789 for YVR offpeak certainly. However Peak Dec-Feb those flights are full so they'll stick with the 77E for the time being. In future I could see them going year round with 789 and going more than daily during the peak.

qf789 wrote:

Qantas expects a better than expected annual underlying pre tax profit of $1.35 billion to $1.4 billion on the back of the strength of QF's domestic operations. QF, JQ and loyalty have solid earning growth.

For the 3Q company revenue was down 1.4% to $3.96 billion due to the performance of International. For the quarter International dropped 5.6% while domestic has risen 4.6%

http://www.news.com.au/finance/business ... 26aa2841f3

Good to see - hope they invest and offer dividends whilst the sunshines. QF seems in a good position, it's growth has been due to VAs domestic detriment, but also due to a different strategy- it's competitors have grown through reduced yields and low oil ( oil obviously helped QF) I just can't see airfares dropping any further to stimulate demand. But could be wrong.

As an avgeek hoping we see some more orders announced at end of year!

Hopefully, the whole domestic market may have recovered a bit - VA need it.

qf789 wrote:

QF to add a one weekly seasonal BME flight from 11 June 17 to 27 August 17

QF1030 BNE0915 – 1225BME 73H 7
QF1031 BME1310 – 1915BNE 73H 7

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... june-2017/

It's strange to see a route from the East coast to WA (except PER) that is targeting anything except mining... but this would appear to be tourism orientated given its seasonality during peak season in the BME region.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Interesting, nice to see AC expanding down under, I had actually wondered if they might add AKL seasonally aswell, NZ have 2 premium 789's arriving later this year, no routes announced for them yet but some of us are speculating AKL-YVR, they have 37 less seats than the 772's mainly in Y but 7 less W aswell. Certainly a growing market though.

The addition of IAH made it very attractive as a transfer point from heavily populated Ontario in/out via YYZ/BUF/DTW to NZL. I will never use YVR again.

Qantas16 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

QF to add a one weekly seasonal BME flight from 11 June 17 to 27 August 17

QF1030 BNE0915 – 1225BME 73H 7
QF1031 BME1310 – 1915BNE 73H 7

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... june-2017/

It's strange to see a route from the East coast to WA (except PER) that is targeting anything except mining... but this would appear to be tourism orientated given its seasonality during peak season in the BME region.

Tourism WA has been pushing for more tourism oriented routes, likely some state assistance in there

Tonight's QF494 MEL-SYD landed in SYD at about 2302. I can't find anything in the curfew act that would justify it landing after 2300 on 34L which is in the curfew shoulder period and can't imagine on what grounds they would have received dispensation. Am I missing something in the clauses regarding the curfew?

With the majority of the A330’s upgraded last year and no new aircraft coming into the fleet this financial year, I expect QANTAS to have free cash flows just above $2 billion.

A quick check of QANTAS’s aircraft register shows QANTAS has increased its share of owned aircraft. For instance Qantas have recently purchased (approx.) 15 737’s and 10 717’s that were previously leased.

On a book value basis QANTAS owns approximately 42-48% of its fleet. With A330’s and A380’s coming of lease over the next couple of years this could quickly jump to 60%.

With revenues set to decline for a second year running, QANTAS really need to start looking at how to start regrowing the business. I suspect the Jetstar businesses will be put back into growth mode. Growing the New Zealand market and the purchase of an existing Asian LCC could be on the cards. Maybe they could have a second bite with a Hong Kong franchise.

With the eights 787’s replacing 5 747’s QANTAS International will not be adding any new capacity in the near future. Maybe the new markets being served will be capable of generating higher revenues. Let’s hope so. Why buy expensive 787’s just to maintain market share.

travelhound wrote:

With the majority of the A330’s upgraded last year and no new aircraft coming into the fleet this financial year, I expect QANTAS to have free cash flows just above $2 billion.

A quick check of QANTAS’s aircraft register shows QANTAS has increased its share of owned aircraft. For instance Qantas have recently purchased (approx.) 15 737’s and 10 717’s that were previously leased.

On a book value basis QANTAS owns approximately 42-48% of its fleet. With A330’s and A380’s coming of lease over the next couple of years this could quickly jump to 60%.

With revenues set to decline for a second year running, QANTAS really need to start looking at how to start regrowing the business. I suspect the Jetstar businesses will be put back into growth mode. Growing the New Zealand market and the purchase of an existing Asian LCC could be on the cards. Maybe they could have a second bite with a Hong Kong franchise.

With the eights 787’s replacing 5 747’s QANTAS International will not be adding any new capacity in the near future. Maybe the new markets being served will be capable of generating higher revenues. Let’s hope so. Why buy expensive 787’s just to maintain market share.

QF's small revenue decline is normal compared to what's happening to other airlines. I'd actually be more worried about NZ and VA.

I don't think QF International are trying to maintain marketshare. If they have, they've certainly given up on that lost cause. Those expensive 787s cut down on operational costs and allows them to utilise A380s across Asia where they can probably get more rotations out of the aircraft. Revenue got hit mainly because of international competition. If it continues to moderate then they don't have to worry too much.

I wouldn't worry about JQHK again. Jetstar Japan and Jetstar Pacific are currently in expansion mode anyway.

getluv wrote:

I'd actually be more worried about NZ and VA.

I think NZ has a pretty good grip on revenue. Both UA and AA have discontinued service for the slow SFO/LAX -AKL months. This reduces the need for aggressive pricing at that time.

sunrisevalley wrote:

getluv wrote:

I'd actually be more worried about NZ and VA.

I think NZ has a pretty good grip on revenue. Both UA and AA have discontinued service for the slow SFO/LAX -AKL months. This reduces the need for aggressive pricing at that time.

Agree with Sunrisevalley. NZ has just announced they expect to have a larger profit than previously forecast.
QF does have the strength that it has a large domestic market to provide a large solid base. NZ on the other hand has a much smaller domestic market (which it does do very well in) so relies on it's international network much more. With the boom in tourism to New Zealand and most of them needing at least one domestic flight (mostly on NZ no matter which airline they arrived on) that does help too.

Sorry if I missed this elsewhere, but has Qantas painted any additional aircraft types into the new livery? I just know of the two A330s.
Cheers.

777LRF wrote:

Tonight's QF494 MEL-SYD landed in SYD at about 2302. I can't find anything in the curfew act that would justify it landing after 2300 on 34L which is in the curfew shoulder period and can't imagine on what grounds they would have received dispensation. Am I missing something in the clauses regarding the curfew?

That's the curfew period, not the shoulder - the shoulder is the period between 5am and 6am during which a certain number of international services are permitted to land. On last night's QF494, provided it received its landing clearance from ATC before 2300 it's not considered to have landed after curfew (likewise, a departing aircraft which receives its taxi clearance before 2300 is not considered to have departed after curfew).

Zkpilot wrote:

sunrisevalley wrote:

getluv wrote:

I'd actually be more worried about NZ and VA.

I think NZ has a pretty good grip on revenue. Both UA and AA have discontinued service for the slow SFO/LAX -AKL months. This reduces the need for aggressive pricing at that time.

Agree with Sunrisevalley. NZ has just announced they expect to have a larger profit than previously forecast.
QF does have the strength that it has a large domestic market to provide a large solid base. NZ on the other hand has a much smaller domestic market (which it does do very well in) so relies on it's international network much more. With the boom in tourism to New Zealand and most of them needing at least one domestic flight (mostly on NZ no matter which airline they arrived on) that does help too.

Tourism to NZ is booming, but airfares are still low and competition is only going to get tougher to the extent QF faces.

In saying that, VA is the biggest basket case of them all. Still sitting at an all time low and their revenue is likely to fall once their fleet gets smaller.

Re NZ: The big challenge is not only getting volume but also increasing yields.

NZ tourism may well be booming but it does largely lack the scale of overall local demand and premium business market compared to Australia for instance.

Air NZ still faces headwinds as some of its market strengths are eroded by competitors non-stop flights, including South America where MEL was said to contribute a significant proportion of pax on the AKL-EZE services.

Finally, CA has applied for 3 weekly PEK-BNE with A332 from October 2017.

News just in, JQ are going to reconfigure the VH A320 fleet with 186 seats, up from 180. The space flex galley will be used, along with new recaro slimline seats that actually look pretty slick. 43 of the current 53 will be in the 186 convicted by the end of 2018. The 10 not getting the new cabin are aircraft that will be coming off lease during the next 18 months. This will give JQ a per seat cost advantage over TT, whos current 320s and new fleet of 738s will be configured at 180.

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/0 ... ore-seats/

I expect TT will consider a move to 189 on the 738 once the 320s leave. Having them at the same capacity during the transition period will enhance their fleets flexibility as they can move aircraft where they are needed most without the risk of bumping PAX.

qf789 wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

QF to add a one weekly seasonal BME flight from 11 June 17 to 27 August 17

QF1030 BNE0915 – 1225BME 73H 7
QF1031 BME1310 – 1915BNE 73H 7

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... june-2017/

It's strange to see a route from the East coast to WA (except PER) that is targeting anything except mining... but this would appear to be tourism orientated given its seasonality during peak season in the BME region.

QF also run a 2 weekly SYD-BME and MEL-BME

Any idea why Qantas can't run a once or twice a week service from Sydney and Melbourne to Port Hedland? Port Hedland actually has a bigger population compared to Broome. I remember Qantas used to do a Melbourne to Port Hedland service with the flight number QF997/998.

CB80Scania wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

It's strange to see a route from the East coast to WA (except PER) that is targeting anything except mining... but this would appear to be tourism orientated given its seasonality during peak season in the BME region.

QF also run a 2 weekly SYD-BME and MEL-BME

Any idea why Qantas can't run a once or twice a week service from Sydney and Melbourne to Port Hedland? Port Hedland actually has a bigger population compared to Broome. I remember Qantas used to do a Melbourne to Port Hedland service with the flight number QF997/998.

Brooke has the tourism, while PH demand will be skewed towards FIFO and can be served via PER.

a320fan wrote:

News just in, JQ are going to reconfigure the VH A320 fleet with 186 seats, up from 180. The space flex galley will be used, along with new recaro slimline seats that actually look pretty slick. 43 of the current 53 will be in the 186 convicted by the end of 2018. The 10 not getting the new cabin are aircraft that will be coming off lease during the next 18 months. This will give JQ a per seat cost advantage over TT, whos current 320s and new fleet of 738s will be configured at 180.

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/0 ... ore-seats/

I expect TT will consider a move to 189 on the 738 once the 320s leave. Having them at the same capacity during the transition period will enhance their fleets flexibility as they can move aircraft where they are needed most without the risk of bumping PAX.

I don't think TT want the 737s anymore, last time I checked there is only 1 737 still operating for TT , VH-VUD

Those new JQ seats look awfully similar to the ones on OS/LX/IB/BA/SN (and probably others). They actually work quite well in maximising the (little) space available - especially at knee level. On long haul flights I always get sideways looks when I take all but the safety card out of the seat pocket and put it in the overhead locker.

Extra overhead locker space is always welcome. Since the introduction of paid checked in baggage it's often a real scramble to get some space. I now have a backpack rather than a roller bag because you can at least squish the backpack in whereas there is no squishing a roller bag.

It's interesting to note that the JQ image has a hard screen on the left infront of 1ABC. That's new. The ABC seats on JQ have a little bit extra legroom because 1ABC is flush up against the door whereas there is a hard screen infront of 1DEF to stop legs protruding into the galley area - which means the ABC seats are slightly more roomy throughout the cabin than the DEF seats.

(Don't get me wrong a 180(+) seat A320 isn't comfortable - but these seats are better than others and makes it slightly less uncomfortable).

angusjt wrote:

I don't think TT want the 737s anymore, last time I checked there is only 1 737 still operating for TT , VH-VUD

As I understand it tiger 737 ops re-commence sometime this month. VUD has been operating training flights.

angusjt wrote:

a320fan wrote:

I don't think TT want the 737s anymore, last time I checked there is only 1 737 still operating for TT , VH-VUD

It is not that they don't want them, they are over capacity and understaffed using the 737. They will return once they have the crew and aircraft capacity for it. For now the 4 DPS aircraft at repainted white with Aussie flag sticker on the R2 door or being parked saving monies by flying with VA or being wet leased. Until then you will see VUD doing the runs.

VUD is flying in tiger livery. VOR is the all white aircraft back flying with Virgin & VUB & VOY are stored in MEL in tiger livery in preparation for return to service.

flyPIT wrote:

Get your pics of the UPS MD-11 while you can; in a year or so the flight will transition to a B-744

Any specific information online about this? I am aware of the 748 orders which will no doubt free up the 744s. What will be the fate of the MD11s other than a trip to the desert?

decry wrote:

flyPIT wrote:

Get your pics of the UPS MD-11 while you can; in a year or so the flight will transition to a B-744

Any specific information online about this? I am aware of the 748 orders which will no doubt free up the 744s. What will be the fate of the MD11s other than a trip to the desert?

Nothing specific online that I can link to. The MD-11's will stay in the fleet (they are even being repainted) but I believe they will see less service in Asia and more domestic US.

QF has Las Vegas as a destination on their website. Are they planning on flying there?

LamboAston wrote:

QF has Las Vegas as a destination on their website. Are they planning on flying there?

AA codeshare - numerous USA destinations show up which are AA codeshare, same as those with EK, etc

xiaotung wrote:

Finally, CA has applied for 3 weekly PEK-BNE with A332 from October 2017.

Difference between applied and launching though, CZ applied for daily SZX-BNE last year that has amounted to nothing (so far)

With VA reducing there ATR 72-600/500 fleet - does anyone know what airlines they will be heading too?

luftaom wrote:

Those new JQ seats look awfully similar to the ones on OS/LX/IB/BA/SN (and probably others). They actually work quite well in maximising the (little) space available - especially at knee level. On long haul flights I always get sideways looks when I take all but the safety card out of the seat pocket and put it in the overhead locker.

Extra overhead locker space is always welcome. Since the introduction of paid checked in baggage it's often a real scramble to get some space. I now have a backpack rather than a roller bag because you can at least squish the backpack in whereas there is no squishing a roller bag.

It's interesting to note that the JQ image has a hard screen on the left infront of 1ABC. That's new. The ABC seats on JQ have a little bit extra legroom because 1ABC is flush up against the door whereas there is a hard screen infront of 1DEF to stop legs protruding into the galley area - which means the ABC seats are slightly more roomy throughout the cabin than the DEF seats.

(Don't get me wrong a 180(+) seat A320 isn't comfortable - but these seats are better than others and makes it slightly less uncomfortable).

The new design of the galley will be horrible for the crew and will end up making it awkward for the passengers. With less space for the crew to work and the two aft toilets being next to each other in the galley when crew are setting things up the passengers will be made to stand in the aisle for crew to work. And there will be some crew that will lock off one of the toilets to give more space to work in. And if the two toilets need to be combined for disabled guests, that will take time and make regular passengers wait even longer for them. And then there is the whole fact that the toilets are smaller now

jwoww wrote:

luftaom wrote:

Those new JQ seats look awfully similar to the ones on OS/LX/IB/BA/SN (and probably others). They actually work quite well in maximising the (little) space available - especially at knee level. On long haul flights I always get sideways looks when I take all but the safety card out of the seat pocket and put it in the overhead locker.

Extra overhead locker space is always welcome. Since the introduction of paid checked in baggage it's often a real scramble to get some space. I now have a backpack rather than a roller bag because you can at least squish the backpack in whereas there is no squishing a roller bag.

It's interesting to note that the JQ image has a hard screen on the left infront of 1ABC. That's new. The ABC seats on JQ have a little bit extra legroom because 1ABC is flush up against the door whereas there is a hard screen infront of 1DEF to stop legs protruding into the galley area - which means the ABC seats are slightly more roomy throughout the cabin than the DEF seats.

(Don't get me wrong a 180(+) seat A320 isn't comfortable - but these seats are better than others and makes it slightly less uncomfortable).

The new design of the galley will be horrible for the crew and will end up making it awkward for the passengers. With less space for the crew to work and the two aft toilets being next to each other in the galley when crew are setting things up the passengers will be made to stand in the aisle for crew to work. And there will be some crew that will lock off one of the toilets to give more space to work in. And if the two toilets need to be combined for disabled guests, that will take time and make regular passengers wait even longer for them. And then there is the whole fact that the toilets are smaller now

I flew to SYD on the JQ 321 with the new cabin. Seats were great! I appreciated the room around my knees. Not much kneck support - but it was an hour flights and I payed $50! I do think JQ should add streaming to their fleet, and maybe charge a $10 access fee.

Bathroom was fine, maybe even a little bigger than those on the QF 738 with the new seats. I can't imagine JQ crew have a whole lot to set up on most flights for the carts? Not like there is a full meal service with it. But with any further 321s they should move to a mid cabin lav for this very reason.

Be as I have an interest in design and lighting always keen to see the lighting scheme! Hopefully blue and orange same as the 789.

jwoww wrote:

The new design of the galley will be horrible for the crew and will end up making it awkward for the passengers. With less space for the crew to work and the two aft toilets being next to each other in the galley when crew are setting things up the passengers will be made to stand in the aisle for crew to work. And there will be some crew that will lock off one of the toilets to give more space to work in. And if the two toilets need to be combined for disabled guests, that will take time and make regular passengers wait even longer for them. And then there is the whole fact that the toilets are smaller now

At least they have 2 Lavs in the rear, NZ opted of an single rear Lav on the 171 Version!

Do JQ Crews really need to use the galley that much? most of there food product is dry or un-heated

zkncj wrote:

jwoww wrote:

The new design of the galley will be horrible for the crew and will end up making it awkward for the passengers. With less space for the crew to work and the two aft toilets being next to each other in the galley when crew are setting things up the passengers will be made to stand in the aisle for crew to work. And there will be some crew that will lock off one of the toilets to give more space to work in. And if the two toilets need to be combined for disabled guests, that will take time and make regular passengers wait even longer for them. And then there is the whole fact that the toilets are smaller now

At least they have 2 Lavs in the rear, NZ opted of an single rear Lav on the 171 Version!

Do JQ Crews really need to use the galley that much? most of there food product is dry or un-heated

Whilst the carts are generally set up before passengers get on board, there are certain things that have to be done to the carts once take off is over. and the carts get restocked from other seperate carts after each service. The whole thing relating to using the galley and not having room is to do with the moving in and out of the carts in the galley area. The carts are long and do require space to turn them around and pull them out. Also, that is the area that crew go to rest and take a break during the flight, having a crew seat situated in front of the toilet reduces that ability. As well as the fact that crew need to be able to eat too, and when you have lots of people coming into the cramped space that will be in the galley, it makes it harder and unfair for the crew

travelhound wrote:

With the majority of the A330’s upgraded last year and no new aircraft coming into the fleet this financial year, I expect QANTAS to have free cash flows just above $2 billion.

A quick check of QANTAS’s aircraft register shows QANTAS has increased its share of owned aircraft. For instance Qantas have recently purchased (approx.) 15 737’s and 10 717’s that were previously leased.

On a book value basis QANTAS owns approximately 42-48% of its fleet. With A330’s and A380’s coming of lease over the next couple of years this could quickly jump to 60%.

With revenues set to decline for a second year running, QANTAS really need to start looking at how to start regrowing the business. I suspect the Jetstar businesses will be put back into growth mode. Growing the New Zealand market and the purchase of an existing Asian LCC could be on the cards. Maybe they could have a second bite with a Hong Kong franchise.

With the eights 787’s replacing 5 747’s QANTAS International will not be adding any new capacity in the near future. Maybe the new markets being served will be capable of generating higher revenues. Let’s hope so. Why buy expensive 787’s just to maintain market share.

"expensive" 787's!!!!!!!! They got them for a song. i.e rock bottom prices.

Does anyone know why QF1280, the usual SYD-MCY 717 flight was tonight operated by 738 VH-VYA?

waoz1 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Australia and Fiji expand air services agreement

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/0 ... agreement/

We nice to see them add a couple flights a week to Perth. Such a pain going via east all the time.

On another note, what ever happened on Perth-Bali for Batik air?

I'd be pretty shocked to see PER-NAN, it's far too long for a 738 and probably wouldn't warrant an A330. Though maybe 2x a week, you never know...

I think the real beneficiary of this will be JQ. IIRC they were complaining that VA had all the rights under the agreement (except for the JQ SYD-NAN service). Wouldn't shock me to see them launch BNE/MEL-NAN and potentially increase SYD as well.

And I know QF codeshares with (and holds a stake in) FJ but you never know... They went back into DPS and NAN seems like it would be a more premium-skewing market even if the volumes aren't quite a large.