Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Topic Author
Posts: 2688
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:31 pm

To no one's huge shock, QF is looking at ULH aircraft, and is reviewing the only 2 available. Possible routes include SYD-NYC and *gasp* SYD-LHR. There is also an endorsement of the 789's long haul capabilities.

Quote:
"We've always operated some of the longest flights in the world, it's the nature of where Australia is" explains Joyce.
"Qantas has great unique IP in how we do that, our pilots and our engineers are very good at how we manage fuel and flight planning on these routes," he continues. Joyce says this is "good expertise" to share with Airbus and Boeing "and hopefully be able to shape those products so that they work for the network that we can envisage in the future."

"This is why we bought the 787-9, because it has that long haul capability, and why we’d like to have the 777x and the A350 long haul eventually... it completely changes the game for Qantas because it allows us to have a network we could only have dreamed of in the past, and offer our customers more direct destinations."

"The opportunity to open up something like a Sydney-New York direct or a Sydney-London direct would be fantastic," Evans adds.

"We want to make sure the aircraft is fully spec’d to where we want, and that takes a bit of time and a bit of work" Joyce says. "There's a bit of tweaking to the aircraft in order to get it there, but we've got plenty of time."
http://www.ausbt.com.au/qantas-consi...=flipper&utm_campaign=home-flipper
 
kaitak
Posts: 9957
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:41 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Thread starter):
we’d like to have the 777x and the A350 long haul eventually...

Both - seriously?

'Strewth!

I think the 777 must be considered to have the edge here - commonality with the 787, and (obviously) the 779, which might be a good 388 replacement, if QF decides to go down that route.

What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

Let's not forget also that QF has long since expressed an interest in the 787-10. It could get pretty crowded around that "300 seat" mark. The 787-10 and the 778 could work together - both with different missions, but the 359 would have to offer something v. special for it to be worth buying.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27311
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:48 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

Probably lower overall operating costs (it's a fair bit lighter frame), but the 777-8 would significantly out-lift it in payload.

So if QF is looking at less than 200 seats, the A350-900ULR could have the edge, whereas the 777-8 would likely be the choice for over 200 seats.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Topic Author
Posts: 2688
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:52 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
Both - seriously?

That's what the quote says, but I don't believe that for a second. A subfleet of perhaps 5 each? It would be strange.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
I think the 777 must be considered to have the edge here - commonality with the 787, and (obviously) the 779, which might be a good 388 replacement, if QF decides to go down that route.

That's pretty much what my first thought was.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

The 778 offers more payload, and that makes me think that unless QF went for a really Premium configuration like SQ, the 778 would be better. In the A350's favour is the order for 8 A380s, but I don't see how that would outweigh the benefits of the 777 as I see them.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
Let's not forget also that QF has long since expressed an interest in the 787-10. It could get pretty crowded around that "300 seat" mark. The 787-10 and the 778 could work together - both with different missions, but the 359 would have to offer something v. special for it to be worth buying.

I'm not sure the similarity in seat numbers will be an issue, the 78X would likely be less premium, and used an an entirely different set of routes. But yes, the 787/777 combo looks a better deal. But who knows, maybe something about the A359LR has caught their eye?
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:56 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

Significant lower operating costs if you do not need more than 300 seats? Smaller plane, different business case.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
cathay747
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:47 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:41 pm

I honestly don't think I could deal with a SYD-NYC
NONSTOP flight...even in F I think I'd commit seppuku
at some point along the way. LAX/HKG/LAX is the
longest I've ever flown, and even in F and J it was
pushing my limits. But to each his own of course.
Try a Little VC-10derness
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:54 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):

What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?
Quoting cathay747 (Reply 5):
I honestly don't think I could deal with a SYD-NYC
NONSTOP flight...

If they try the non-stop... and end up with the general consensus (demand) being "too long, I'd rather have a stop", then at shorter ranges does the A350 make more sense?
 
Beatyair
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:09 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 2:15 pm

Great, but odd.
The current range of the 777lr is 17,600 km, were as the 777x8 is 16,112 km(projected) and the A350ULR is around 16,120km(projected). If they make the direct run to Heathrow, then they should have the same setup as BA's A319's. Fewer seats, more space.

[Edited 2016-06-04 07:31:31]
 
KaiTak747
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:08 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:04 pm

SYD-LHR and SYD-NYC I do not see happening.

The CASM on these flights would be sky high, and therefore ticket prices would have to be very high as well just to break even. This means that there would have to be very high demand for these direct flights, with people willing to pay a premium over one-stop options.

Flights between SYD and LHR are very competitive, with the likes of EK, EY, QR, SQ, TG, MH, BA, QF, CX all providing decent connections times, low fares and great products. Would people really be willing to spend the extra $$$ to fly non-stop?

Edit: typo

[Edited 2016-06-04 08:16:31]
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1267
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:09 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 7):

Seriously! If the 77L is not deemed to have the legs for SYD - LHR, then I don't see how either of the new generation will be able to do it?
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:30 pm

Quoting cathay747 (Reply 5):
I honestly don't think I could deal with a SYD-NYC
NONSTOP flight...

The quote says direct flights, not nonstop flights. A nonstop between either of those two city pairs would be a brutal experience in Y or even Y+.
 
wingflex744
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 8:52 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:43 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 10):
The quote says direct flights, not nonstop flights

in that case QF is already operating both flights direct...LHR via DXB and JFK via LAX.
I believe Evans meant non-stop
Don't worry about the world coming to an end today...it's already tomorrow in Australia!
 
Beatyair
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:09 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 5:26 pm

Quoting Armodeen (Reply 9):

Agreed, but maybe with half the seats and extra tanks. Sidney to Heathrow is 17,002 km , with perfect weather. Either way there is a fuel stop somewhere.
 
User avatar
ro1960
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:19 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:59 pm

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 8):
Would people really be willing to spend the extra $$$ to fly non-stop?

People who fly often SYD-LHR for business AND have the money would definitely do it. And I imagine QF would make it worth the extra $$$ to attract customers. Maybe only F and J classes?

But what would be the time gain be over a one-stop flight? I think the average SYD-LHR flight is around 22-24 hours (stop included), no?

Maybe NZ would be happy with a AKL-LHR capable aircraft. See this post:
NZ Not Happy With Transition Time At LAX (by G500 Jun 3 2016 in Civil Aviation)

[Edited 2016-06-04 12:07:24]
You may like my airport photos:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/aeroports
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 7:01 pm

Well, granted, they proved LHR-SYD nonstop was possible all the way back in 1989 with the very exclusive QF7441 service  

I mean, considering that it carried precisely 0 revenue passengers and had to be towed with engines off to the runway is just pedantry, really :p
 
bobdino
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:55 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 7:12 pm

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 8):
Would people really be willing to spend the extra $$$ to fly non-stop?

Totally.

Quoting ro1960 (Reply 13):
But what would be the time gain be over a one-stop flight? I think the average SYD-LHR flight is around 22-24 hours (stop included), no?

Really depends. The shortest seems to be around 22h, but if you can't get on that, you're looking at significantly longer - around 27h or 32h.

But for the sake of this discussion, we're looking at folks that would be price-insensitive, so taking 22h as a comparison point is fair. Personally, I would definitely pay extra to avoid having to wake up, pack up, get up, get off the plane, traipse through DXB, go through a heavily-crowded immigration desk, find the plane again, and reboard. Avoiding all that is worth money, and flying in J, I'd totally be looking for a non-stop if I could find it.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 7:25 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
Both - seriously?
Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 3):
That's what the quote says, but I don't believe that for a second. A subfleet of perhaps 5 each? It would be strange.

The quote says he'd like both the 350 and 77X. It does not say he wants the ULH version of both of these - it actually doesn't mention the 359LR or 778 specifically at all.

I'd be very surprised if he's not looking at both the 778 and 779, and at all of the 350 models, for various missions.

It is, of course, entirely possible that he will eventually take both ULH aircraft, to match his routes with the optimal size of aircraft. I see no reason why QF could not comfortably support a small fleet of 778s and 359LRs, especially if it also has 779s and other 350 models.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:49 pm

Quoting speedbored (Reply 16):
I see no reason why QF could not comfortably support a small fleet of 778s and 359LRs, especially if it also has 779s and other 350 models.

Qantas is not a huge airline, and I doubt it wants to continue operating a large number of widebody types. It's committed to the 787-9 and A380 for at least the moment. What looks most attractive may depend on its future plans for the A380.

If QF wants ultimately to replace the A380s with something smaller and increase frequency, then a fleet made up of 787-9, 787-10, and 777-9 looks pretty compelling, and a few 777-8s would fit well if the airline really does want to explore ULH. But if QF wants to keep the A380s over the long term, then the A350 may be optimized a bit better for the space in between the 787-9 and the A380. In that case I could see the airline operating 787-10 and HGW A350-900 alongside each other for shorter and longer missions respectively
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:10 pm

Would QF feel able to go down the road of an all-Boeing long-haul fleet in the future considering the outstanding A380 orders and the deposits to cover them? It may be the case that they reach a compromise with Airbus to take them as A350s instead.

Or as A320s, I suppose, given the huge order the QF Group have in for that family at the moment.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20591
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:56 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Probably lower overall operating costs (it's a fair bit lighter frame), but the 777-8 would significantly out-lift it in payload.

That explains the different business cases of the two.

Quoting cathay747 (Reply 5):

I honestly don't think I could deal with a SYD-NYC
NONSTOP flight.

Then you are not the market. We're talking about 15% longer than DXB-AKL. Is that going to be too much? I think there is a market. Look at SYD-DFW: QF has done very well there. It might not be daily, but there is certainly a market to avoid hours at a hub.
Not many passengers want to double hub (aka "Bridge hub.") Every point connection has a chance.
With the A359LR, we're looking at a restart of SIN-LAX/JFK. The 778 will do so with more payload.

We'll see more connections. With these much loser cost per flight airframes.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5092
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 12:14 am

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 8):
Flights between SYD and LHR are very competitive, with the likes of EK, EY, QR, SQ, TG, MH, BA, QF, CX all providing decent connections times, low fares and great products.

The QF & BA flights do not have connection times, they are direct flights with a transit stop. Which means you & your baggage can not miss your connection.

Quoting speedbored (Reply 16):
It is, of course, entirely possible that he will eventually take both ULH aircraft, to match his routes with the optimal size of aircraft. I see no reason why QF could not comfortably support a small fleet of 778s and 359LRs, especially if it also has 779s and other 350 models.

Not going to happen! QF [internationally] only operate two aircraft types at a time [not counting any types being phased out/in] for very good reason and that is the cost of supporting multiple aircraft types.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 17):
If QF wants ultimately to replace the A380s with something smaller and increase frequency

For the next 10 years it's pretty clear that the A380 & B789 are going to be the main types in the QF [international] fleet. Beyond that it seems unlikely that QF would want to increase frequency on the current A380 routes, there is just no reason to do so. So IMHO the only A380 replacements will be A380NEOs, unless there is a currently unforeseeable MAJOR change in traffic patterns. Also IMHO I can't see QF getting more into ULH with current and proposed aircraft designs.
So bottom line, I don't see the B77X or A350 in QF service before 2025. After that? Who knows!

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11163
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 2:29 am

Quoting speedbored (Reply 16):
It is, of course, entirely possible that he will eventually take both ULH aircraft, to match his routes with the optimal size of aircraft. I see no reason why QF could not comfortably support a small fleet of 778s and 359LRs, especially if it also has 779s and other 350 models.

QF may operate one or the other but they wont operate both. During Qantas's transformation program over the past few years one thing that has come out of that is reduced fleet types and as a result they got rid of the 767's and 734's. Also remember that QF's international fleet is small compared to other carriers, around 37 aircraft. This includes

12 x A388
11 x 744
10 x A333
4 x A332 (the remaining 14 are on domestic, though extra aircraft from domestic are put on international when need)
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7349
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 3:21 am

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 20):
For the next 10 years it's pretty clear that the A380 & B789 are going to be the main types in the QF [international] fleet. Beyond that it seems unlikely that QF would want to increase frequency on the current A380 routes, there is just no reason to do so. So IMHO the only A380 replacements will be A380NEOs, unless there is a currently unforeseeable MAJOR change in traffic patterns. Also IMHO I can't see QF getting more into ULH with current and proposed aircraft designs.
So bottom line, I don't see the B77X or A350 in QF service before 2025. After that? Who knows!

The gap in capacity between the 789 and A380 is pretty big. That said, I have a feeling QF can work out a deal with Airbus to convert some, if not all, of their outstanding A380s to A350s (LR or not).

Right now for widebodies, they have A330s, 747s, and A380s, and recently retired the 767. The 747 is clearly next on the chopping block. That leaves the A330 and A380. Take the 789 to replace the A330, A350-900/1000 in between, and A380 on the high end.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5092
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 3:58 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 22):
That leaves the A330 and A380. Take the 789 to replace the A330, A350-900/1000 in between, and A380 on the high end.

You could be right BUT the gap between the B789 and A380 is no bigger than the gap between the B744 & B763 so I don't see the gap that as a reason to assume a third type is needed. There could be reasons to close the gap, but we don't know what they are or if they even exist for QF.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7349
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 4:38 am

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 23):
You could be right BUT the gap between the B789 and A380 is no bigger than the gap between the B744 & B763 so I don't see the gap that as a reason to assume a third type is needed. There could be reasons to close the gap, but we don't know what they are or if they even exist for QF.

I'm not arguing to be negative, I'm arguing to learn. Just throwing that out there by the way, not trying to say you're being negative, I just don't want you to get the wrong idea from what I'm saying.

That said; the A330 came into that 767 and 747 gap. Also, the 767 was used to Oz t-con and regional routes, something we are starting to see the A330 move into on the high end of the demand spectrum, and JQ for the low end. Eventually QF *can* use the 789 in the same regard as the A330 on regional and medium haul, and even long haul to utilize the plane better, but I have a feeling they will use it for long haul and even ULH if it can work in the later regard. The 78J would be better for the regional routes the A330 is on, but the capacity would be too great to be an effective replacement.

Any way, going to the topic of the 789 and A380 gap, the A350 would be a great fit, especially if they go for the LR. That would allow them to effectively reach the eastern US (ORD, JFK, and MIA come to my mind in the order of most to least likely), and establish new routes where the A380 is too big and the 789 is too small, especially in cargo. I keep saying A350 instead of 777 because it will be easier for QF to acquire and integrate to their fleet. I can see new routes such as JNB flying an ETOPS compliant route, maybe CPT, SEA, ORD, JFK, LIM; and LHR, FRA, and CDG from the Australian continent be it from PER or SYD; well as adding frequencies from BNE, MEL, and perhaps even PER and ADE to the US.

For simplicity's sake, lets say QF takes 4 of their 8 outstanding A380s. With all of the improvements Airbus has made to the 380, those planes have to be able to make at least LHR from PER (DXB-AKL is 8824mi, and PER-LHR is 9009mi), then there's also FRA, CDG, both about the same length as DXB-AKL. I don't always believe in the notion of "if you build it, they will come" but if executed correctly, QF can make an effective European scissors hub in PER to link up to the rest of the country, reducing the need for EK, but can still utilize EK for secondary and tertiary European cities as well as Asia minor and Africa. If that doesn't work out, they can just retire their oldest 380s and keep that fleet the same, then convert the remaining outstanding 380s to 350s, and even order more if they need. A380s for trunk routes, A350s for thick longhaul, and 789s for medium and ULH. That doesn't seem like a bad combo to me.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15291
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:14 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 19):
With the A359LR, we're looking at a restart of SIN-LAX/JFK.

Singapore is expected to use the A350 for SIN-JFK, and Philippines for MNL-JFK, it does not seem that unreasonable for QF to look at SYD-JFK which is only 40 minutes longer than SIN-JFK. There is a lot of growth available in the A350-900 now they have got the number for the -1000.

I would see SYD-PER-LHR also as being very viable. The A350 could carry 40t of domestic freight SYD-PER and full international passenger load and the unload domestic freight whilst refueling then direct to LHR. The dogleg is only 50 minutes longer than the great circle SYD-LHR direct.

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 23):
no bigger than the gap between the B744 & B763

Which they have had the 747 classic, A330, and in the future 789 to sit in. Qantas should be looking more to it major trading partners in Asia than the USA and London. That is where the future growth is.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:20 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
Qantas should be looking more to it major trading partners in Asia than the USA and London. That is where the future growth is.

  So true and so unknown / misunderstood by a lot ofr basically uninformed A.netters !
Contrail designer
 
Razza74
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:17 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:24 am

PER will only work if there is terminal consolidation as the current setup is too onerous on fast passenger transfers

Razza74
Ahh the joy of living under a flightpath
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21896
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:51 am

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):

What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

*A lighter overall structure
*A relatively decreased capacity in payload in exchange for
*Reduced trip cost.

It's all about choosing the best airline for your market, not the biggest and beefiest just for its own sake.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15291
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 8:21 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 28):
*A lighter overall structure
*A relatively decreased capacity in payload in exchange for
*Reduced trip cost.

When talking ULH every extra kg carried costs a lot in additional fuel. You start entering an area of the range payload curve where careful consideration needs to be made.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21896
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 8:25 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 29):

When talking ULH every extra kg carried costs a lot in additional fuel. You start entering an area of the range payload curve where careful consideration needs to be made.

Yes, and the A359LR will be lighter and probably burn less fuel than the 778. At the cost of less payload.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 6:53 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 7):
The current range of the 777lr is 17,600 km, were as the 777x8 is 16,112 km(projected) and the A350ULR is around 16,120km(projected)

The 778 should be more capable than the 77L while returning 15% better operating costs. STC has suggested SYD-ATH as viable with this aircraft. He calls it a 20 hour aircraft.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 8):
The CASM on these flights would be sky high, and therefore ticket prices would have to be very high as well just to break even. This means that there would have to be very high demand for these direct flights, with people willing to pay a premium over one-stop options.

I don't think its even a thought about breakeven. If they can do the route with a full passenger load then I don't doubt either route would be profitable. I really don't question that. What the airlines might question though is whether operating the route will take profitable high yield traffic away from existing routes that would suddenly make those routes significantly less profitable and negating the possible benefit.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 26):
So true and so unknown / misunderstood by a lot ofr basically uninformed A.netters !

And QF itself evidently.

tortugamon
 
klinit
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:18 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 8:49 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
I would see SYD-PER-LHR also as being very viable. The A350 could carry 40t of domestic freight SYD-PER and full international passenger load and the unload domestic freight whilst refueling then direct to LHR. The dogleg is only 50 minutes longer than the great circle SYD-LHR direct.

What's the benefit of PER over pretty much any other point between SYD and LHR?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 9:23 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
Qantas should be looking more to it major trading partners in Asia than the USA and London. That is where the future growth is.

Except that this thread is about ultra long range aircraft, and while Asia is incredibly important, that doesn't mean Qantas should ignore other markets, some of very long standing, and some of higher yield.

The UK and the US are the third and fourth largest source of visitor arrivals. New Zealand is first followed by China.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/961B6B53B87C130ACA2574030010BD05

But neither NZ nor China need ultra long range aircraft, so they wouldn't figure in this thread.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27311
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 9:25 pm

Quoting klinit (Reply 32):
What's the benefit of PER over pretty much any other point between SYD and LHR?

For QF they can use it as additional domestic passenger and freight feed between Southwestern and Southeastern Australia, as zeke noted up-thread.

[Edited 2016-06-05 14:31:16]
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Sun Jun 05, 2016 10:34 pm

Demand for East Coast - PER and v.v. capacity is heading back down at the moment, mind, as the mining boom cools off, and probably won't be going up again any time soon. To the extent that A332 utilisation on transcon flights has also been reduced in favour of using them purely in the east.

I can't speak for the utility of the extra freight uplift on SYD/MEL - PER sectors but I can say with some confidence it would be useless to domestic passengers unless it was vastly cheaper, because said passengers would have to undergo international security (domestic security is much less strict) as well as pass Immigration at departure and both Immigration and Customs at arrival.

Really the only major utility I could see for PER as the stop in a SYD-LHR journey would be for premium passengers, who could drink their way through the SYD-PER leg, disembark for the bare minimum time possible at PER, then load back on and sleep through PER-LHR leg.

... so I suppose the opposite direction would be best served by something like LHR-IST-SYD then :P
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20591
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Mon Jun 06, 2016 12:18 am

Quoting bobdino (Reply 15):
Personally, I would definitely pay extra to avoid having to wake up, pack up, get up, get off the plane, traipse through DXB, go through a heavily-crowded immigration desk, find the plane again, and reboard. Avoiding all that is worth money, and flying in J, I'd totally be looking for a non-stop if I could find it.

Even the short stop is worth avoiding. As others noted, one stop of QF or BA means fewer hours saved, thus a higher per hour price premium. That said, I think it will work, but only from SYD. Oh, perhaps rotate the spares through Melborne to open long thin routes that fill the premium cabin.

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
t does not seem that unreasonable for QF to look at SYD-JFK which is only 40 minutes longer than SIN-JFK. There is a lot of growth available in the A350-900 now they have got the number for the -1000.

You have a point there. With a little more MTOW growth will come more range. That wing has room to grow and the routes I envisioned

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 28):
Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):

What would the 359LR bring that the 778 could not?

*A lighter overall structure
*A relatively decreased capacity in payload in exchange for
*Reduced trip cost.

It's all about choosing the best airline for your market, not the biggest and beefiest just for its own sake.

It is a business case.

The 778 will cost more per flight but should have more range and more carrying capacity until extreme range. The A359LR will have the advantages DocLightning Noted above. The 778 will also have better takeoff performance. I cannot think of a city pair where shortfield would really be a limit, but...

At ISA+15C (see what is labeled page 3, which is pg 106 of 271--- I didn't label the pdf), the A359 is good to 4,000ft barometric altitude. Now the shift does show the A359 is sensitive to temperature. So the A359LR will have it tough on a hot day. So QF has a bit of analysis ahead of them. I cannot say which is the best choice for QF.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5649
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Mon Jun 06, 2016 1:06 am

Quoting Armodeen (Reply 9):
Seriously! If the 77L is not deemed to have the legs for SYD - LHR, then I don't see how either of the new generation will be able to do it?

Was it that it did not have the legs or it would not be economically viable? The stated range of the 77L is 17,600 km; the distance is 17,016 km. Theoretically it should be able to do it nonstop one way; against the wind it would almost certainly would have to stop for fuel. Both the 778 and the A350LR have less range, but more than 17,016 km. But I do not think any airline is going to cut things that close.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
jfk777
Posts: 7388
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 12:22 am

Qantas A380 fleet are probably their last four engine airplanes. Other then LAX and LHR they are not needed. LAX doesn't have slots issues and smaller planes with more frequency could be the future. DFW will get more nonstop from other Aussie cities. ORD, MIA and JFK could be flown nonstop by a 777-9 or A350 ULR. QF flight to London could be more efficiently flown by a 777-9, Qantas has four LHR slots but only uses 2 these days and leases two to BA.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 12:49 am

The good news is about this subject being raised in the media, is QANTAS must be getting pretty close to making a decision.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 5092
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 2:14 am

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 38):
with more frequency could be the future

Why would they want to add more frequency at a higher cost?

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 38):
DFW will get more nonstop from other Aussie cities. ORD, MIA and JFK could be flown nonstop by a 777-9 or A350 ULR

MEL/BNE-DFW are possibilities, they rest are HIGHLY doubt due to lack of market. They can be better served via DFW, which is why it exists.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 38):
QF flight to London could be more efficiently flown by a 777-9,

How do you know? IMHO the B779 etc are too small for SYD/MEL-LHR, which means you would need to increase frequencies, at extra cost, why do that? Extra frequencies offer little to no advantage to North America, to Europe they are outright waste.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7349
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 2:37 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 39):
The good news is about this subject being raised in the media, is QANTAS must be getting pretty close to making a decision.

Not to burst your bubble, but the same has been going on about TK's "impending" order for A380s or 748i's.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13348
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:01 am

Quoting speedbored (Reply 16):
I see no reason why QF could not comfortably support a small fleet of 778s and 359LRs

Wouldn't be surprised to see 778s for heavy duty USA lifting, and A359ULR with very limited seats for LHR nonstop.


Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
Singapore is expected to use the A350 for SIN-JFK

NYC, but SQ has made no indication of sending them to Kennedy AFAIK.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:27 am

When looking at which ULH aircraft they'll select, QF will also be weighing up which has a best fit for their total fleet.

I think they have a need for some flexibility in the (total) order that this ULR consideration is a part of. IMHO QF will select one aeroplane with a variety of models that can serve the airline's various longhaul in a size between the 789 and A380.

I think the A350-900ULR has the best shot at it because QF also have a need for the A350-1000 and probably the mooted A350-1200 too. I think the 778 and 779 will be too heavy and too large respectively while not providing enough fleet flexibility. Also, the more cramped Y-class in ULR missions.

I think the 787-10 is a good candidate for regional routes too.

So I think QF may end up without the Triple-7 again.
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13348
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 4:45 am

Quoting Motorhussy (Reply 43):
Also, the more cramped Y-class in ULR missions.

If nothing else, that's a flexibility advantage to the airline, not the other way around.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 8:42 am

I don't think QF will get both types, personally I think the 778/779 has a pretty good chance of ULH and LAX/LHR while the A350 could be useful for converting the current A380 orders.

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 40):

More frequencies to the US via DFW and also Maybe AA to MEL/BNE.

QF have more LHR slots and could also use DXB more to feed into EK more.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8468
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 9:36 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 33):

Note that Zeke said "growth", and he certainly isn't wrong. That is why I expect that the 787-10 will be ordered along side any potential ULH order. With an average stage length of 8-10 hours from Sydney to Asia the 78J is virtually custom made for Qantas!
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15291
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:24 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 30):
Yes, and the A359LR will be lighter and probably burn less fuel than the 778. At the cost of less payload.

You will need to see the far right side of the payload range curve of each aircraft to make that assessment. We are talking about a region where the aircraft would be fuel volume limited.

Quoting klinit (Reply 32):

What's the benefit of PER over pretty much any other point between SYD and LHR?

In pax transfer requirements.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
mafaky
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:04 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 5:44 pm

Can any of you guys analyse the viability of Istanbul (Turkey) to Sydney or Melbourne nonstop flights, assuming a 2-class full payload, using a359ULR?
A veteran Electronics & Communications Engineer from Istanbul-Turkey, highly interested in civil and military aviation.
 
klinit
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:18 am

RE: Qantas Considering A350-900LR Or 777-8

Tue Jun 07, 2016 9:08 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 47):
In pax transfer requirements.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 34):

For QF they can use it as additional domestic passenger and freight feed between Southwestern and Southeastern Australia, as zeke noted up-thread.

It's still a stop, just one of the sectors becomes a lot longer (and therefore costly). And I'm not entirely convinced a Perth stop would be any more convenient than SIN, HKG or DXB ... PER-LHR passengers would gain, but somebody from the East Coast really wins nothing.

Regarding domestic freight and passengers - if the demand is there for extra capacity surely you don't need to wait until you have an aircraft that can fly PER-LHR nonstop to add an extra SYD-PER frequency.

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