Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
gilesdavies
Topic Author
Posts: 2331
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:51 pm

Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 12:34 pm

I'm a little out the loop, but remember some years back when Qantas was going through some serious financial problems, they postponed the last eight A380's they were supposed to receive from Airbus.

What is latest on these aircraft?

Are they still supposed to be getting them at a later date, or are they like Virgin Atlantic and their phantom A380's?!

The Airbus order book, is still showing them up...

www.airbus.com/company/market/orders-deliveries/
 
qf002
Posts: 3663
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:28 pm

Quoting gilesdavies (Thread starter):
What is latest on these aircraft?

As far as I'm aware they are still on the books for delivery starting in 2018. The intention was for these eight aircraft to replace the final nine 744s.

The general mood around here is that these orders will be quietly dropped in favour of additional 787s and possibly 779s down the track (ie from 2020-21ish). While there are certainly good arguments in favour of additional A380s, the talk from QF recently has been about building a more nimble, more flexible carrier which is exactly what a large fleet of 787s and 777s would offer.
 
giblets
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 3:34 pm

Not sure Airbus would be too keen on them dropping A380's for 787s or 777, would they not look at A350s? Or A330Neo?
146, ATR72, Q400, Saab 340, PA-46 Jetprop, Jetstream, E175/195, 707/727/737/747/757/767/777, DC-3/9/10, MD-11/80, A300/310/319/320/321/330/340/350/380 Tristar, BAC 1-11, Trident, Chipmunk, Bell 206/222, Chinook, Puma, Cessna 172, Fokker 70, 100, SRN4!
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:11 pm

Quietly drop them in favor for 779 and 787. So who bails out then the A380? Boeing?

Typically such an issue is solved when you buy other planes from the same manufacturer as a kind of compensation. Create win win.

It depends on how much Qantas sees Airbus either as part of the solution or part as part of the problem.
Also: BA is on lookout for used A380s.
How about Qantas gets new birds and forward them to BA, all arranged by Airbus.

Newest birds with latest MTOW and better fuel economy may be beneficial with for the Qantas network.

Flyglobal
 
User avatar
Heavierthanair
Posts: 954
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 11:20 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:20 pm

G'day

Quoting qf002 (Reply 1):
fleet of 787s and 777s

Haven't we had a quadrillion threads here about Qantas buying 777s? Do we really need another one of those?

Sorry, could not resist....               


Cheers

Peter
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879 - 1955)
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11097
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:26 pm

Quoting giblets (Reply 2):
Not sure Airbus would be too keen on them dropping A380's for 787s or 777, would they not look at A350s? Or A330Neo?
Quoting flyglobal (Reply 3):
Quietly drop them in favor for 779 and 787. So who bails out then the A380? Boeing

The 8 A388 will more than likely be converted into more A320's for the QF group, currently they have enough neos on order to replace the whole jetstar fleet without growth. QF is also yet to decide on whether they will go with the 737MAX or the A320neo. As discussed recently in Australian Aviation thread a A321neo, even the LR could be quite attractive to QF
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 8:36 pm

Quoting giblets (Reply 2):

IMHO an A350 order is highly unlikely for Qantas. They are an existing 787 customer and that will be the focus of their mid-size expansion. You need to keep in mind just how small Qantas is; 28 A330s, 12 A380s and 12 747s is a pretty tiny fleet in the great scheme of things. I say this is highlight why aircraft commonality is so important for them. They are far too small to realise economies of scale if they start splitting their long haul fleet with four or five different types. Qantas have spoken several times about getting down to only two wide body types. The other factor is that the 77X is going to be the only aircraft in production (other than 380 and 748) which could be a viable A380 replacement.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
bbbb
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:43 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:29 pm

Quoting qf002 (Reply 1):
As far as I'm aware they are still on the books for delivery starting in 2018. The intention was for these eight aircraft to replace the final nine 744s.

They're still on the books as orders, but they've been deferred indefinitely.

There's a quote from Alan Joyce in May-2015 where he noted there's no plans to increase the A380 fleet beyond 12 aircraft: "We’ve got 12 and we think if you look at that size of the fleet and that is the right size... There are still options out there, firm aircraft out there, but they have been deferred. We keep on looking at deferring those aircraft because we don’t see a need in our current operations past 12 aircraft."

I consider it extremely unlikely that Qantas will take anymore A380s.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15087
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:32 pm

They can defer them all the way to 2028 and replace the existing fleet with neos
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Tue Apr 12, 2016 12:01 am

The A380 DOW is too high in proportion to it's DOW plus payload. An operator needs high load factors to compensate for this. Conversely as load factors drop the fuel burn drops only slightly by virtue of having to move the fixed DOW. Using EK as an example their 77W ratio is 175t DOW to 214t ZFW {passengers only) a ratio of 1. 226. Their A380 has a 299t DOW and a 356t ZFW ( passengers only) a ratio of 1. 190. For the A380 ratio to be about equal to the 77W it needs to haul an additional 100 passengers in a standard configuration. My point is that operators need to be very careful about the A380 load factors. They need to be sure that they are close to the base number that they used in doing the economic analysis of the type. If this was 85% , then 75% or less will make the type unattractive. I suggest that QF can operate 12 frames within a range of acceptable load factors, but no more.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Tue Apr 12, 2016 12:07 am

Alan Joyce has said he wishes he could get in a time machine and cancel the A380/747 orders. http://australianaviation.com.au/201...o-change-qantas-fleet-order-joyce/

...so it seems highly unlikely that QF will take A380's on his watch. With all the program delays, it's also unlikely that cancelling A380's would cost QF much, if anything, at this point.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 1:18 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 10):
Alan Joyce has said he wishes he could get in a time machine and cancel the A380/747 orders. http://australianaviation.com.au/201...oyce/

I'd like to hear straight from the horse's mouth what he would have ordered instead  
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4513
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:03 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 11):

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 10):
Alan Joyce has said he wishes he could get in a time machine and cancel the A380/747 orders. http://australianaviation.com.au/201...oyce/

I'd like to hear straight from the horse's mouth what he would have ordered instead  

Well considering the option at the time was A) 777's and B) 744ER+A330+A380 and they rejected the 777 option then the answer would be A.
As mentioned the 77W would have been perfect for pretty much every 744/A380 mission that QF operates (CASA would have had their hand forced regarding twins if QF didn't have any quads).
They could have still had the A330 for Asia missions/domestic as a 777/A330 only international fleet would be large enough to split the types (say 30+ of each).
Initially the 77W was thought to not be capable of longer flights but this ended up being incorrect. QF wouldn't have taken the first birds anyway so even if they had 77W + 77L on order they could have either reduced or removed the 77L orders in time for more 77W.
QF would likely still be flying to LHR 3-4x daily along with FRA daily and maybe CDG almost daily.
They could have been flying to YVR all along as well as SFO and started DFW earlier.
DXB could have been started in its own right (possibly still doing the EK deal but from a stronger position).
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
smi0006
Posts: 2547
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:59 am

As mentioned in another thread, I think QF need two more. I'd then convert the other six to A321NEO.

I'm more curious about when QF will need to look at 738 replacements, some of them must be getting older and highish cycles. How long can the out of the 320NEO v Max option for mainline? What would happen to JQs cost base if they operated the same fleet type? How would JQ tech crew react?

And if QF go for the MAX - what becomes of the 380 positions?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:33 am

Quoting smi0006 (Reply 13):
I'm more curious about when QF will need to look at 738 replacements

The oldest is still only 15 years old. While the 734s were retired around the 20-25 year mark, there is no reason that can't be pushed to 25-30 years. Both United and Delta for example are currently putting their A320s through a life extension program that will likely seem them flying for 25+ years. Given the current capital restraint at Qantas I honestly don't expect an order this side of 2020, when the 737 oldest is 19, and wouldn't fall over in shock in their replacement isn't on property before 2025.

What I could actually see happening is that Qantas sits out the NEO and MAX generation, but is then an early operator of the "NSA" or equivalent. Either that or they get a good deal on "last off the line" MAXs or NEOs.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:49 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 10):
Alan Joyce has said he wishes he could get in a time machine and cancel the A380/747 orders. http://australianaviation.com.au/201...o-change-qantas-fleet-order-joyce/

...so it seems highly unlikely that QF will take A380's on his watch. With all the program delays, it's also unlikely that cancelling A380's would cost QF much, if anything, at this point.

Pretty damning words.


However, is he annoyed with (a)aircraft performance, (b)non-economies of scale due to uncommon types or (c)fleet inflexibilty? [This would influence what QF do next. Dropping all and buying 777X is financially non-viable so they have to work with what they have, which means follow on orders may not be ideal, but may be the best route ahead.]
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10510
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 1:38 pm

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 15):
However, is he annoyed with (a)aircraft performance, (b)non-economies of scale due to uncommon types or (c)fleet inflexibilty? [This would influence what QF do next. Dropping all and buying 777X is financially non-viable so they have to work with what they have, which means follow on orders may not be ideal, but may be the best route ahead.]

I think it is mostly C. The A380 is frankly too big for most of their network, and they have gone too long without a suitable long haul aircraft smaller than the 744.

I believe that with a time machine Alan Joyce would rather forego some of their North American capacity, especially since Aus/NZ-US competition has increased tremendously since when they first ordered the A380, in exchange for greater flexibility with their (in this scenario greater than current) Asian/European operations.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:26 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 16):
I think it is mostly C. The A380 is frankly too big for most of their network, and they have gone too long without a suitable long haul aircraft smaller than the 744.

The 747ER ended up being payload restricted LAX-MEL. Whether that was anticipated I don't know. Now the 77W would also have been payload restricted on that sector but as it developed it may have been the lesser of the two evils. The A380 setup for about 450 seats did the job for that city pair but they did not need 12 frames to do it. There was a point in time when QF ordered about nine 747's when they could have started to introduce the 77W . I believe this is when things went wrong Also if they had held off on the 747ER's for a year or two they may have ultimately passed on them.
 
PanAm1971
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:28 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:30 pm

The elephant in the room is the competition from EK. The A380 order looked like a wise move... until EK and their magic economics made them so very tough to beat. It seems the 777 would have been the better and more flexible choice. But that's easy to say in hindsight. In my opinion QF is caught off balance... despite aggressive cost cutting. The next fleet choice could be the whole ballgame.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23910
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:17 pm

Quoting PanAm1971 (Reply 18):
The elephant in the room is the competition from EK. The A380 order looked like a wise move... until EK and their magic economics made them so very tough to beat. It seems the 777 would have been the better and more flexible choice. But that's easy to say in hindsight.

Yes, so much of this is hindsight. A380 makes much more sense when EK is not in the picture. The numbers for the 777 didn't look very impressive until the GE90-115 came along and transformed the product. The 787 was a great choice if it had been delivered with only a modest delay instead of the 4+ years it ended up having.

I'm not sure how much of this should fall on the shoulders of management. They are now behind the curve when it comes to their fleet composition but they don't have the resources needed to get ahead of the curve. They are now the vassal of EK, and it's hard to see how things could have turned out differently, other than with perfect hindsight.

Management would have had to seen the threat of EK perfectly and would have had to convince labor of that threat, and would have had to have had a lot better luck and timing when it came to fleet replacement decisions.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Spiderguy252
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:58 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:20 pm

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 10):
Alan Joyce has said he wishes he could get in a time machine and cancel the A380/747 orders. http://australianaviation.com.au/201...o-change-qantas-fleet-order-joyce/

Why does any airline place an order for brand new 747s in 2000?
Vahroone
 
jmchevallier
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 7:17 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:37 pm

Quoting Spiderguy252 (Reply 20):
Why does any airline place an order for brand new 747s in 2000?

Should you be much older, you would be aware that the 747 has been strongly inbedded in the Qantas culture for a long time. In the beginning of the 80s, Qantas advertized as "The only all B747 airline", until they started ordering 767.

In such a context, it takes time to change mind ...
 
qf002
Posts: 3663
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 4:11 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
A380 makes much more sense when EK is not in the picture.

Perhaps, but QF could easily make their current fleet of A380s work even if they did drop out of Europe entirely.

The 744ERs were the big killer from that 2000 order. Having those aircraft is what put them off buying 777s a decade ago when they placed the big 787 order.

Quoting Spiderguy252 (Reply 20):
Why does any airline place an order for brand new 747s in 2000?

The 744 was the same age in 2000 as the 77W is today.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:13 pm

Quoting Spiderguy252 (Reply 20):
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 17):

At the time nobody knew yet just how good the 77W's performance was, that came a few years later and it is often said (no doubt correctly) that Boeing shocked themselves with how good that plane's performance is. The 773A was a dog. Add in that this was before 10 abrest was accepted as a configuration meaning that the 777 was a significant reduction in capacity compared to the 747, and that oil was still cheap in 2000, and I can fully understand why QF ordered those aircraft given what they knew at the time.

Quoting polot (Reply 16):

While the A380 might be too big for "most" of their network (well, duh!) they make very good use of the 12 they do have. The A380 fleet has very, very high utilisation, many would say too high as delays cascade throughout the system if one goes tech as there isn't enough slack to compensate.

I don't understand why you suggest that QF would forgo additional USA capacity, as even if you disregard AA and look only at planes with a roo on the tail, Qantas has more capacity to the US than they did when DL and VA entered the market. Add in AA and they've grown even more. That doesn't sound like the actions of an airline that wants to allocate capacity away from the market to me.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:36 pm

Quoting qf002 (Reply 22):
Perhaps, but QF could easily make their current fleet of A380s work even if they did drop out of Europe entirely.

Joyce is suggesting that they can't.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 23):
While the A380 might be too big for "most" of their network (well, duh!) they make very good use of the 12 they do have. The A380 fleet has very, very high utilisation, many would say too high as delays cascade throughout the system if one goes tech as there isn't enough slack to compensate.

But at what load factors. They have them setup for about 485- seats ; they need at least 85% on each and every flight to make them work They should be setup for many more seats if they are to work at lower load factors. Operators have had a break with lower fuel prices , this has allowed them to operate at lower load factors but it does not change the fact that the plane is too heavy for the typical seating configuration. It is interesting to note that AF is taking no more. Presumably they do not have the city pairs that will provide the load factors that they must have to make money.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Wed Apr 13, 2016 10:01 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
so much of this is hindsight.

True but many airlines avoided committing to the A380 in 2000. Bob Crandall at AA had been saying for a decade that smaller planes were the way to go. It was more reasonable to order 12 A380's in 2000 than in 2015, but the right choice was articulated even back then.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
A380 makes much more sense when EK is not in the picture.

The A380 holds back the TPAC market as well though. QF would be better served by more direct flights from BNE and MEL to North American points than a few A380's from SYD and MEL to big partner hubs.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
I'm not sure how much of this should fall on the shoulders of management.

Joyce thinks none of it is his fault. He's probably right.
 
travelhound
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:17 am

QANTAS's current A380's will be coming off lease finance from 2018. I'd suggest an upgrade of the existing fleet along with new orders for the type could work out to be a highly flexible fleet.

Hong Kong could have enough traffic to go SYD-HKG A380 double daily in a few years time. Melbourne could be a similar position. In the not too distant future Singapore will probably have enough traffic to justify A380's as well.

If we consider Europe, QANTAS have slots at LHR that they will one day need to fill and of course we also have flights in to Germany and France which were once a stronghold for QANTAS.

We know 787's and 777X's are on the cards. We just don't know what QF's future route plans are and how many actual aircraft they are going to need.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15087
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:41 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 25):

It certainly isn't hindsight in that nobody warned them. It's just they didn't listen.

1/2 of anet has been saying for 15 years that the A380 is the wrong size. It's too big to be flexible but too small to replace 2 777s or A350s without losing seats or decreasing premium capacity. It also lacks cargo space, especially as a replacement for 2 smaller planes.

Many airlines had 744s because there was no other option for range and payload for 10-15 years. But that didn't mean that just because you had the 744 you needed a same size or larger replacement. You just needed a long range aircraft with good cargo capacity. 77W, a346, a350.

QF was so afraid of twins that they committed heavily to the a380 even though it didn't make sense for many of their routes. Then to overcompensate, they over committed to the 787. Al the while transpacific competitors were dying the right aircraft: 777.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
777LRF
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:42 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:22 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):

Exactly. You can't really blame hindsight in a cut throat business like aviation. I think the 777X will give QF a lot of nimbleness between their greater network and the multiple hubs they have in the country.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 26):
slots

Unless EK steals em
 
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23910
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:22 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 27):
QF was so afraid of twins that they committed heavily to the a380 even though it didn't make sense for many of their routes. Then to overcompensate, they over committed to the 787. Al the while transpacific competitors were dying the right aircraft: 777.

I don't think you're getting the time line right. QF committed to the A380 before the 777's popularity, not during it. When they were making the decision the big twins of the day were the 773A and the A330, and they did invest in the A330 for what it was then good at, domestic/regional service. The big issue wasn't QF's commitment to the 787, it was and still is Boeing's dreadful execution of the 787 program.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10510
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:50 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 29):
The big issue wasn't QF's commitment to the 787, it was and still is Boeing's dreadful execution of the 787 program.

It didn't help though that QF kept on changing its plans on how the 787 were allotted between JQ and QF, and that QF got to the point were they didn't want to spend the cash for them. QF was, after all the 787 delays, suppose to get their first 787s in 2012. The lack of 787s in their fleet since then is the result of actions taken by QF.

Also the 77E was still fairly popular in 2000, and even if they didn't want a split fleet they could have elected for the A343 to have a long haul fleet smaller than the 742. That was the crux of the QF's issue for so long: it was 747 or nothing.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 2:07 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 30):
That was the crux of the QF's issue for so long: it was 747 or nothing.

     
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 9:36 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 30):

Had the 787 been delivered on time then I actually think that they would have taken most or all of the frames they ordered by now. The stuffing around since then has been because the 787 delays (conveniently for Qantas) coincided with their tough times, when their longhaul business was hemiraging money and the entire company was seemingly lurching from crisis to crisis. Eventually cancelling the 787 order was a smart decision to conserve capital (although they did take their first delivery in 2013, it just had an orange star on the tail. The Jetstar frames are from the Qantas order, not a separate order)

The 777-200ER lacks sufficient range for Qantas' needs. As United can attest westbound out of LAX you can't carry anything more than passenger bags, and sometimes that's dicey. From my understanding the 343 has a shorter range than the 77E?
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:25 pm

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 32):
e 777-200ER lacks sufficient range for Qantas' needs.

I think LAX-SYD would work but QF are always looking at the freight revenue. It is here that they would come up short. Diversion fuel was an issue but Cat III at Sydney should help that.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5079
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:34 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 33):
Cat III at Sydney should help that.

??? Is that even a firm proposal, not just hot air?

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
jfk777
Posts: 7336
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:46 pm

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 32):
The 777-200ER lacks sufficient range for Qantas' needs. As United can attest westbound out of LAX you can't carry anything more than passenger bags, and sometimes that's dicey. From my understanding the 343 has a shorter range than the 77E?

That depends which 777-200ER you have ? Remember United has what has to be the worst engine on their 777, Pratts, that
ever existed. Its merger partner, Continental, had and now United has what have to be the best non LR 777 in the business which would have no issue making LAX to SYD since they regularly flew Newark to Hong Kong and EWR to India Nonstop with GE90 at 94K thrust.

Does Gordon Bethune know how to order an airplane ? You bet your 16 hour flights he does. UA should appoint Gordon chairman. HE took Continental from " Worst to First" while United has gone from "First to Worst".

[Edited 2016-04-14 17:03:59]
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:04 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 34):
Is that even a firm proposal, not just hot air?

Allen.........From your response it is presumably an unfounded assumption on my part ?
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5079
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 1:53 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 36):
Allen.........From your response it is presumably an unfounded assumption on my part ?


Last I heard the airlines were still opposed to it on cost grounds, saying it was not worth it for an average of 3 days a year. It could have changed, from your post I thought you might have heard something. Anyone else have more up to date information?
BTW I believe MEL is/will be installing cat III, another move in the perpetual MEL/SYD one upmanship game.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
jrfspa320
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:18 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 2:01 am

While CASAs ETOPS regulations are the way they are, there is no way QF could profitably operate twins on the SCL or JNB flights, with longer routings on north America? Not sure if QF is able to offer a shorter route than VAs 777s?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 2:15 am

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 38):

North America is no issue. LAX, SFO and YVR stay well within ETOPS180, and IIRC the diversion for DFW adds less than 15 minutes flying time. SCL and JNB though are definitely out of the question.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 35):

Interesting what you say about the GE90 powered 77Es, and now you mention it I did know that the -224ERs had a higher thrust than the -222ERs.

I wonder if it would it be possible to crunch the numbers comparing EWR-HKG and LAX-SYD on a GE 77E? The latter is shorter, but more strongly affected by winds westbound. Does EWR-HKG even go out weight restricted at all?

And you don't need to convince me about Bethune, see my signature line  
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
skyhawkmatthew
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:42 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:04 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 37):
BTW I believe MEL is/will be installing cat III,

MEL has had IIIB on 16 for some time.
Qantas - The Spirit of Australia.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:31 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 12):
I'd like to hear straight from the horse's mouth what he would have ordered instead

Well considering the option at the time was A) 777's and B) 744ER+A330+A380 and they rejected the 777 option then the answer would be A.

Agreed, but I'd still love to hear AJ actually state what he would have ordered and why 'back then' just to stir the pot a bit  

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15087
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:02 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 29):
I don't think you're getting the time line right. QF committed to the A380 before the 777's popularity, not during it.

That's not correct. The 777-200ER was in service. QF ignored it. The A343 had range, and the A346 was much further along in development than the A380. QF ignored them. Even if they were worried about long-range twins and ETOPS, the A340 would have fit the bill.

For many routes, the 777 and/or A340 would have allowed QF to rightsize. Instead they ordered 744ERs. Granted they needed them for MEL-LAX, but it just added more 744s to the fleet rather than something more flexible. And the A346 was delivering about the same time as the 744ER, so it's unclear why they needed the 744ER other than fleet commonality and the belief that they need the biggest. Considering they were building an A330 fleet the A346 would have had enough commonality anyway.

Again, when the A380 was being ordered, a.net was debating if the A380 was the wrong size. It became a silly "if you live in the EU you must support the A380" vs. "you hate the A380 because you don't like airbus" argument because it wasn't the case. Much of what A380 detractors had said has been proven true for many airlines.

The A380 is 30% larger than the 744. But it's 15% smaller than two 772s, and 30% smaller than two 77W/A346. With far less cargo space. It is just an inflexible bird and makes smaller carriers less "agile" when they operate it. QF is not the mega carrier they think they are, and their decisions are all based on being one. And when you act like that without acknowledging that your global location prevents it from coming true, you make poor decisions based on ego.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:56 am

Quoting polot (Reply 30):
It didn't help though that QF kept on changing its plans on how the 787 were allotted between JQ and QF, and that QF got to the point were they didn't want to spend the cash for them. QF was, after all the 787 delays, suppose to get their first 787s in 2012. The lack of 787s in their fleet since then is the result of actions taken by QF.

I think you mean the actions of Joyce. He was more committed to Jetstar than QANTAS.
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2610
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 5:24 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 41):
Agreed, but I'd still love to hear AJ actually state what he would have ordered and why 'back then' just to stir the pot a bit
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 42):
The A380 is 30% larger than the 744. But it's 15% smaller than two 772s, and 30% smaller than two 77W/A346. With far less cargo space. It is just an inflexible bird and makes smaller carriers less "agile" when they operate it. QF is not the mega carrier they think they are, and their decisions are all based on being one. And when you act like that without acknowledging that your global location prevents it from coming true, you make poor decisions based on ego.

At the time that Qantas was making those decisions it was run by someone from a marketing background so image was probably considered as a priority. Look at John Borghetti's actions at Virgin Australia after he was passed over for Joyce as the replacement Qantas CEO. He too has seeming focussed more on branding and image than operations (and the 777s don't seem to have worked out that well for VA/Qantas 2.0 either all up).

Under AJ Qantas has taken a more agile and outward looking attitude to routes and so their fleet needs have likely also changed. But they've got what they've got and, facing the capex restrictions they do, they need to live with that fleet until the time is right to order the replacements.

Not that it should have any bearing on fleet decisions, but I fail to see any 777 offering the "personality" of a 747 or A380. I personally hope they never order 777s because it would end these angst filled discussions.  
I like artificial banana essence!
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Fri Apr 15, 2016 2:33 pm

Quoting jrfspa320 (Reply 38):
While CASAs ETOPS regulations are the way they are, there

CASA have adopted the worldwide ICAO standard for EDTO. Now I doubt if QF have applied for approval of any twins for > EDTO-180 since thus far they have used the 747 for these routes. If they have some 238t A332's they may consider it.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7336
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:44 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 39):

I wonder if it would it be possible to crunch the numbers comparing EWR-HKG and LAX-SYD on a GE 77E? The latter is shorter, but more strongly affected by winds westbound. Does EWR-HKG even go out weight restricted at all?

I don't know how weight restricted the Newark to Hong Kong flight is but since its an almost 16 hour flight time there has to be some level of restriction involved.
 
UKtoOzFlyer
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:00 pm

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Sat Apr 16, 2016 12:17 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 42):
QF is not the mega carrier they think they are, and their decisions are all based on being one. And when you act like that without acknowledging that your global location prevents it from coming true, you make poor decisions based on ego.

I think you are confusing Qantas under Dixon vs Qantas under Joyce...

QF is not the mega carrier "Dixon" thought they were.... and Dixons decisions were all based on being one.

I think under Joyce we are seeing a very different Qantas.

Remember it was Dixon who ordered the A380's, and it was Dixon who ordered 115 787's. I mean, where were Qantas going to fly 115 787's?

Quoting polot (Reply 30):
It didn't help though that QF kept on changing its plans on how the 787 were allotted between JQ and QF,

No it didn't. The first 787's bought by Qantas were always going to JQ. That was never in doubt

From their 2005 Press Release:

"......Mr Dixon said Jetstar would commence operations with an interim fleet of four A330-200 aircraft and transition as quickly as possible to a fleet of 10 new Boeing 787 aircraft, with delivery of Jetstar's first B787 scheduled for August 2008.


"We will take delivery of the first B787 for Qantas mainline operations in July 2009," he said....."

http://www.qantas.com/travel/airlines/newsroom-1081/am/en

Quoting ricknroll (Reply 43):
I think you mean the actions of Joyce. He was more committed to Jetstar than QANTAS.

Yet since he has come in, his main priority has rationalising Qantas to make them stronger. I think the market is showing he is getting the mix right of mainline Qantas and Jetstar. I'd suggest current strategy is working.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Sat Apr 16, 2016 12:36 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 46):
I don't know how weight restricted the Newark to Hong Kong flight is but since its an almost 16 hour flight time there has to be some level of restriction involved.

For starters UA are probably satisfied with max passenger load. Secondly EWR-HKG is essentially equidistance whether it is flown eastbound or westbound so the most favorable winds on the day will determine which direction it is flown Third, the route essentially follows the meridians where the typically abeam winds have minimal on the nose effect.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15087
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Qantas And Their "postponed" A380's

Sat Apr 16, 2016 8:04 pm

Quoting UKtoOzFlyer (Reply 47):

True. But it was a target involving "hindsight" and there was no such thing as that, because at the time it was obvious to many, just not the then current management, that this was true.

As you say, the current management doesn't think that way, but the mess they are in and the order book they have came from that way of thinking.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.

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