mentioned possible international flights out of Canberra earlier, can the 787 or 350 take a good payload out of the Gold Coast to Japan ?
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:58 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 162):
If you or anyone else who claim to know about buying aircraft could indicate the order of discount given without listing the particular carrier it would be appreciated.

Which part of the two previous statements relisted below that you don't understand:

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 155):
contractual detail will not be released for public consumption, because that's the business protocol



Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 159):
If anyone knows the actual number through proper channel, then he will not be able to disclose it because it's competitive sensitive information.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 162):
I had realized the RFP included more than just a 300-350 seat size aircraft, just that size aircraft would be delivered first.

That's obviously, isn't it? The 787 won't be available until 2008 and the 350 won't be available until 2010. Also, what does this has anything to do with the price negotiation? If QF is willing commit to a large fleet, Boeing will sure come to the negotiation table with an attractive deal. If Boeing won't, Airbus will.
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:07 pm

Zeke,

It has been graciously suggested by others that I was calling Canberra a few decades too soon, but since the airport can handle 744s on hot days with a reasonable load according to a few pilots who live in these parts even an A380 should work fine, and of course the new medium sized jets.

I'm in no position to look it up, but I think the Gold Coast airport might need some work to accommodate the heavier departures although Brisbane Airport is a comparatively short distance to the north and has around 4000 metres of main runway and a wide space parallel runway of around 3300-3500 metres is schedule to open around 2011 or a little sooner.

My guess is the the Gold Coast is right on the margin of what a single class leisure carrier would need to operate northbound to Japan with a viable payload in the new twins.

Antares
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2542
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:18 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 144):
What I said was 100% correct

Yes it was. The maximum certified passenger capacity of the 777-300ER is 550 passengers in a single, economy class. The maximum certified passenger capacity of the A340-600 is 440 passengers, also in a single, economy class. This was not my contention.

The contention I have is with your factually incorrect statement that these two long-range aircraft do not compete because of these all-economy configurations. That is ignorant. No airline looking at either of these aircraft are going to configure them in a single-class configuration. The truth of the matter is they are direct competitors. For an employee of an airline who flies one of them, I would think you would know this. If not, ask:

Virgin Atlantic
Emirates
Lufthansa
Iberia
Air France
Qatar Airways
Etihad Airways
Air India
Qantas
Jet Airways
Japan Airlines
Air Canada
Singapore Airlines

Would you like more?

Quoting Zeke (Reply 144):
I didn’t mention “all-economy configuration”

You didn't need to. The only way either aircraft is going to carry it's maximum passenger load is in a single, all-economy configuration.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 144):
FYI BAe in ADL do the CX HK license conversions

Thank you, I appreciate the explanation.


Now, as to your continued defense of your incorrect statements regarding discounts (or your bad math skills, take your pick), this leads me to wonder exactly how "willing to learn" you truly are.


Hamlet69
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:45 am

Quoting FCKC (Reply 147):
Also they could wait for another month to announce a Boeing order , simply as the A380 will be in Australia for this birthday , and could be not appropriate to announce a non Airbus order during that time.

Why not? Will she be offended?
 
antares
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 am

There are stories in the business sections of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian today on the possibility of an all business class 777-200LR being ordered by Qantas for LHR non-stops both ways and the expansion plans for Jetstar 'heavy.'

Both stories appear to be well sourced, each covering a part but not all of the developments occuring behind the scenes so you need to read both.

The reduction of seats also mentioned in the Qantas A380 is not surprising. Qantas has I think found out that its premium configurations were too mean spirited to be competitive with SQ and EK and has been able to avoid the humilation of coming out with an inferior outfit.

As I understand it, the changes are not about weight, in fact, may have increased the weight, because of the nature of the premium appointments. But it doesn't matter because the jet seems set to do Los Angeles-Melbourne non-stop much more viably that the 744s now used on what is the longest and most challenging route flown by QF jumbos (by a whisker).

Last time I looked the seat count on three class QF 744s was down to around 343 seats with the current disappointing and outmoded sloper sleepers.

Antares
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:06 am

Quoting Antares (Reply 167):
Gold Coast airport might need some work to accommodate the heavier departures

It has 2042m, you can get a 767 out of there, just not with a fuel load for NRT. Just thought you might have know if you could get a 787/350 out of that length with 9.5 hrs of fuel onboard on a ISA+20 day sea level.

Extending the runways there has problems with a hill on one end, and the NSW boarder on the other.

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 166):
That's obviously, isn't it? The 787 won't be available until 2008 and the 350 won't be available until 2010.

Not really, it was a fairly simple question, not need to worry, found the data I was looking for. Aircraft are selling at discounts ranging from 18–40% for Boeing and 16-27% for Airbus according to "The Airline Monitor".

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 168):
The contention I have is with your factually incorrect statement that these two long-range aircraft do not compete because of these all-economy configurations.

Thats not what I was getting at, most full service airlines fit their aircraft to seat about 70%+/-5% of the legal maximum for commercial reasons. Since the 364 and 772 have the same legal maximum outside the USA on a seating capacity basis I see these as being competitors. At 70%, it would give 308 pax in the A346/772 and 385 in the B773. If you look at the CX configuration for the 346/772/773 you will see they have 286 (3 class)/332(2 class)/385(2 class) respectively, almost 100 passengers different between the 773 and 346. To me trying to compare a 346 to a 773ER is like trying to compare a 772 to a 744.

CX don’t see the 346 as a competitor or replacement a 773 or the other way around, if anything its close to the 772. They are each better for different routes, or the same route at different timing.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 168):
Now, as to your continued defense of your incorrect statements regarding discounts (or your bad math skills, take your pick), this leads me to wonder exactly how "willing to learn" you truly are.

I came across the same term used in the same context in this thread, 744 Seating Capacity Vs A380 (by Trolley Dolley Oct 17 2005 in Civil Aviation) so I don’t think its just me then.
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:43 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 171):
CX don’t see the 346 as a competitor or replacement a 773 or the other way around, if anything its close to the 772. They are each better for different routes, or the same route at different timing.

Oh come on let's be fair and open about this. Others are clearly talking about 773ER v A346/HGW. Do you know that CX has an RFP put at the moment comparing these 2 types and they will order one or the other, as they are direct competitors? You can't compare the 773 at CX with the 346 at CX. The 773 is used as a high density regional aircraft and the 346 is used as a 3-class long hauler.
At most airlines the 773ER would be regarded as a DIRECT competitor to the A346/HGW. You just CAN'T deny that....or can you!!!
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 10:10 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 171):
Thats not what I was getting at, most full service airlines fit their aircraft to seat about 70%+/-5% of the legal maximum for commercial reasons.

I guess you're just clueless. The reason the 346 has lower certified capacity than the 773er is not because it's a much smaller airplane than the 773er. The reason is the third door on the 346 is not a Type-A exit. The reason Airbus didn't put a Type-A exit was partly to reduce the OEW of the airplane. In doing so, they sacrified the max allowable pax the aircraft can carry. The 346 competes against the 773er. Haven't you noticed that you are the only person who argues the 346 doesn't compete against the 773er? Ask yourself why!
 
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:01 pm

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 173):
Haven't you noticed that you are the only person who argues the 346 doesn't compete against the 773er? Ask yourself why!

Dynkrisolo, would you by chance know what the average number of seats on A346 currently in service compared to 773/773ER ? Every airline I could think of has less seats installed in the 346 in two or three class compared to the 773/773ER.

I have seen a comparison between the 346 and 773 in "Airline Fleet & Asset Management", they didnt call them "350" seat aircraft they called them "the over 250 seats", and I agree if this is the basis for your comparison, its valid, to call them both 350 seat aircraft when I cannot think of a 346 operator that has their aircraft configured with 350 seats. They additionaly said

Quote:
Baseler reckons that the B777-200LR will not only seat more than the A340-500 in a “like for like” configuration due to its greater maindeck floor area, but also will offer slightly more range. In addition. “It will do so with 15 per cent lower operating costs per seat and 7.5 per cent lower overall trip costs. Likewise, the B777-300 will have 34 more seats than the A340-600, whose trip costs are 5.5 per cent higher, and seat-mile costs 17 per cent higher.” However, Aboulafia advises against becoming too reliant on evaluating aircraft types based purely on such OEM published data since one is rarely comparing apples with apples. “The jury is still out on the whole issue of operating costs, and since it is so dependent on which routes you fly, it is very difficult to compare aircraft on this basis. The larger operating cost ownership question is another matter.”

I see each aircraft for different roles, so does this industry magazine. I guess according to you we are both wrong.
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2542
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:09 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 171):
If you look at the CX configuration for the 346/772/773 you will see they have 286 (3 class)/332(2 class)/385(2 class) respectively

Then your error might originate in the fact you are confusing a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one, as I hope to God you are not ignorant as to what CX actually flies.  sarcastic 

FYI - CX does not operate either the 777-200ER, nor the 777-300ER. They operate the base models of both these aircraft, which are designed for higher-density, regional routes. You can no more compare a 777-300 to a A340-600 than you can a 777-200 to a A340-300 (which CX also flies, btw).

Quoting Zeke (Reply 171):
To me trying to compare a 346 to a 773ER is like trying to compare a 772 to a 744.

Then you are the only one. Every airline that has issued an RFP for these aircraft (including your claimed-employer) see them as direct competitors with their own strengths and weaknesses.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 171):
CX don’t see the 346 as a competitor or replacement a 773 or the other way around

Of course not. But they do see the 346 as a competitor to the 773ER.


Regards,

Hamlet69
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2542
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:18 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 175):
Dynkrisolo, would you by chance know what the average number of seats on A346 currently in service compared to 773/773ER ?

If he'll allow me, I'll gladly answer your question. Afterall, you're "willing to learn" right?

Of the 5 airlines that currently have the A340-600 in service in a 3-class configuration, the average seat count is 306.

Of the 5 airlines that currently have the 777-300ER in service in a 3-class configuration, the average seat count is 319.


In case you were wondering - Lufthansa and SAA currently operate the A340-600 in a business/economy layout, with seat counts of 345 and 333, respectively.

Regards,

Hamlet69
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:03 pm

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 176):
Then your error might originate in the fact you are confusing a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one, as I hope to God you are not ignorant as to what CX actually flies.

Well the company does operate the two types over some of the same routes, I will let scheduling know that people on A.net think they are confused using a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one on the same route, or operating the 744 HKG-TPE a long haul aircraft on a short haul route. While you at it, better let QF know that they are also confused sometimes operating a 747 PER-SYD, as thats a long haul aircraft on short haul route.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 176):
see them as direct competitors with their own strengths and weaknesses

Its a diverse route network, like most airlines, different routes are seasonal, if your hypothetically running around with a 80% load factor on a 346, in my view putting a 773ER on the same route does little, if due to a seasonal increase the loads go up to 100% on the 346, putting a 773ER in my view does improve the situation as it allows for further growth. If you have a 744 with a hypothetical 80% load factor and put a 773ER on it, your going to improve economics significantly. If I am missing something let me know, I don’t buy aeroplanes, I just operate them.
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:39 pm

Zeke,

By arguing against the blindingly obvious fact that the 773ER and 346 are indeed head-to-head to competitors based on seat counts, all you are doing is illustrating the superior payload generation capability of the Boeing in this niche. Do you not realize that?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 10:18 pm

Quoting N79969 (Reply 179):
the superior payload generation capability of the Boeing in this niche. Do you not realize that?

That’s exactly what I am saying, I agree totally, they are not in the same league. The A346 in my view is a smaller less capable aircraft. People are saying that they are both "350 seat" aircraft, for a legacy carrier I would see the A346 as a 275 pax aircraft, and the 773ER as a 340 pax aircraft.

What I am also saying is the 773/773ER is not a fix all solution to all routes for all airlines, the 346 has its niche as well, I think its fruitless trying to compare them just on range/payload, or seat per mile basis unless you know the complete picture of what the airline is trying to achieve, what funds it has available, and what loads the route is producing.

In the same way I think its fruitless trying to compare a 773ER/747ADV to a A380 it has superior payload generation capability in its niche.
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:58 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 180):
That’s exactly what I am saying, I agree totally, they are not in the same league. The A346 in my view is a smaller less capable aircraft. People are saying that they are both "350 seat" aircraft, for a legacy carrier I would see the A346 as a 275 pax aircraft, and the 773ER as a 340 pax aircraft.

Absolute nonsense. Go and check how many seats IB, LH and VS are configuring their 346s, and see to where they fly their 346s.

You absolutely have no intention to learn.  sigh 
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 1:43 am

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 181):
Go and check how many seats IB, LH and VS are configuring their 346s

Two class - LH, SA, IB
Three class - VS-309, MU-320, CX-268, TG-267 - average 291, sorry I was wrong with 275, still not 350.
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2542
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:17 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 178):
Well the company does operate the two types over some of the same routes

No airline likes their aircraft to sit around. Therefore, when the A340-600 is not operating the HKG-US routes due to scheduling, I'm sure CX is going to operate some shorter routes. However, the aircraft was leased specifically to fly long-range routes to the U.S., while the 777-300's were bought specifically for high-density regional routes.

If you don't understand that, think of it this way - if an A340-600 went down, would CX put a 777-300 on the HKG-JFK route? Of course not, because it can't do it! However, if they bought the 777-300ER, then it would certainly be capable of doing such a route, and would indeed be doing them all the time.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 182):
Two class - LH, SA, IB

IB configures their aircraft in both a 3-class congifuration and business/economy configuration.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 182):
Three class - VS-309, MU-320, CX-268, TG-267 - average 291

VS has 311, not 309.
MU has 320, and TG has 267.
CX (your claimed airline, and the aircraft you claim to fly) has 286.
In their 3-c arrangement, IB puts in 342.

That's an average of 306, unless you'd like to teach me how I did my math wrong.  sarcastic 


Hamlet69
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:24 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 178):
Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 176):
Then your error might originate in the fact you are confusing a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one, as I hope to God you are not ignorant as to what CX actually flies.

Well the company does operate the two types over some of the same routes, I will let scheduling know that people on A.net think they are confused using a medium-haul aircraft with a long-haul one on the same route, or operating the 744 HKG-TPE a long haul aircraft on a short haul route. While you at it, better let QF know that they are also confused sometimes operating a 747 PER-SYD, as thats a long haul aircraft on short haul route.

Spent over an hour reading this thread... and I just had to jump in.

Zeke, I really hope you're not a pilot for CX, CX is one of my favorite airlines, if you're really a pilot for them (especially CX A346 pilot), I think I'll need to book another airline for my trip to HK.

What Hamlet is saying that you're comparing CX777-300 (NON-ER) to CX340-600, which is NOT a valid comparision. CX uses their 777-300 (NON-ER!!!) on regional, high density routes, and 777-300 (NON-ER!!) itself is classified as that. He didn't say the find people at CX scheduling department doesn't know what they're doing.

CX flies ALL TYPES of aircrafts to TPE, just like CI flies all 4 of their A/C types in their fleet into HKG (A333/343, A300, B744, B737). HKG-TPE is one of the busiest international short routes in the world, CI, BR, CX usually send whatever plane is available at that time slot to fly that route. If only a 744 happens to be available for the 50 minute trip to TPE, and CX will use that plane for the short hop before they use it to on a long hual mission...

I hope you understand this... If you do... well... I tried.

[Edited 2005-10-18 19:26:49]
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:45 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 182):
Three class - VS-309, MU-320, CX-268, TG-267 - average 291, sorry I was wrong with 275, still not 350

Zeke, you're a tireless a$$. Lemme see, JL's 773er has 292 triclass seats. NH's 773er has 269 triclass seats. AF's 773er has 310 triclass seats. And the average is 290. So, what's your point? Comparing average is not necessarily meaningful. Some airlines have larger front cabins, some airlines have smaller front cabins. Cabin configuration depends on many factors. The simple fact is the 773er and 346 have similar floor space.

The 773er has a slight advantage in floor space and better payload/range capability than the 346, but it doesn't mean the 346 does not compete against the 773er. The 738 is slightly bigger than the 320, but it doesn't mean the 320 does not compete against the 738. Bigger isn't always better and vice versa.

When everyone pointed out you were wrong with your 20% nonsense, you went on and on. You finally stopped but never admitted you were wrong.

Now, it's back to the 346 not competing with the 773er argument. People tried to be polite and told you that you were wrong. And you still keep going on and on.

If you don't have a clue, the please listen and learn. If you want to learn, ask questions. Don't make ridiculous claims!

Like I said before, if you want to argue something you don't have full knowledge of, you bound to make a fool of yourself.

Please review the whole thread and see if anyone has come to defend you. Please comprehend why everyone thinks you are wrong. How obvious do you want it to be?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:45 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
I'm sure CX is going to operate some shorter routes.

I thought the reason was to still keep a three class aircraft on routes to Australia at off peak times.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
if an A340-600 went down, would CX put a 777-300 on the HKG-JFK route? Of course not, because it can't do it!

SQ apparently operated recently a 773 SIN-EWR when they broke some part of the A345 gear on a heavy landing. I dont know if HKG-JFK is possible, the boys say you can put 20 hours of gas in them with a restricted payload.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
In their 3-c arrangement, IB puts in 342.

Got this off the net, never flown them, thats why I listed them as 2 class

Quote:
Iberia will adopt a two-class service product on A340 long-haul services, eliminating first class in favor of an enhanced business- class cabin with lie-flat seatbeds, audio-video on demand, satellite phones and text messaging. It will invest eur100 million ($125 million) to equip 31 A340s with the new product, which will be rolled out on the airline's first three A340-600s in Oct. and installed across the fleet by the end of 2005.



Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
CX (your claimed airline, and the aircraft you claim to fly) has 286.

Yes thats correct, typo on my part when I just put it into excel. I have said 286 further up.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
VS has 311, not 309.

This site says 309 http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Vir...n_Atlantic_Airways_Airbus_A346.php

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 183):
That's an average of 306, unless you'd like to teach me how I did my math wrong.

I guess we are down below 300 again - 295 ?
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:59 am

OK Zeke,... First I thought you just can't explain yourself too well, sometimes I find some smart people (especially programmers I work with) know what they're saying, but can't say it in a way that can be understood easily...

Then... this just tops it off...

Quoting Zeke (Reply 186):
SQ apparently operated recently a 773 SIN-EWR when they broke some part of the A345 gear on a heavy landing. I dont know if HKG-JFK is possible, the boys say you can put 20 hours of gas in them with a restricted payload.

NO! NO! NO!!! SQ used their 772ER (That is 777-200 Extended Range, to spell it out for you) to replace their A345 due to A345's unscheduled MX on SIN-EWR. On the return trip, EWR-SIN, they made a stop in TPE due to headwinds before continuing to SIN.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt... but... you just lost all your credibility with me... (You didn't have a lot to begin with)

Just wondering... and please do answer this question...

Do you understand when we use abbreviations for aircraft models?

Do you know the difference between the following? (and by the grace of God, Allah, Buddha... do you know the market they're intended for??)

772
773
772ER
772LR
773ER
743
744
744ER
A343
A345
A346

[Edited 2005-10-18 20:10:09]
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:04 am

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 184):
I hope you understand this... If you do... well... I tried.

I do know what your saying, 340s are also used for TPE. I was actually thinking more of the medium haul Asian/Australian routes which the 777's are used for, not just the TPE route. I threw in TPE as an extreme. As I said before I thought the reason for using a 340 was more to do with providing a 3 class service than the sector length with the flexibility of doing USA.
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:33 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 188):
I do know what your saying, 340s are also used for TPE. I was actually thinking more of the medium haul Asian/Australian routes which the 777's are used for, not just the TPE route. I threw in TPE as an extreme. As I said before I thought the reason for using a 340 was more to do with providing a 3 class service than the sector length with the flexibility of doing USA.

When your "facts" and credibility is under so much attack (for valid reasons, like SQ flying a 773 SIN-EWR  gasp  Wink, you cannot efford not to be specific in what you're saying...  fight 

[Edited 2005-10-18 20:38:08]
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:36 am

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 187):
Do you understand when we use abbreviations for aircraft models?

Do you know the difference between the following?

Yep I do, I was told 773 with the 345 passengers numbers (I assumed around 200 pax), so I said 773 simple as that. The conversation was not centered around the rescue, more the landing which caused the AOG to start with. I dont know if its possible, I dont fly them, thats just what was said to me. I dont have the ability to check the SQ schedule like you obviously can to know if they did or didnt do a tech stop either.
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:42 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 190):
Yep I do, I was told 773 with the 345 passengers numbers (I assumed around 200 pax), so I said 773 simple as that. The conversation was not centered around the rescue, more the landing which caused the AOG to start with. I dont know if its possible, I dont fly them, thats just what was said to me. I dont have the ability to check the SQ schedule like you obviously can to know if they did or didnt do a tech stop either.

If you're really a pilot, you'd question the validity of the statment... If you fly an A346, you should know the range and capability of 773. I'm not a pilot, and I'm not in the aviation industry... But if someone tells me that SQ flew SIN-EWR with a 773, there is NO WAY IN HELL I will post that kind of crapola here...

You're both a pilot (so you claim) and in the airline industry (So you say)... Makes me wonder if you're smoking something really good that you're not sharing...
 
luisca
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:37 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:57 am

I found the airline zeke works for http://www.cpavirtual.org/
they are recruting if you are interested
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 4:40 am

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 185):
When everyone pointed out you were wrong with your 20% nonsense, you went on and on. You finally stopped but never admitted you were wrong.

Nah, im just an easy target, and I have a thick skin. I dont care if a poster here is a 12 yr old kid with zits or the 56 yr old CFO of an airline calls me a dumb a$$ or a dickhead, I dont get worked up over online discussions.

I found it interesting another poster used the same % less in the same context in another thread and none of the usual zeke bashers above piped up and gave that user the wisdom of their mathematical advice. Just went to show to me that a) I was not the only one to use the term that way b) it wasn’t really all that important c) the question I asked no one here knew the answer to.

So I drew the conclusion that a number of the usual zeke bashers dont have a clue either, they are just taking cheap shots at my expense.

Your the first person here to mention they are only 290 seaters, someone said just before you said 319 seats for the same calculation, thanks for letting me know.

I didn’t know that the 773ERs had on average 290 seats in them, the way QF1 was going on before "Both airplanes are in the long-range 3-class 350-seat market" was one of the reasons I thought the 346 was way smaller as I knew what we threw in the back and it was no where near 350 bits of SLF, I also knew we had about 385 in our 773's so I thought for an 773ER 350 SLF sounded about right.

If both aircraft are around 290 seats three class then I do see them as competitors, the way people go on about them "illustrating the superior payload generation capability of the Boeing" is absolute crap then, and the margins are very small indeed and could go either way depending on the routes and the initial purchase price. I had always thought the way people carry on about them there was 60-70 seats difference that’s why I went on saying they are not competitors.

From the little snippets of news I have seen today seems the QF order is not going to be what I thought it would, which was a few 772/773's to do flying from the east coast to the Asian hubs. Now bits of news tends to indicate the boards is looking at a much larger business plan then just the QF fleet upgrade, looking at a large expansion of Jetstar.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 4:57 am

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 191):
But if someone tells me that SQ flew SIN-EWR with a 773, there is NO WAY IN HELL I will post that kind of crapola here...

Well believe it or not, we dont normally talk 773 range/payload over a beer, prangs, pay, and holidays are a much more intersting points of discussion. I have an idea of the normal routes the 773 does with a good load, going no cargo, light on pax, and full gas is not a normal operational occourance.
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:10 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 193):
I didn’t know that the 773ERs had on average 290 seats in them, the way QF1 was going on before "Both airplanes are in the long-range 3-class 350-seat market" was one of the reasons I thought the 346 was way smaller as I knew what we threw in the back and it was no where near 350 bits of SLF, I also knew we had about 385 in our 773's so I thought for an 773ER 350 SLF sounded about right.

You are still clueless. Airbus and Boeing clearly stated their seating configuration rules. With their seating configuration rules, they arrived at their nominal seatings which are in the triclass 350-seat category. You're the one who judges everything by a single average number. Few airlines fit 416 seats on their 744s, and few airlines will fit 555 seats on their 388s. When you compare airline-specific seatings with OEM's generic seatings, of course you can see big differences. For example, on the 345, AC has 267 seats on one end, and SQ has 181 seats on the other end, while the generic Airbus seating is 313.

Quote:
So I drew the conclusion that a number of the usual zeke bashers dont have a clue either, they are just taking cheap shots at my expense.

The first part of the conclusion is about yourself, and I can tell you that you are spot on. I don't know why it took you so long to realize it. For the second part of your conclusion, I'm afraid you still have the same problem: you're clueless 99.9% of the time.

Here we have yet another example:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 193):
From the little snippets of news I have seen today seems the QF order is not going to be what I thought it would, which was a few 772/773's to do flying from the east coast to the Asian hubs

The news was about using the 772lr for the SYD-LHR service. And you turned it into Asian hubs. Is LHR in Asia? That's news to me. Based on this thread, I think you'll need to take refresher courses in reading, English, math, and geography.  sigh 
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:48 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 194):
Well believe it or not, we dont normally talk 773 range/payload over a beer, prangs, pay, and holidays are a much more intersting points of discussion. I have an idea of the normal routes the 773 does with a good load, going no cargo, light on pax, and full gas is not a normal operational occourance.

Nice try Zeke... you're so full of sh*t, you're beginning to stink up a.net...

Well, believe it or not, the closest thing any one of my friends and family talk about aviation is how much someone paid for a trip to LHR, TPE, SYD, PVG, JFK, LAX, SFO, HKG, MAD, etc, etc... Yet, I seem to have more common sense and knowledge than a CX A346 pilot?!?!?! WOW... Looks like I'm in the wrong profession!!!

I have friends who are in the same profession I am in, and we talk about our profession... If you're a pilot, don't you have any friends that are also pilots? Don't you know any CX773 pilots? I'm sure they can enlighten you on the range and capabilities of B773.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16322
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:49 am

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 195):
The news was about using the 772lr for the SYD-LHR service. And you turned it into Asian hubs. Is LHR in Asia? That's news to me. Based on this thread, I think you'll need to take refresher courses in reading, English, math, and geography.

Another cheap shot...this is how the article starts...

Quote:
Qantas passes baton to Jetstar
By Scott Rochfort
October 18, 2005

Qantas's plans to hive off a large chunk of its international operations to its low-cost Jetstar franchise are well advanced, with the airline looking to launch Jetstar flights from Australia to South-East Asia, China and possibly Japan in the second half of next year.

Now was that the same article you were referring to ?

Would you like to change your comments considering I said "looking at a large expansion of Jetstar".
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:24 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 197):
Would you like to change your comments considering I said "looking at a large expansion of Jetstar".

Lemme see what you said before you mentioned Jetstar:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 193):
From the little snippets of news I have seen today seems the QF order is not going to be what I thought it would, which was a few 772/773's to do flying from the east coast to the Asian hubs

The article that made a reference to the 777, the 772lr to be exact, was about SYD-LHR which would invovle only a few aircraft. Where was the 777 mentioned in the article that you quoted? The part on Jetstar has nothing to do with the 777. It's the 787 and 330/350 that are being considered. Moron!

Quoting Zeke (Reply 197):
Another cheap shot...this is how the article starts...

Sorry man, it's not a cheap shot at all. You have absolutely no reading comprehension at all!

You don't know the simplest concepts of math.

You picked on others' spellings. Yet, you kept on using "your" for "you're".

You don't know aircraft performance.

You don't know airline seating configuration variations.

You don't know why and how airlines misuse their fleet.

You mix items from one news article to another.

Why do you think people constantly criticizing you? You just don't get it!

You claimed you are willing to learn, yet you won't listen.

I'm being polite to just call you a moron!  sigh 
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Qantas And The 777, How Soon?

Wed Oct 19, 2005 1:30 pm

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 172):
Do you know that CX has an RFP put at the moment comparing these 2 types and they will order one or the other, as they are direct competitors?

OTOH, CX might buy both the A340-600 and B777-300ER. They might be prone to make that kind of decision because of their current split A340/B777 fleet. Anyhow, it was just a thought. CX has made some 'interesting' fleet choices in the past; I wouldn't put it past them to do so again.

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 173):
The reason the 346 has lower certified capacity than the 773er is not because it's a much smaller airplane than the 773er. The reason is the third door on the 346 is not a Type-A exit. The reason Airbus didn't put a Type-A exit was partly to reduce the OEW of the airplane. In doing so, they sacrified the max allowable pax the aircraft can carry.

FWIW, it's not the Type-III overwing door that prevents >440 passengers on the -600; it's that Airbus didn't certify the airplane for that. You will recall that the first -600 didn't have the overwing exit, just eight Type-A doors as the -300. Airbus had hoped to save even more weight by not having a overwing exit at all and argued that the regulation governing that the distance between doors should not be >60ft was outmoded (the gap was 74ft on the -600). The FAA/JAA told them to re-design the airplane with the overwing exit, but Airbus never re-certified the airplane to >440 passengers. If they wanted to, they could certify it for >500 passengers.

I don't think that Airbus ever re-built the first -600, as it's still with them. If they didn't, then it isn't certified for airline use even if they wanted to sell it.

Anyhow, interesting trivia... I hope.

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 191):
If you fly an A346, you should know the range and capability of 773.

Most pilots that I've met are fine people; they can also read and do basic math. Also, most don't pretend to know things about the industry that are categorically untrue or just completely made-up. (Sure, the rumours that come off the flight deck are often a hatstand comedy, but if you sat in an enclosed space with someone that you've never met for 8-hrs, bored out-of-your-brain because regular flying conditions are tedious, then chances are that somoene will make-up something.) So, I hope that one fool doesn't destroy your opinion of all pilots. Just be thankful that you don't have to sit next to him for any length of time!

 airplane QFA001

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: B777lover, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Daysleeper, godsbeloved, kalvado, Kindanew, laxmia, LH779, nickya340, OzarkD9S, pmanni1, Someone83, trex8, VCVSpotter, veeseeten, Wolfman and 203 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos