I find this a mystery, it seems strange that Qantas has never ordered the 777. What do you guys think?

They didn't want it?

I actually wonder given how profitable it is now - did QF make the right decision sticking with the 744 / A330 / 380. The 380 will be used until the end of their lives, and QF will most likely go for the 350 or 77X - they have effectively skipped a generation of 340 / 777 - saved capital the capital of a new fleet, and will soon have a very up to date fleet.

Not always about having the latest- perhaps it pays to wait? Lol similar analogy to my iPhone, I only upgrade every second or third release, why replace what already works, when you can wait for major changes!!

It's actually not that complex. At the time QF had a lot of 747s. They had their mainline fleet down to 3 types. 747, 767 and 737. This proved popular with passengers and efficient in terms simplification. BA was a 20 percent shareholder and WANTED qf to order the 777 as it could do the longer runs to the Americas. At the time on a few key routes there was only one competitor... the jewel in the crown was LAX. UA flew 1 flight a day on the 744 LAX SYD, and another that hooked up(to combine pax) was MEL-LAX SFO. Also 744. prices where expensive, even not counting inflation. You couldn't get a business class ticket for less then $10 000. The only real other competition was from Air NZ but that meant via AKL. This was a cash cow for QF to LAX. It was cheaper to fly them to LHR... significantly longer and tying up more aircraft than LAX.

The network was based around a series of key cities. London Heathrow, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Los Angeles. At this point QF was an all Boeing airline.
Then a couple of things changed. Ansett failed(so domestic needed to be expanded), and Singapore ordered the A380 and stated its first route was Sydney. Airbus was desperate at any price to get inside Qantas. They saw a few opportunities. The then newly formed Jetstar needed bigger aircraft fast. Ansett had left a pool of A320 pilots unemployed that weren't doing much. Qantas needed to use the 767 on a lot more domestic routes due to slot restrictions in Sydney. SQ kept on advertising heavily of their upcoming service being amazing.

So QF knew it had to match the A388 service on the LHR route. However it was only about 5 percent more to operate to lax than the 744. Airbus knew this was there one chance to break into the company in a big way.... so with the A380 order it threw its initial batch of A330s to them rediculously cheap as part of the deal, and at a similar time did a deal on A320s for Jetstar. The A330s were perfect for Asia. Only slightly more fuel burn than the 767s they replaced on the routes. But more cargo and pax capacity. They could make it to HNL. And they allowed the 747s to be retired from transcon routes.

Airbus did a similar thing with the old Northwest Airlines and hence now delta is a big airbus operator.

So in short.... in a strategic move, Airbus swooped in at a time QF had to react to several issues and made them an offer too good to refuse.
If SQ never ordered the A380, I'm sure things would be different today.

Lufthansa wrote:

It's actually not that complex. At the time QF had a lot of 747s. They had their mainline fleet down to 3 types. 747, 767 and 737. This proved popular with passengers and efficient in terms simplification. BA was a 20 percent shareholder and WANTED qf to order the 777 as it could do the longer runs to the Americas. At the time on a few key routes there was only one competitor... the jewel in the crown was LAX. UA flew 1 flight a day on the 744 LAX SYD, and another that hooked up(to combine pax) was MEL-LAX SFO. Also 744. prices where expensive, even not counting inflation. You couldn't get a business class ticket for less then $10 000. The only real other competition was from Air NZ but that meant via AKL. This was a cash cow for QF to LAX. It was cheaper to fly them to LHR... significantly longer and tying up more aircraft than LAX.

The network was based around a series of key cities. London Heathrow, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Los Angeles. At this point QF was an all Boeing airline.
Then a couple of things changed. Ansett failed(so domestic needed to be expanded), and Singapore ordered the A380 and stated its first route was Sydney. Airbus was desperate at any price to get inside Qantas. They saw a few opportunities. The then newly formed Jetstar needed bigger aircraft fast. Ansett had left a pool of A320 pilots unemployed that weren't doing much. Qantas needed to use the 767 on a lot more domestic routes due to slot restrictions in Sydney. SQ kept on advertising heavily of their upcoming service being amazing.

So QF knew it had to match the A388 service on the LHR route. However it was only about 5 percent more to operate to lax than the 744. Airbus knew this was there one chance to break into the company in a big way.... so with the A380 order it threw its initial batch of A330s to them rediculously cheap as part of the deal, and at a similar time did a deal on A320s for Jetstar. The A330s were perfect for Asia. Only slightly more fuel burn than the 767s they replaced on the routes. But more cargo and pax capacity. They could make it to HNL. And they allowed the 747s to be retired from transcon routes.

Airbus did a similar thing with the old Northwest Airlines and hence now delta is a big airbus operator.

So in short.... in a strategic move, Airbus swooped in at a time QF had to react to several issues and made them an offer too good to refuse.
If SQ never ordered the A380, I'm sure things would be different today.

That's slightly revisionist history, as Qantas signed onto the A380 early (and enthusiastically). At the time their long haul route network was highly LHR and LAX centric, and the A380 was the perfect aircraft for these high volume, low frequency routes. That was the case regardless of whether SQ ordered it or not.

Over the past 15 years though, and certainly the last 5, the Qantas long haul network has (necessarily) evolved and VLAs flying two trunk routes no longer suits their current network. Now there is a need for the 787 + 350/77X.

The other thing to consider with regards to the 777 is that Qantas was due to receive their first of 50 787s in 2009 ... we all know how that turned out, but in the 2000s when the 747-400ERs were still only a couple of years old and the A380 and 787 were coming in a couple of yesrs there was not really any scope for the 777 in their fleet (whether the ERs should have ever been ordered is a separate question, although they were attractive from a commonality perspective)

Also don't forget the original B777-200A/-300A has limited capability which could only fly from SYD/MEL to Asia and QF also had relatively new 747s and 767s in their fleet doing the long haul and Asia flights. QF also got a great deal on some ex-BA RR 763s in early 2000s.

By the time the 77L/77W became available, QF has chosen the A330/A380/B744ER for their short haul and long haul replacements. And by the time they needed to replace the 744s, they have chosen the B789s. Lots of QF routes are long haul but thin, so the 77L/77W could be too big and so they picked the 789s.

QF may yet order the 777s - in the form of 777-8 for the Project Sunrise to fly SYD-LHR, SYD-JFK non-stop. Right now it seems it's down to B777-8x and the A350-900ULR.

caliboy93 wrote:

I find this a mystery, it seems strange that Qantas has never ordered the 777. What do you guys think?

Sorry, but I fail to see how this is strange.

The 777 is no wonder plane, and not every airline operating long haul has a need for it.

I wonder how the reactions here will be when Qantas announce their Sunrise fleet decision and it’s again not the triple... guess we will have “why didn’t Qantas order the 777x” threads popping up for another 20-30y

Scanorama wrote:

Right now it seems it's down to B777-8x and the A350-900ULR.

It's been publicly released that the A359ULR is out of the running.

Airbus is proposing an A35K with the -ULR modification for Project Sunrise.

https://simpleflying.com/qantas-777-order/

Interesting article on this very topic. Qantas was apparently one of the airlines Boeing consulted regarding the 777; yet Qantas decided to go with the A380. The article mentions Airbus "strong-arming" Qantas into the A380 order; however, I will let you draw your own conclusions.

The interesting thing about Qantas NOT ordering the 777-200ER is that it was one of the original " Gang of Eight" which helped Boeing design the plane. The other seven gang of eight did order the 777-200ER. The eight were the US3, BA, JAL, Cathay, ANA and Qantas. Qantas could have used a smaller plane for flying to SFO and from Brisbane to LAX then a 744 in the 1990's. One fleet issue Qantas had is their 744 were Rolls powered which are the least desirable in the market, GE 744's are much more desired. It would wonderful to see Qantas order 777-9 for A380 replacements and 777-8 for the LHR & JFK nonstop flights. 787-10 would be great for A330 replacements into Asia.

LAX772LR wrote:

Scanorama wrote:

Right now it seems it's down to B777-8x and the A350-900ULR.

It's been publicly released that the A359ULR is out of the running.

Airbus is proposing an A35K with the -ULR modification for Project Sunrise.

I stand corrected, was meant to day the A350-1000ULR, was in a hurry on a lunch break.

jfk777 wrote:

The interesting thing about Qantas NOT ordering the 777-200ER is that it was one of the original " Gang of Eight" which helped Boeing design the plane. The other seven gang of eight did order the 777-200ER. The eight were the US3, BA, JAL, Cathay, ANA and Qantas. Qantas could have used a smaller plane for flying to SFO and from Brisbane to LAX then a 744 in the 1990's. One fleet issue Qantas had is their 744 were Rolls powered which are the least desirable in the market, GE 744's are much more desired. It would wonderful to see Qantas order 777-9 for A380 replacements and 777-8 for the LHR & JFK nonstop flights. 787-10 would be great for A330 replacements into Asia.

It was really only commonwealth or former commonwealth countries that bought the 744 with roles engines. Though if you look at the volume BA, CX, and QF bought that did add up to a significant number. Obviously NZ and SA got in not the act too for a bit. But there was a reason for it too. Initially, the Rolls engine had a bit more thrust than the other two types, meaning a little bit higher max takeoff weight. Obviously this gap was closed but in the late 80s and early 90s these carriers needed it on key routes. SA for example couldn't over flight much of Africa so had to fly to Europe over the ocean, and even another 500nm made a difference to things like that or QF's transpacific. And CASA was always very resistant to increasing ETOPS on longer routes which didn't help the 772ERs business case.

I think QF never intended to order the 777 and never will. Sunrise will go to an ULR variant of the 351. Why were QF part of the group of eight given the would be ETOPS limitations on 777s on the QF network back then? Who knows why.

Jesse

FlyDeltaJetsATL wrote:

I think QF never intended to order the 777 and never will. Sunrise will go to an ULR variant of the 351. Why were QF part of the group of eight given the would be ETOPS limitations on 777s on the QF network back then? Who knows why.

Jesse

I believe QF looked seriously at the 777 twice, mid 90’s when it first came out it probably lacked the range, then when ordered the A380/330/74E in 2000, They probably would have flown to Asia initially and then been ok for North America BNE-LAX, AKL-LAX etc they could have allowed YVR. That’s all in the past, what they order for sunrise will be interesting. Could go either way.

RyanairGuru wrote:

but in the 2000s when the 747-400ERs were still only a couple of years old and the A380 and 787 were coming in a couple of yesrs there was not really any scope for the 777 in their fleet (whether the ERs should have ever been ordered is a separate question, although they were attractive from a commonality perspective)

Can you remind me, were the -400ERs purchased primarily to operate MEL-LAX to give the range and unrestricted payload year-round, or was it some other reason?

QF93 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

but in the 2000s when the 747-400ERs were still only a couple of years old and the A380 and 787 were coming in a couple of yesrs there was not really any scope for the 777 in their fleet (whether the ERs should have ever been ordered is a separate question, although they were attractive from a commonality perspective)

Can you remind me, were the -400ERs purchased primarily to operate MEL-LAX to give the range and unrestricted payload year-round, or was it some other reason?

MEL-LAX was certainly up there, exclusively ER operated bar last minute subs. They also planned AKL-DFW with them in their early days but that never happened. Otherwise generally they spent the vast majority of their time on the pacific routes until the A380s arrived, then they were exclusively used when DFW did launch in 2011 stopping in BNE on the return.