User avatar
Byron1976
Topic Author
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:52 pm

IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:23 am

This is my first thread and with a good question. IF QF ordered the 748i, does they would be in a more confortable position without the need to fill the seats that nowadays they have with the A380? Do they would be "forced" to negotiate and share with EK the DBX hub to fly to europe?
Edit for spelling.
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 619
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:08 am

Your question equates the cause of the venture with EK being QF's decision to order the A380. That is, frankly, preposterous.

QF have stated many times that they were, and continue to be, happy with the A380.

The rationale for QF joining forces with EK is complex and is tied up with changes in market forces, delays in the 787 programme (which impacted QF badly), economic circumstances, etc etc.

To view QF's A380 investment as the cause of the EK venture is folly indeed.
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
User avatar
vhqpa
Posts: 1283
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:10 am

For Qantas the A380 works well for LAX/LHR, but as a result of the EK JV they they no longer need any more A380s which is why they have deferred their outstanding orders. As much as I love the old queen and will miss the 74' when it leaces the fleet. Ifeel QF would be worse off had it ordered the 747-8i.

They would be much better off waiting for the next gen large widebody (ie. A350XWB/777X) possibly as a 744ER or even A380 replacement. Which have the flexibility of coming in a variety of sizes vs single size 747 or A380. Keeping in mind Qantas is a relatively small airline at huge disadvantage as far as geographic location they can't have too many fleet types.

AJ has acknowledged in hindsight they would've better off had previous management ordered a smaller widebody (ie 777) rather than more 747s along with the Airbus order twenty years ago (*1).

As far as the EK tie up goes I don't necessarily think it was a bad idea or could have been avoided by an alternative fleet. The Kangaroo route has always been very competitive even before the ME3 arrived on the scene. EK allowed them access into a number of European and African ports without using their metal or even not accessible due to bilaterals. (The main reason why QF pulled out of CDG with their own metal was France wouldn't give them more than three weekly frequencies). The EK JV has also effectively eliminated what would otherwise be a fierce competitor.


*1 - http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/03/no-time-machine-to-change-qantas-fleet-order-joyce/
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
 
TN486
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:08 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:09 am

I suggest, for some entertainment, you click on the above referenced link in #3 above then peruse the readers comments at the bottom of the article. Some great armchair CEO's (not!!).
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
 
airbazar
Posts: 7747
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:04 am

You're assuming that QF has had a hard time filling their A380's. I have never heard of such a thing.
 
User avatar
Byron1976
Topic Author
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:52 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:37 pm

airbazar wrote:
You're assuming that QF has had a hard time filling their A380's. I have never heard of such a thing.

No, I never said that. I said that's easier to fill a 748 than a A380. Both airplanes are intended to do the same missions, and would be a simpler task to make the 748 work on the QF structure.
 
travelhound
Posts: 1453
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 1:41 pm

I suspect QF would have been financially better off with the 748i because it would have entered the QF fleet more seamlessly.

Where the A380 required substantial sums of money for new support facilities the 748i would have simply utilised existing facilities used for the extensive 744 fleet.

In stating this the timing would have been all wrong. In stating that this could have resulted in orders for the 777-300ER.
 
NichCage
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 2:22 pm

How profitable was the SIN hub for European flights? If I am correct, they flew MEL/SYD-SIN-LHR/FRA. I think they even flew from HKG and BKK to LHR.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 2:38 pm

Byron1976 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
You're assuming that QF has had a hard time filling their A380's. I have never heard of such a thing.

No, I never said that. I said that's easier to fill a 748 than a A380. Both airplanes are intended to do the same missions, and would be a simpler task to make the 748 work on the QF structure.


You seem to be assuming that there's some direct causal connection between ordering a too-large aircraft (the A380) and the Emirates agreement but provide pretty much nothing except blind speculation in support of that theory. Under your logic, maybe they shouldn't have ordered VLAs at all and just gone for the large-twin model like CX. But the reality is, the A380 seems to work pretty well for QF on some of their routes, especially trans-Pacific, where the capacity/CASM advantage does help them in a segment that's faced increased competition recently.
 
User avatar
Byron1976
Topic Author
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:52 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:03 pm

IADCA wrote:
Under your logic, maybe they shouldn't have ordered VLAs at all and just gone for the large-twin model like CX. But the reality is, the A380 seems to work pretty well for QF on some of their routes, especially trans-Pacific, where the capacity/CASM advantage does help them in a segment that's faced increased competition recently.


Is not my point. I see the 748 better suited and a natural upgrade for the 744 fleet that they had. As you said, the A380 works fine on SOME of their routes, when the 748 may offer better flexibility and I guess some advantages in cargo ops.
 
TC957
Posts: 2461
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:11 pm

I reckon Boeing should cut QF a too-good-to-refuse deal on 15 or so 748i's to replace the rest of the 744 fleet.
Should be ideal for the growing Chinese routes, and trans-pac to S America without ETOPS worries.
Yes, I know they have loads of 789's coming but they can be used to open new routes whilst the 748i's can do the established routes now flown with 744's or A333's.
Air travel is growing and you can't grow an established route by switching a 744 with a smaller 789.
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:20 pm

vhtje wrote:
Your question equates the cause of the venture with EK being QF's decision to order the A380. That is, frankly, preposterous.

QF have stated many times that they were, and continue to be, happy with the A380.

The rationale for QF joining forces with EK is complex and is tied up with changes in market forces, delays in the 787 programme (which impacted QF badly), economic circumstances, etc etc.

To view QF's A380 investment as the cause of the EK venture is folly indeed.


While I agree QF's ownership of 380's was conditional to the JV with Emirates, the 748 could do the same routes just as well. I've done DFW-SYD twice and there seemed ample empty seats on all 4 sectors. The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying. I would make the comment here they should order 778/779 but that seems to incite insultive dialogue. :white:
 
qf002
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:07 pm

TransGlobalGold wrote:
The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying.


But if an A380 is too much plane then a 748i likely would be as well. There is merit in an A380 vs 77W debate because they represent two quite different strategies but once you've chosen to go down the VLA route you might as well commit to that strategy and go for the largest aircraft available.

Frankly, it's remarkable that a relatively small, non-hub carrier like QF has anything in the 400+ seat bracket in the first place. They are often compared with the big Asian/ME carriers but really their network structure more closely resembles the US3 which for a long time resisted buying anything larger than the 772/A333. Had things played out a little differently (ie had economic turmoil had arrived a couple of years earlier or the A380 a couple of years later) I daresay we would have seen QF abandon the A380 altogether and invest in the more risk-averse strategy that 90% of their competitors have gone for.

Anyway...to return to the original question, QF's European network was already rotten long, long before the A380s arrived. The only way they could have maintained their 1990s presence is with a major overhaul - costs slashed, 77Es for everything except LHR and an earlier focus on the SIN hub. Basically what they've done in the last 5-7 years but a decade earlier.
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:14 pm

qf002 wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying.


But if an A380 is too much plane then a 748i likely would be as well. There is merit in an A380 vs 77W debate because they represent two quite different strategies but once you've chosen to go down the VLA route you might as well commit to that strategy and go for the largest aircraft available.

Frankly, it's remarkable that a relatively small, non-hub carrier like QF has anything in the 400+ seat bracket in the first place. They are often compared with the big Asian/ME carriers but really their network structure more closely resembles the US3 which for a long time resisted buying anything larger than the 772/A333. Had things played out a little differently (ie had economic turmoil had arrived a couple of years earlier or the A380 a couple of years later) I daresay we would have seen QF abandon the A380 altogether and invest in the more risk-averse strategy that 90% of their competitors have gone for.

Anyway...to return to the original question, QF's European network was already rotten long, long before the A380s arrived. The only way they could have maintained their 1990s presence is with a major overhaul - costs slashed, 77Es for everything except LHR and an earlier focus on the SIN hub. Basically what they've done in the last 5-7 years but a decade earlier.


I would assume the 748 would have 50-75 fewer seats depending on configuration. I do agree they should have gone 772/3, but obviously they felt it wasn't prudent. It is indeed problematic when one round trip from Australia to London consumes three airframes. The 380's will go at some point, it'll be interesting to see what takes their place.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4556
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 10:30 pm

TransGlobalGold wrote:
While I agree QF's ownership of 380's was conditional to the JV with Emirates,:

Could you please explain what this statement means? It makes no sense as is. Are you saying QF ordered the A380 to go into the EK JV? Or are you saying the A380 order forced them into the JV or what?

Gemuser
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:52 pm

Gemuser wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
While I agree QF's ownership of 380's was conditional to the JV with Emirates,:

Could you please explain what this statement means? It makes no sense as is. Are you saying QF ordered the A380 to go into the EK JV? Or are you saying the A380 order forced them into the JV or what?

Gemuser


Accidental omittance of the word "not" between 'was conditional'. Nothing else.
 
kimshep
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 3:13 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sat Mar 18, 2017 1:53 am

TransGlobalGold wrote:
[i]I've done DFW-SYD twice and there seemed ample empty seats on all 4 sectors. The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying[/i].


A little bit of network route knowledge helps. SYD-DFW-BNE-SYD was flown by the B747-438ER before the A380-800 was placed on the route. In the case of the B747-438ER, the range (on the return sector) exceeded the aircraft's capability, which is why it was routed on a shorter DFW-BNE sector (and then onwards to -SYD). Flying west from DFW to Australia entails flying into trans-pacific easterly winds which at certain times of the year are quite strong.

Using the A380-800 allowed QF to service DFW-SYD non-stop and eliminate the BNE stop. Both aircraft (B747-438ER and A380-800) flying this route are at the extremes of their performance, although the A380-800 does allow non-stop service.

That said, and given that the route is the 3rd longest non-stop in operation worldwide, it is also relevant for you to understand that the DFW-SYD route requires the blocking of in excess of 100 seats on the return journey. This was true on the B747-438ER and remains true on the A380-800. It has nothing to do with QF being unable to fill seats as is suggested by your comment "but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying." Further, it is of note that SYD-DFW-SYD is QF's most profitable route. Not bad for a company that had a $1.5B profit in 2015 and an $900M profit in 2016.

Another point:
Please remember that as one of the initial launch customers for the A380-800, QF received extraordinary pricing for its frames (think sub $150M) and also delayed delivery compensation. The B747-8i was not even an option, at the time of QF's order. For QF to order B747-8i's, the pricing would also be extraordinary - but in the wrong direction (list price of USD$400M and then apply industry discount).
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:37 pm

kimshep wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
[i]I've done DFW-SYD twice and there seemed ample empty seats on all 4 sectors. The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying[/i].


A little bit of network route knowledge helps. SYD-DFW-BNE-SYD was flown by the B747-438ER before the A380-800 was placed on the route. In the case of the B747-438ER, the range (on the return sector) exceeded the aircraft's capability, which is why it was routed on a shorter DFW-BNE sector (and then onwards to -SYD). Flying west from DFW to Australia entails flying into trans-pacific easterly winds which at certain times of the year are quite strong.

Using the A380-800 allowed QF to service DFW-SYD non-stop and eliminate the BNE stop. Both aircraft (B747-438ER and A380-800) flying this route are at the extremes of their performance, although the A380-800 does allow non-stop service.

That said, and given that the route is the 3rd longest non-stop in operation worldwide, it is also relevant for you to understand that the DFW-SYD route requires the blocking of in excess of 100 seats on the return journey. This was true on the B747-438ER and remains true on the A380-800. It has nothing to do with QF being unable to fill seats as is suggested by your comment "but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying." Further, it is of note that SYD-DFW-SYD is QF's most profitable route. Not bad for a company that had a $1.5B profit in 2015 and an $900M profit in 2016.

Another point:
Please remember that as one of the initial launch customers for the A380-800, QF received extraordinary pricing for its frames (think sub $150M) and also delayed delivery compensation. The B747-8i was not even an option, at the time of QF's order. For QF to order B747-8i's, the pricing would also be extraordinary - but in the wrong direction (list price of USD$400M and then apply industry discount).


Guess what? You typed all that for nothing. I know quite a bit about airlines, and DFW in particular. There's a reason why QF isn't going to take their last 8 frames. No, they won't buy the 748i. They likely will look at the 787-10 of 350-1000 as their regional widebodies, and longer term replacements for the 380's. Sooner or later they will need an airplane that will do SYD/MEL-LHR and right now they don't have anything to fly it with, which is why they are going to do the first n/s from PER.
 
DL757NYC
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:07 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:44 pm

If I were Boeing I would use a few frames as demos let airlines use it for let's say 3-6 months and see the how well the 748 works in the fleet.
 
ausworld
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 3:20 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 12:01 am

Qantas sources having indicated for a long time that they are not interested in B747-8I
 
kimshep
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 3:13 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:46 am

TransGlobalGold wrote:
Guess what? You typed all that for nothing. I know quite a bit about airlines, and DFW in particular.

With you having joined airliners.net a month ago, I have no idea how much you know or don't know. I replied to your post to correct some inaccuracies in your comments. I hope you learnt something from that. If not, so be it. I don't consider my time replying as 'wasted'.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
There's a reason why QF isn't going to take their last 8 frames.

There are many reasons why QF may - or may not - take their last 8 A380-800 frames. These include reasons such as CAPEX, substantial changes in route network since the A380-800 was ordered, strategic co-operation and agreements, changing travel demand, a variable economic cycle - and future fleet plans. For someone that is knowledgeable - as you've assured us - I would avoid speculation that "QF isn't going to take their last 8 frames." That is a definitive speculative remark which may - or may not - be true ... or indeed, false. QF has NOT cancelled any of its A380-800 orders. It has simply deferred them.

In any case, this issue was not part of the point I replied to.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
No, they won't buy the 748i.

Then why speculate on why they should? See my 'Additional Point' paragraph above.

The six remaining B747-400ER's are far too young to consider replacement at this stage, in any case. As a seasoned 'knowledgeable' poster, I am sure that you are aware of QF being burdened by the Australian Government's far more restrictive depreciation allowance policy, which does not allow the write-off of capital assets as quickly as most of it's competitors. When the time comes for the re-ordering / replacement of the B747-400ER's, one would have to ask if Boeing's B747-8i program will even be in existence.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
They likely will look at the 787-10 of 350-1000 as their regional widebodies, and longer term replacements for the 380's.

Thank you for your wisdom. 'Regional' in QF parlance equates to Australia-SE Asia routes generally, and QF also has a 'flexibility' desire which commonly often sees wide body 'regional' swapped in and out of Australian domestic <-> 'regional' international. QF has shown 'interest' in the B787-9, 10 and 10LR in the past, along with the A350-900 and 1000. What makes you so sure that they will limit their choice to only 2 specific models? Perhaps the A350-1100 may figure, or even more A330 family within the guise of (CEO, NEO etc) which are currently used to much of Asia? Longer term replacement of the ULH A380-800 fleet will happen at some stage - but not anywhere in the immediate future.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
Sooner or later they will need an airplane that will do SYD/MEL-LHR

That 'need' has existed for years. It is not just limited to LHR. Think JFK and/or MIA nonstop as well. However, QF seeks to avoid small sub-fleets so an ultra long-haul craft such as the highly expensive B777-8LR might be suitable or desirable for a SYD-LHR or SYD-JFK flight, but would be financial overkill for the rest of their network.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
and right now they don't have anything to fly it with,

Neither does anyone else - either competitor or supplier (Boeing / Airbus). Bear in mind that QF's agreement with EK is set to expire within the next 12 months. A lot depends on whether the Australian Government chooses to allow QF/EK to renew it for another 5 years - or whether even if the parties wish to renegotiate or renew it. The question of 'overflight' of DXB / DWC and / or non-stop flights to wider Europe / LHR might then assume far greater importance to QF in these scenarios, as a competitive response.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
which is why they are going to do the first n/s from PER.

... using a low capacity, high Premium yield B787-9. The same non-stop logic will not work from the Australian East Coast (SYD/MEL/BNE) using this frame type.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
I've done DFW-SYD twice and there seemed ample empty seats on all 4 sectors.

I do it on average, 4 times per year (return). Beware of casual observations. The route has seasonal variations (opposing Northern and Southern hemisphere) similar to North / South America and Africa.) Have a look at GDG9's posts on DFW International carriers. For Jan 2017, QF had an average load factor of 92% on SYD-DFW-SYD, which bolsters AJ's remark that this is their most profitable route - despite the seat blocking factor on the return leg. 4 class service (F,J,Y+ & Y) works a treat on the A380-800 for QF for yield. FF redemption for seats / upgrades on this route is highly problematic

TransGlobalGold wrote:
The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying.

Not sure what the relevance of the last part of that quote is meant to mean. (Efficient) airlines match fleet capacity with yield, demand, operating cost and profit. QF's loads and yields on the A380-800 on the routes it operates (LHR, LAX & DFW) are highly satisfactory - and QF is smart enough to roster the A380-800 to HKG on a seasonal basis ie: Christmas, Chinese New Year etc, only when demand requires it. A lot of QF's A380-800 competitors don't have that flexibility. If you doubt that, talk to MH, TG, AF etc. The only other 'flexible' competitor has been EK, which BTW, serves DFW on a seasonal DXB-DFW-DXB basis.
 
tmu101
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:04 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:24 am

I'd be in Seventh Heaven if QF purchased or leased the 748! :cloudnine:
 
qf002
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:04 am

kimshep wrote:
AJ's remark that this is their most profitable route


Um, what? I would be very interested to see a source for that claim.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5454
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:57 am

qf002 wrote:
kimshep wrote:
AJ's remark that this is their most profitable route


Um, what? I would be very interested to see a source for that claim.


I've seen that float around lately on here about DFW more than once but with no freight and 130 odd seats blocked ex DFW usually it seems hard to believe that it could be the most profitable route, surely something like SYD-LAX or even MEL-LAX?!

This is another thread as to why QF didn't order xxx??? The decision at the Time was probably the right one with the A380 for trunk routes to LAX/LHR ex SYD/MEL and the 744ER was available pretty quickly for MEL-LAX back then, AKL-DFW was planned with it to! While the 77W didn't enter service until 2004 and wasn't expected to be anywhere near as capable as it has turned into, the A330's were added at a bargain for ordering A380's and are an excellent aircraft for QF to Asia.

I personally believe QF should have added 777's around a similar time to replace the 747 classics 743's included several years before they eventually retired, by then UA had used the 77E on AKL-LAX and QF could have used a 77E fleet on routes like BNE-LAX, SYD-SFO, SYD-YVR, AKL-LAX initially. Maybe to many fleet types with the 763 in there? Then the 77W would have been a good replacement for the early 744's from 2010 or so.
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:36 pm

kimshep wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
Guess what? You typed all that for nothing. I know quite a bit about airlines, and DFW in particular.

With you having joined airliners.net a month ago, I have no idea how much you know or don't know. I replied to your post to correct some inaccuracies in your comments. I hope you learnt something from that. If not, so be it. I don't consider my time replying as 'wasted'.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
There's a reason why QF isn't going to take their last 8 frames.

There are many reasons why QF may - or may not - take their last 8 A380-800 frames. These include reasons such as CAPEX, substantial changes in route network since the A380-800 was ordered, strategic co-operation and agreements, changing travel demand, a variable economic cycle - and future fleet plans. For someone that is knowledgeable - as you've assured us - I would avoid speculation that "QF isn't going to take their last 8 frames." That is a definitive speculative remark which may - or may not - be true ... or indeed, false. QF has NOT cancelled any of its A380-800 orders. It has simply deferred them.

In any case, this issue was not part of the point I replied to.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
No, they won't buy the 748i.

Then why speculate on why they should? See my 'Additional Point' paragraph above.

The six remaining B747-400ER's are far too young to consider replacement at this stage, in any case. As a seasoned 'knowledgeable' poster, I am sure that you are aware of QF being burdened by the Australian Government's far more restrictive depreciation allowance policy, which does not allow the write-off of capital assets as quickly as most of it's competitors. When the time comes for the re-ordering / replacement of the B747-400ER's, one would have to ask if Boeing's B747-8i program will even be in existence.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
They likely will look at the 787-10 of 350-1000 as their regional widebodies, and longer term replacements for the 380's.

Thank you for your wisdom. 'Regional' in QF parlance equates to Australia-SE Asia routes generally, and QF also has a 'flexibility' desire which commonly often sees wide body 'regional' swapped in and out of Australian domestic <-> 'regional' international. QF has shown 'interest' in the B787-9, 10 and 10LR in the past, along with the A350-900 and 1000. What makes you so sure that they will limit their choice to only 2 specific models? Perhaps the A350-1100 may figure, or even more A330 family within the guise of (CEO, NEO etc) which are currently used to much of Asia? Longer term replacement of the ULH A380-800 fleet will happen at some stage - but not anywhere in the immediate future.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
Sooner or later they will need an airplane that will do SYD/MEL-LHR

That 'need' has existed for years. It is not just limited to LHR. Think JFK and/or MIA nonstop as well. However, QF seeks to avoid small sub-fleets so an ultra long-haul craft such as the highly expensive B777-8LR might be suitable or desirable for a SYD-LHR or SYD-JFK flight, but would be financial overkill for the rest of their network.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
and right now they don't have anything to fly it with,

Neither does anyone else - either competitor or supplier (Boeing / Airbus). Bear in mind that QF's agreement with EK is set to expire within the next 12 months. A lot depends on whether the Australian Government chooses to allow QF/EK to renew it for another 5 years - or whether even if the parties wish to renegotiate or renew it. The question of 'overflight' of DXB / DWC and / or non-stop flights to wider Europe / LHR might then assume far greater importance to QF in these scenarios, as a competitive response.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
which is why they are going to do the first n/s from PER.

... using a low capacity, high Premium yield B787-9. The same non-stop logic will not work from the Australian East Coast (SYD/MEL/BNE) using this frame type.

TransGlobalGold wrote:
I've done DFW-SYD twice and there seemed ample empty seats on all 4 sectors.

I do it on average, 4 times per year (return). Beware of casual observations. The route has seasonal variations (opposing Northern and Southern hemisphere) similar to North / South America and Africa.) Have a look at GDG9's posts on DFW International carriers. For Jan 2017, QF had an average load factor of 92% on SYD-DFW-SYD, which bolsters AJ's remark that this is their most profitable route - despite the seat blocking factor on the return leg. 4 class service (F,J,Y+ & Y) works a treat on the A380-800 for QF for yield. FF redemption for seats / upgrades on this route is highly problematic

TransGlobalGold wrote:
The fact they aren't going to take delivery of the last 8 380's probably has lots of factors, but one for sure is it's too much airplane for any other route it's currently flying.

Not sure what the relevance of the last part of that quote is meant to mean. (Efficient) airlines match fleet capacity with yield, demand, operating cost and profit. QF's loads and yields on the A380-800 on the routes it operates (LHR, LAX & DFW) are highly satisfactory - and QF is smart enough to roster the A380-800 to HKG on a seasonal basis ie: Christmas, Chinese New Year etc, only when demand requires it. A lot of QF's A380-800 competitors don't have that flexibility. If you doubt that, talk to MH, TG, AF etc. The only other 'flexible' competitor has been EK, which BTW, serves DFW on a seasonal DXB-DFW-DXB basis.


I've been reading this board for years. I chose not become a member until recently when really absurd topics kept popping up. It doesn't mean I am not well versed and knowledgeable of the industry having been it for 30 years. 25 of those in Dallas, So I am well aware of QF and their ops at DFW, and seven visits to SYD, two from DFW on both 744 and 380 have given me a decent knowledge of them. Oh having a brother in law working for them in SYD kinda helps too. . You need not school me on airlines, I know quite a bit more that you assume, and nothing I said was incorrect. Bye now.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 2923
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:39 pm

QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:49 pm

b747400erf wrote:
QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.


Someone forgot to tell Tim Clark this. Then again he's the only one keeping the A380 alive.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 2923
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:35 pm

TransGlobalGold wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.


Someone forgot to tell Tim Clark this. Then again he's the only one keeping the A380 alive.

Emirates was the exception to the rule. And they are struggling for profits now the cheap oil and unlimited funding from their governments are over.
 
qf002
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:36 pm

b747400erf wrote:
QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.


788s would never have worked well for QF. Not capable enough for long-haul and just an expensive duplication of their existing A332s in the now very flexible domestic/regional fleet. The current arrangement works very well IMO.

As for the 789s, they should have been here years ago but QF had to sort themselves out first. There was no point bringing in new aircraft unless it was under a brand new cost structure which actually made it a profitable endeavour.
 
TransGlobalGold
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:40 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:47 pm

b747400erf wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.


Someone forgot to tell Tim Clark this. Then again he's the only one keeping the A380 alive.

Emirates was the exception to the rule. And they are struggling for profits now the cheap oil and unlimited funding from their governments are over.


I should have posted a sarcasm emoji. Given the EK issues, I'd be shocked of they take all 140 Whalebuses. IMO, it's always been a niche aircraft, and there are only so many niche routes it can serve (DXB to London for instance).
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18839
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:13 pm

TransGlobalGold wrote:
I should have posted a sarcasm emoji. Given the EK issues, I'd be shocked of they take all 140 Whalebuses. IMO, it's always been a niche aircraft, and there are only so many niche routes it can serve (DXB to London for instance).


What's the problem with a niche aircraft? It's clearly a very much bigger niche than that occupied by the 748i - LOL.

Threads like this amaze me. The 748i its a commercial dog which was only built to try and kick Airbus in the nuts. Why would anyone wish it on Qantas?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Ryanair01
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:27 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:38 am

Going back to the question about QF/EK. In truth the decline of QF to Europe went on for years, from serving Athen, Rome, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Manchester, Belgrade and London in the 1980s, to Rome, Paris, Frankfurt and London by the 1990s and then Frankfurt and London pre EK. The 748 couldn't have reversed that long term trend. Ultimately QF (and BA for that matter) have seen the Kangaroo Route's importance dwindle for decades in the face of ever expanding competition, initially from the likes of SQ, TG, MH and CX - now supplemented by the ME3.

On the Kangaroo Route BA seem to have found a sweet spot with their premium heavy 777-300ER (14/56/44/185) and codeshare with CX for non Sydney traffic. I do ponder if similarly QF's premium heavy 787-9 (42/28/166) could prove to be a mid term Kangaroo Route solution, supplemented by EK codeshare for non London traffic.

It is sad to see the 748 be such a commercial failure, what a disappointing end to the 747 dynasty.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 1204
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:05 am

b747400erf wrote:
TransGlobalGold wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
QF should have ordered the 787's for themselves rather than passing them to Jetstar. Big mistake. 4 engine airplanes are for military and freighters.


Someone forgot to tell Tim Clark this. Then again he's the only one keeping the A380 alive.

Emirates was the exception to the rule. And they are struggling for profits now the cheap oil and unlimited funding from their governments are over.

Only politicians believe that repeating the same untruths over and over makes them the truth.

Emirates does not get cheap oil. Never did, never will do. Dubai is NOT an oil producer in any volume. They pay commercial rates at Dubai and the going rates at the other end of the flight where they fuel up for return.

EK also finance their aircraft commercially. They lease from people like ILFC-AerCap and GECAS, take out bonds and other financial instruments. Emirates also use Islamic financing methods for some purchases.

Basically what you posted is rubbish and has been debunked so often it's becoming silly.
 
DaufuskieGuy
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:15 am

does the dfw syd flight really go out with 100 blocked seats and no cargo? would the 778 perform better?
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4556
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:41 am

DaufuskieGuy wrote:
does the dfw syd flight really go out with 100 blocked seats and no cargo? would the 778 perform better?

Yes, or thereabouts depending on condition.
No, there is no such aircraft & won't be for 5-7 years and even if it did QF would not necessarily buy it because they don't run specialised sub fleets unless there is a very, very good reason for it, which SYD-DFW is probably not.

Gemuser
 
qf002
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:46 am

DaufuskieGuy wrote:
does the dfw syd flight really go out with 100 blocked seats and no cargo? would the 778 perform better?


When the winds are at their worst they go out with as few as 320-330 seats available.

They don't even need 778s for DFW, a 235-seat 789 should make the route easily with a full passenger load and some payload left over for a bit of cargo.
 
DaufuskieGuy
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:34 pm

how can the flight be profitable with that many seats blocked? The operating costs for a 2/3 full 380 are enormous. They must have a high % of paid J and F?
 
incitatus
Posts: 2918
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:09 pm

This thread has a number of conclusions I do not agree with.

First, the alliance with Emirates: Maybe the Qantas flights to Dubai and London are doing amazingly well financially. But the reality is that QF is the underling in the relationship. We are a full four years into this alliance and QF has not added a single drop of capacity to Europe and the Middle East. One would think the power of distributing passengers in Dubai would do wonders for Qantas, but we have not seen it reflected in its network. Sad!

Second, EK has done well after the alliance with QF. It has steadily added capacity to Australia and NZ, mostly with bigger aircraft but also more flights. EK seems to have done well twice out of this deal: It flies QF passengers beyond Dubai and it gained market share in Australia. Terrible deal for QF!

Third, 748... really? The Qantas international network is AMAZINGLY small in number of flights. QF suffers from a fleet that is made of too large aircraft. Too large aircraft has led to small Qantas presence in key markets like LHR and absence of other important markets like FRA and CDG. If QF wants to compete with foreign carriers, it needs the 789s that are coming plus 777-8s. Ditch the 747s and A380s. Fly SYD-LHR 3 x daily. Make SYD-DFW 2 x daily with 789. Add MEL-DFW, SYD-GRU, SYD-PER-CDG/FRA.
Conservatives against Trump
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5454
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: IF QF ordered the 748...

Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:11 am

incitatus wrote:
This thread has a number of conclusions I do not agree with.

First, the alliance with Emirates: Maybe the Qantas flights to Dubai and London are doing amazingly well financially. But the reality is that QF is the underling in the relationship. We are a full four years into this alliance and QF has not added a single drop of capacity to Europe and the Middle East. One would think the power of distributing passengers in Dubai would do wonders for Qantas, but we have not seen it reflected in its network. Sad!

Second, EK has done well after the alliance with QF. It has steadily added capacity to Australia and NZ, mostly with bigger aircraft but also more flights. EK seems to have done well twice out of this deal: It flies QF passengers beyond Dubai and it gained market share in Australia. Terrible deal for QF!

Third, 748... really? The Qantas international network is AMAZINGLY small in number of flights. QF suffers from a fleet that is made of too large aircraft. Too large aircraft has led to small Qantas presence in key markets like LHR and absence of other important markets like FRA and CDG. If QF wants to compete with foreign carriers, it needs the 789s that are coming plus 777-8s. Ditch the 747s and A380s. Fly SYD-LHR 3 x daily. Make SYD-DFW 2 x daily with 789. Add MEL-DFW, SYD-GRU, SYD-PER-CDG/FRA.


And I'll disagree with all of your points aswell.

1. The EK alliance allows exactly that, QF to fly SYD/MEL-DXB and hand pax to EK so QF don't have to fly their own aircraft. LHR is tough for QF they admit that so will take a chance and try PER-LHR going after the more premium market, imo at the expense of MEL-DXB-LHR. The days of QF flying multiple dailies to Europe are gone imo and won't return unless they can be done from OZ non stop.

2. QF might fly more to DXB maybe but again that's what the deal is about, it's not like QF are the only ones with some codeshare deal or JV letting others do the flying. I can't remember the number but actual people booking QF to Europe increased dramatically with the EK deal, win for both IMO.

3. Agree re 748I, and it's conceivable QF will go to smaller aircraft after the current A380's however they are happy with the 12 they have. They work on the few routes they fly. I don't see the point of 2 daily SYD-DFW, they have hinted at MEL-DFW in which case I could even then see the SYD flight as an A380 still and MEL with a 789, more likely to add BNE-DFW or SYD-ORD rather than a second SYD-DFW imo.

Anyway.

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