Qantas and 777/A380

[Kieran Wells]

I was talking to a QF staff member last night in Melbourne about Qantas future plans for planes, and he bought up the 777. I noticed quickly on A.net last night about discussion about this topic. He was saying that Qantas will be ordering up to approx 30 777 (didn't specify which one) to start replacing the older 767-300's in the fleet.

The other (i thought) interesting thing was that he said once the A380 had done its intitial routes(MEL/SYD/LAX & SYD/SIN/LHR), the next route would be MEL/SIN as SQ are apparently getting ready to run A380 to Melbourne when their next stock are in...

Looks like very interesting times ahead for qantas, especially with the introduction of the new body types..

[Daniel F]

Are you sure that QF staff member didn't mean the 787? That seems like a more natural replacement for the 767.

[Ross Corrigan]

The Australian had a story on this in yesterday's edition. Link here. (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24256923-23349,00.html)

I for one would love to see Qantas flying the 777 but would it make sense to have so many types of aircraft in the fleet?

[Shameel Kumar]

I reserve comment for now until something a bit more concrete comes through... *trying hard to keep calm* :D

[Kieran Wells]

Are you sure that QF staff member didn't mean the 787? That seems like a more natural replacement for the 767.

No, he mentioned the 787 separately, especially as they wont be here for at least 2-3 years, and that a number of them will be going to Jetstar first, before coming in qantas colours. The mention of 777 was what stood out to me, as i wasn't aware of them looking/ordering them.

[Michael Morrison]

The mention of 777 was what stood out to me, as i wasn't aware of them looking/ordering them.

They ar elooking at the 777-300er and the A350-1000 as replacements for the remaining 747's not being replaced by the A380. I would then presume these aircraft will operate on routes currently served by 2 class 747-400's.

[Josh F]

I did not think there were any productions slots available for such a mass order in such a short time?

[Michael Morrison]

I did not think there were any productions slots available for such a mass order in such a short time?

Apparently some leasing companies have frames not allocated to customers currently

[Bruce Bramwell]

I did not think there were any productions slots available for such a mass order in such a short time?

GECAS has orders which dont have a customer base.... there are also a few un-identified customers which we dont know about

Also - you have the option of purchasing a.c from other airlines...........


Helps if we think outside the box

[Will H]

[duplicate--mod please feel free to delete. sorry!]

[Will H]

I for one would love to see Qantas flying the 777 but would it make sense to have so many types of aircraft in the fleet?

Well it seems QF would add the 777 or 350, so either way they're going to introduce a new type. With them already having the largest 787 order on Boeing's books, adding 350s wouldn't make sense, especially when you also consider if QF purchased the 777-300ER, they could easily add the 777-200LR for you know what. ;)

I reckon a 10% fuel burn efficiency improvement in the -300ER could be applied--maybe not as strongly--to the -200LR as well.

Non-stop Oz-UK is a key advantage QF would have over SQ, and one SQ couldn't replicate without a major industry shakeup.

[Paul C.]

I'd feel safer in a plane with a metal fuselage, not a plastic one (like the 787). Even though plastic could be quieter, metal is almost always the way to go. So the 777-300ER would be a great addition. And even the slightly smaller A340-600 could be an option too. The A340 is very quiet to fly on. I also went on a Qantas A330-300 VH-QPA and found it pretty quiet too, I slept well because of that.

[Andrew McLaughlin]

I'd feel safer in a plane with a metal fuselage, not a plastic one (like the 787). Even though plastic could be quieter, metal is almost always the way to go. So the 777-300ER would be a great addition. And even the slightly smaller A340-600 could be an option too. The A340 is very quiet to fly on. I also went on a Qantas A330-300 VH-QPA and found it pretty quiet too, I slept well because of that.

Plastic??? :rolleyes: (through to the keeper...). Won't be flying much in 30 years then Paul, huh?

Despite it quietness and comfort, the A345/A346 uses ~20% more fuel than the comparable 77L/77W in a thinner tube (8 abreast vs 9), hence the nearly single figures orders for the type in recent years. Many airlines are phasing out their A345/346s in favour of 777s (e.g. SQ, TG, CX), while others are cancelling or deferring orders for them (Kingfisher, VS).

[Montague S]

I'd feel safer in a plane with a metal fuselage, not a plastic one (like the 787). Even though plastic could be quieter, metal is almost always the way to go.

you'd be stunned to know that the composite fibre shell of the 787 is actually stronger than any "metal" shell...

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=-DE8LZcZgn4

[Josh F]

How will the composite perform in an aeroplane crash? Will it shatter?

[Rhys Xanthis]

How will the composite perform in an aeroplane crash? Will it shatter?

Thats another thing all together, there have been concerns that it could shatter, and also any fire could lead to some pretty nasty chemicals being released. Concerns in a crash that if a fire started, breathing could get very difficult due to the gases coming from the airframe.

We had a discussion some time ago about composites etc, but i think that was on the old board.

[D Chan]

With them already having the largest 787 order on Boeing's books, adding 350s wouldn't make sense, especially when you also consider if QF purchased the 777-300ER, they could easily add the 777-200LR for you know what. ;)

what about the issue that was stated on some forums / media about Qantas trying to get Boeing to develop the 787-10? Boeing is not committed to it and some airlines might go 350 just because the -10 has not / may never be offered by Boeing.

Non-stop Oz-UK is a key advantage QF would have over SQ, and one SQ couldn't replicate without a major industry shakeup.
the problem with flying such a long distance non-stop, as you may be aware, is that you're burning more fuel (e.g. climb) to 'carry the fuel required to fly non-stop' for such a long distance. Then there's the wind factor. Thirdly there's the issue of how much pax and cargo one could carry on the route (very likely the number of pax would be restricted) - so flying non-stop oz-uk is still a very difficult proposition and it might be 10 or 15 yrs before we can do it economically

[Rhys Xanthis]

Problem with the -1000 is it wont be available til well into the next decade...a replacement might be a bit more pressing for QF, especially if they believe fuel will be an issue.

[Andrew McLaughlin]

what about the issue that was stated on some forums / media about Qantas trying to get Boeing to develop the 787-10? Boeing is not committed to it and some airlines might go 350 just because the -10 has not / may never be offered by Boeing.

The problem with the -10 is that Boeing is reluctant to commit to it because of, A) it's busy getting the -8 and -9 issues sorted and these aircraft to market, B) it will undermine sales of the 777, C) it will require a redesign of several major elements such as the landing gear, and, D) there is currently no engine available for it as the -9's Trent 1000 may not be able to be grown out to the estimate 85K+ lbs thrust required for the -10.

I guess the final decision will be based upon how much market pressure airlines like EK and QF can bring to bare on Boeing, whether the market for the 777-200ER starts to dry up, and whether Boeing has the engineering capacity to do it along with the 747-8I/F, the delayed 787-3, a reported 777X, and of course, a 737 replacement. Likewise, Airbus is fully comitted with its A330-200F, possible A330-300F, the A350-800/900 program, and then the A380-900 and A380F, and somewhere in there they have to start work on an A320 replacement, so I doubt we'll see a 787-10 or an A350-1000 until 2018 at the earliest.

Cheers

[Will H]

the problem with flying such a long distance non-stop, as you may be aware, is that you're burning more fuel (e.g. climb) to 'carry the fuel required to fly non-stop' for such a long distance. Then there's the wind factor. Thirdly there's the issue of how much pax and cargo one could carry on the route (very likely the number of pax would be restricted) - so flying non-stop oz-uk is still a very difficult proposition and it might be 10 or 15 yrs before we can do it economically

QF is on the record saying they can do LHR-SYD non-stop year-round but can only do SYD-LHR 7 months out of the year if they don't want to reduce payload (IIRC).

If Boeing is suggesting a 10% efficiency in the -300ER, it's reasonable to assume some of that can be carried over to the -200LR, which would only need a slight nudge to operate the five months, one-way it presently cannot.

[Joseph Saragozza.]

hey guys.
i just came back from Swinburne uni open day, and they had a QF second officer speaking, and he was mention that the A380s are come this month (which is no surprise) he also said a the 787. then he said the 777 ARE ALSO COMING! but he did not say anything about what type.
for a QF pilot to say that i must say that maybe these words going around are going to be firm orders.

i got a bit excited when he mentioned it so i thought ill let you in from when i heard about their fleet :D

joey.

[Bruce Bramwell]

for a QF pilot to say that i must say that maybe these words going around are going to be firm orders.


Wish it was that simple

[Tony G]

No, he mentioned the 787 separately, especially as they wont be here for at least 2-3 years, and that a number of them will be going to Jetstar first, before coming in qantas colours. The mention of 777 was what stood out to me, as i wasn't aware of them looking/ordering them.

My flatemate is a Jetstar Flight attendant. She also mentioned within the Jetstar meetings they discussed using the 777 until the 787 came on line as Jetstar were looking at expanding to Italy and the UK.

As with composite. I understand it is much stronger than metal, however i have no idea how it perform in a fire or crash. Maybe they could simulate a crash as they did with the remote controlled 707 a few years back. $$$$.

[Daniel M]

hey guys.
i just came back from Swinburne uni open day, and they had a QF second officer speaking, and he was mention that the A380s are come this month (which is no surprise) he also said a the 787. then he said the 777 ARE ALSO COMING! but he did not say anything about what type.
for a QF pilot to say that i must say that maybe these words going around are going to be firm orders.

i got a bit excited when he mentioned it so i thought ill let you in from when i heard about their fleet :D

joey.


My Uncle's friends daughter is a cleaner for Qantas and she mentioned that she heard from one of her friends brothers that Qantas were getting a spaceship:rolleyes:

Don't take everything you hear as fact, just because they are with the company...

[Shameel Kumar]

My Uncle's friends daughter is a cleaner for Qantas and she mentioned that she heard from one of her friends brothers that Qantas were getting a spaceship:rolleyes:

Don't take everything you hear as fact, just because they are with the company...

....And in return, don't treat him as if he's a stupid teenager. He was merely relaying what he heard from a Qantas employee. If the information he has given is true, then great... but if it doesn't eventuate, then you should at least be thankful that he's shared with us what he's heard.


Some people at times....:rolleyes:

[Tony G]

I'd feel safer in a plane with a metal fuselage, not a plastic one (like the 787). Even though plastic could be quieter, metal is almost always the way to go. So the 777-300ER would be a great addition. And even the slightly smaller A340-600 could be an option too. The A340 is very quiet to fly on. I also went on a Qantas A330-300 VH-QPA and found it pretty quiet too, I slept well because of that.

Just watched a show called ENGINEERING CONNECTIONS on the NAT GEO channel. It was discussing the A380 and its safety and economical value in the industry.

The main concern was the weight and size of the aircraft to compete in the market.

To combat this they used a compisite material 'Glare'. It is a combination of glass and aluminium, much much stronger than the material used on most aircraft and lighter also. They use aluminium because it is rigidness, and glass for strength.

They used chickens shot out of a cannon to simulate and aircraft htting a bird at high speed. The chicken went straight through the standard aircraft skin. The composite material held up with only minor damage. They also mentioned using this material to store luggage as to absord any bombs that may be used as a form of terrorism.

[Bernie P]

They used chickens shot out of a cannon to simulate and aircraft hitting a bird at high speed. The chicken went straight through the standard aircraft skin. The composite material held up with only minor damage. They also mentioned using this material to store luggage as to absorb any bombs that may be used as a form of terrorism.

Oh my god... I know this might be the 'norm', but slightly not PC... What if PETA got a hold of this?? They might leave KFC alone! :D

[Joseph Saragozza.]

....And in return, don't treat him as if he's a stupid teenager. He was merely relaying what he heard from a Qantas employee. If the information he has given is true, then great... but if it doesn't eventuate, then you should at least be thankful that he's shared with us what he's heard.


Some people at times....

thanks for your support Shameel. ;)
fingers crossed that these 'rumors' become true.

[Ray P.]

you'd be stunned to know that the composite fibre shell of the 787 is actually stronger than any "metal" shell...
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=-DE8LZcZgn4

I think it's a giant leap to assume that composites are stronger than metal shells. Composites lack ductility, so they don't deform the same way metal does. I would like to see the piece of composite in the video that they are bashing with the hammer actually placed on an aircraft. What you don't see is the micro cracks, inter-ply delaminations and disbonds that occur with each belt of the hammer. These micro cracks leads to moisture ingression which at altitude freezes (and expands) causing growth of the ply damage. It may take a number of years and many thousands of cycles but in the end, the result may or may not be a catastrophic failure of that same panel (you'll never know). Non-visible impact damage is one of the biggest problems in the composite industry.

[Edward Terry]

There are technologies that I believe are incorporated on the 787 that allow damage to the internal structure of the composite to be seen. According to a lecturer from UNSW who visited us at Sydney Uni last week, some clever engineers have infused the skin with capillary tubes of minute diameter which contain a coloured fluid. They are calibrated so that an impact to the skin beyond a certain magnitude will rupture them and cause the fluid to 'bleed' through, allowing engineers to see where the structure is damaged.

[D Chan]

My Uncle's friends daughter is a cleaner for Qantas and she mentioned that she heard from one of her friends brothers that Qantas were getting a spaceship:rolleyes

I couldn't resist this one..... but ... could the spaceship you were referring to be the Sonic Cruiser? :D;):cool:

I do wonder if Boeing were to compensate the Qantas Group for the delay in the 787s (and given the big order .. counting firm orders - still a huge order)... whether heavily discounted 777s could be the answer. AFAIK the compensation that were included into the annual result were from Airbus only?

In relation to Jetstar having the 777s first (if it turns out to be true), if they do indeed transfer them to Qantas later on this would mean a reconfig after a few years of use? not sure if that's the cheapest option.

[Bernie P]

Just saw this over at A.net, and thought it good to share...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qantas/Airbus-A380-842/1389465/M/?width=1500&height=1012&sok=&sort=&photo_nr=&prev_id=&next_id=

[Andrew McLaughlin]

I couldn't resist this one..... but ... could the spaceship you were referring to be the Sonic Cruiser? :D;):cool:

I do wonder if Boeing were to compensate the Qantas Group for the delay in the 787s (and given the big order .. counting firm orders - still a huge order)... whether heavily discounted 777s could be the answer. AFAIK the compensation that were included into the annual result were from Airbus only?

In relation to Jetstar having the 777s first (if it turns out to be true), if they do indeed transfer them to Qantas later on this would mean a reconfig after a few years of use? not sure if that's the cheapest option.

I don't think Boeing would discount 777s as part of compensation for the 787, as from a profit perspective the 777 is one of Boeing's biggest earners. More likely they would make earlier production slots available (there's always a few slots up their sleeve), and/or set up a larger than normal support base at Boeing's expense to help ease the introduction of the new type, and perhaps even offer a guaranteed buy-back option if the aircraft are only intended to for interim use.

More likely is that Boeing would either offer discounts on new 767s, or huge discounts on the cost sustaining the 767s and 747s currently in service (i.e. genuine parts etc).

Cheers

[Ash W]

....And in return, don't treat him as if he's a stupid teenager. He was merely relaying what he heard from a Qantas employee. If the information he has given is true, then great... but if it doesn't eventuate, then you should at least be thankful that he's shared with us what he's heard.


Some people at times....:rolleyes:

Shameel I don't think Daniel was saying not to post 'rumors' such as this, I think he was more saying don't treat gossip and third hand info as lore or get too excited by it all.

Gee Some people at times....:rolleyes:

As for this debate, can anyone offer any good reason why Qantas or Jetstar would want 777's as compensation for 787 delays? I can't. Afterall it isn't like either carrier has them already, and the cost and the time to introduce a new type to either fleet would make in unviable. Unless of course there are even more major delays to the 787 that are not public.

As has been previously said Qantas has made it clear in the past they are considering 777's, A350's and 787's for future replacement of the 747 fleet on routes that don't justify the use of an A380. No annoucement has been made on that yet. At present every other route in the Qantas long haul bag is covered by existing equipment (A330-300/200) or new orders (A380 and 787's).

[D Chan]

As for this debate, can anyone offer any good reason why Qantas or Jetstar would want 777's as compensation for 787 delays? I can't. Afterall it isn't like either carrier has them already, and the cost and the time to introduce a new type to either fleet would make in unviable.

If V Australia could do it why can't Qantas? They could do it via different means e.g. leasing.

As you've stated previously, when some 744s are retired, QF will have less and eventually no a/c that is in the capacity / size between the A380 size and 787-9 or A330-300. That gap is quite big. What is the replacement aircraft for 744s? The A380 could be on some routes but on other routes / markets they won't need so many seats. The 773ER is the next best option currently. I can think of some reasons:
1) Boeing will have to compensate QF one way or the other.
2) How likely would it be QF to choose the A345/A346?
3) Favourable exchange rates (1aud = 80 us cents - is still quite high)

If they test the mission requirements on the more demanding routes, I think the 773ER will come out on top. Various airlines around the world have proved that the 77W, for them, was the best option (e.g. SQ, CX, AF, AC, NH, EK and so on...)

Of course they could just skip the 773ER altogether and get the A350. But what's to say there won't be delays to the A350 (like the A380)? And how many years will the 744 remain in the Qantas fleet?

I have always reckoned that QF shouldve got their A330s a few years earlier than they should have. The A333 is a true workhorse in regional asian flights - the extra belly cargo revenue (if filled) wouldve generated extra revenue over the 767s for those few years..

[Ash W]

The 744s aren't going to fly forever. Next year some of the earlier 744s will be 20 yrs old. When some 744s are retired, QF will have less and eventually no a/c that is in the capacity / size between the A380 size and 787-9 or A330-300. That gap is quite big. What is the replacement aircraft for 744s? The A380 could be on some routes but on other routes / markets they won't need so many seats.

Of course they could just skip the 773ER altogether and get the A350. But what's to say there won't be delays to the A350 (like the A380)?

I have always believed that QF got their A330s a few years later than they should have. The A333 would have proved to be a great workhorse in regional asian flights.

Yes I know the 744's aren't going to go forever, and indeed I mentioned that QF were indeed looking at a/c like the 777, A350 and 787 as future replacements for the routes where the A380 is too big. But clearly to date Qantas have been in no rush maybe because some of the 747's are not that old. Think the 6 ER's and the last 6 or so of the -OJx's.

The question I asked is why would Qantas and/or Jetstar want or even want to consider 777's as compensation for delays in the 787 or as a a stop gap meassure?

[Andrew McLaughlin]

And how many years will the 744 remain in the Qantas fleet?

Quite a few I would imagine. The six 747-400ERs are all less than six years old, and have plenty of time left on them, and the three 'ugly sisters' aren't much older. Don't count the old girl out yet...

Longer term, if the A350-1000 is as good as it promises, then Boeing is going to have to do more than just a 777 refresh or "ERX" as EK's Tim Clark calls it. It's either going to have to bite the bullet and do the 787-10, or do a 777 replacement in the 300-400 seat range.

Either way, these aircraft are all a decade away at least, and Qantas is going to need to replace its older VH-OJ_ series 744s before then, so it's either 777-300ERs or 747-8Is.

2) How likely would it be QF to choose the A345/A346?

Not very...the economics just don't stack up anymore, and the 'four engine for long haul' argument is largely irrelevant now unless you're polar routes.

[Ash W]

If V Australia could do it why can't Qantas? They could do it via different means e.g. leasing.

V Australia are planning them long term not short term, that is the main difference.

As you've stated previously, when some 744s are retired, QF will have less and eventually no a/c that is in the capacity / size between the A380 size and 787-9 or A330-300. That gap is quite big. What is the replacement aircraft for 744s? The A380 could be on some routes but on other routes / markets they won't need so many seats. The 773ER is the next best option currently. I can think of some reasons:

Again Qantas have made it clear that their plan is to replace the older 744 with A380's and then when and if they become available replace what are currently the newest 744's with A350-1000's or 787-10 (if ever built)

1) Boeing will have to compensate QF one way or the other.
2) How likely would it be QF to choose the A345/A346?
3) Favourable exchange rates (1aud = 80 us cents - is still quite high)

Point 1 compensation doesn't have to be in new aircraft, it can be in money or other things. Point 2, I would say never and point 3, yes good exchange rate but why would they bring forward their replacement program to take advantage?


If they test the mission requirements on the more demanding routes, I think the 773ER will come out on top. Various airlines around the world have proved that the 77W, for them, was the best option (e.g. SQ, CX, AF, AC, NH, EK and so on...)

They have clearly looked at the 777 in the past and have clearly never felt it was suitable for their needs, why would now be any different?


Of course they could just skip the 773ER altogether and get the A350. But what's to say there won't be delays to the A350 (like the A380)? And how many years will the 744 remain in the Qantas fleet?

There could well be delays no one will ever know. But with their 747's the 6 ER's are only 4 or 5 years old and the last 6 or so of the non ER's are about 8-10 years old. Now take into account the number of A380's on order that still leave a lot of capacity and a lot of years to keep the 744's going until a more suitable new generation aircraft is available. This has always been Qantas's annouced plan.

I have always reckoned that QF shouldve got their A330s a few years earlier than they should have. The A333 is a true workhorse in regional asian flights - the extra belly cargo revenue (if filled) wouldve generated extra revenue over the 767s for those few years..

You need to remember the A330's were orginaly purchased for domestic use, so the freight issue wouldn't have been that great a consideration considering the frequencies of the domestic flights etc But yes they have proved their worth internationaly. So if anything I would say the most sensible thing Qantas could order AS A STOP GAP meassure would be more A330-200 or -300's for international use.

As I have said most of what I have been talking about are Qantas's previously announced decisions and in aviation plans need to change. Now consdering the bad publicity with the -OJK incident and the public perception that the 747's are old maybe Qantas will have a bit of a re-think.

[Kieran Wells]

You need to remember the A330's were orginaly purchased for domestic use, so the freight issue wouldn't have been that great a consideration considering the frequencies of the domestic flights etc But yes they have proved their worth internationaly. So if anything I would say the most sensible thing Qantas could order AS A STOP GAP meassure would be more A330-200 or -300's for international use.


How have the A330-300's gone with doing the SYD-SIN run then connecting on the the B744's which headed on to Frankfurt recently? Could this be done as a more frequent thing, although this would reduce capacity SYD-SIN? Although with the intro of the A380 on SYD - SIN - LHR in the near future, this may add the capacity that they may have otherwise droped..

[Ray P.]

This rumour seems to have died just like all of its predecessors. :confused:

[Anthony J]

This rumour seems to have died just like all of its predecessors. :confused:
It's actually waiting patiently for the September board meeting where it will be discussed.