QF removes First from 747s and selected 380s

[James Smith]

Other potential routes to continue 744 operations are BRI & AKL to LAX and SYD to NYC via LAX. Will QANTAS fly the A380 from LAX to NYC?

But as said, 787 operations and any 777 order could change this.

[Mike W]

Originally Posted by James Smith

and any 777 order could change this.

While I'd like to see this happen James, don't hold your breath on it. They've had plenty of chances to get on to it (777) before now and with all the talk about the next gen CRFP Aircraft coming on stream (which possibly includes the 777's replacement), will they invest in "old tech"? (as Dixon [in]famously called the 747-8.)

Revisiting the main topic of this thread. My question is, are Qantas reducing the 747 fleet to nine or are they taking the first class out of nine aircraft with the other (if any) 747s already only being two class?

[Greg McDonald]

From NEWS.COM.AU:

QANTAS says passenger comfort will not be compromised by its profit recovery plan to increase passenger numbers on its long-haul A380 super jumbos to 550 people.
The airline will add 100 extra seats to 12 of its airborne mammoths.

It will also lift passenger numbers on nine Boeing 747s, from 305 to 359, effectively ending the golden era of luxury air travel, reports the Herald Sun.

Expensive first-class cabins aboard both model airlines will be carved up to make way for extra business class and premium economy seating.

Alan Joyce, the airline's chief executive, said first-class seats would be available only on Australia-London flights and on trans-Pacific services to Los Angeles.

He said that new arrangement would not see passengers crammed like cattle into economy cabins.

"They'll get a better deal because we will be stripping out the old economy seats on the 747s and replacing them with the wider seats used by economy passengers travelling on the A380,'' he said.

"They will also be getting a new entertainment system preloaded with 500 movies.''

[Brad Myer]

Any truth to the news that an A330 mini cabin refresh which will begin shortly?

Intl A333/A332s will receive the new Panasonic IFE system and have the new (red) Y class seat covers (already on Intl A332s) plus the new A380 style carpet and curtains installed?

[Arthur T]

I sincerely welcome the decision of refitting the existing A330s and B747s to A380 cabin style, which I believe the service standard will bring back up and make Qantas to be more attractive.

However, I would like to mention about the safety standards for Qantas. Although it has been lucky enough to have no fatal accidents, major accidents are still common in this carrier. There was just another A333 returned Sydney because of landing gear failure. I seriously don't think and is hard to believe Qantas is a safe airline anymore, especially according to its recent safety records.

As the result, Qantas is on my 'Dangerous' carrier list flying directly from YSSY to VHHH.

Meanwhile, Qantas and Virgin Atlantic are on my 'Poor Service' carrier list. I cannot stand the service quality of Qantas luggage handlers as they have already break at least 3 of my checked luggages. The issue also appeared on Virgin as well as I cannot stand any carrier who are weighting passengers' hand luggage. Furthermore breakfast provided by Virgin bound from Hong Kong is the worst among both 3 direct carriers.

Finally I would like to know whether the new products will be deployed onto Boeing 737-800 and 767-300(ER) Aircrafts. I think if they are still refusing to install AVODs on domestic flights the competitveness for Qantas will eventually been taken over by Virgin Blue.

[Todd Hendry]

Arthur T,

Which airlines are "your" "safe" airlines?

Which airline has good service?

Todd.

[Jack B]

It was an A332 and the landing gear failure wasn't what I'd call a "dangerous" situation.

People in Australia seem to love to pick apart every aspect of Qantas, and compare it to Singapore Airlines etc. The service on Singapore Airlines is DISTINCTLY Asian. It can also be argued that the service on Singapore Airlines is "fake", as the crew can be seen as rather "robotic".

Qantas is AUSTRALIAN. They hire crew of various ages and backgrounds, and train them well. The service reflects Australian culture.

Virgin Blue, for example, hires mostly young crew, and seems they also hire far less male crew than Qantas. There are exceptions, but your kidding yourself if you think that isn't true. Most are probably at the airline only a few years, so they're bound to be bubbly as anything. As for Virgin's actual product? I can do without paying for the ham and cheese sandwhiches, pringles and packet soup

If you really think Qantas is that bad, fly with an airline in Europe or America. You'll see why Qantas has consistently been in the top 5 skytrax airlines.

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Originally Posted by Arthur T

Although it has been lucky enough to have no fatal accidents, major accidents are still common in this carrier

Name some "major accidents" Qantas has had lately Arthur...

Originally Posted by Arthur T

There was just another A333 returned Sydney because of landing gear failure.

It was a hydraulic problem...if it was a "landing gear failure", they would still be cleaning up the mess at YSSY...

[Philip Argy]

Originally Posted by Arthur T

As the result, Qantas is on my 'Dangerous' carrier list flying directly from YSSY to VHHH

In my respectful opinion that's not a responsible thing to say on a board like this - "dangerous" is way too extreme a word to use given what you have described.

By all means express the view that the crew to passenger ratio change that will result from the seating increase will make the airline less safe in your view, but to put it in the category of "dangerous" I think is inappropriate.

Just my view, anyway ...

[Grant Smith]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Arthur - I note you're flying SQ. Why is this airline not on your 'dangerous' list? They killed 83 people in the Taipei crash back in 2000? Or how about that tail strike in Auckland caused by pilot error? This sounds like a 'very dangerous airline' to me Arthur...

Oh Andrew, didn't you know this was due to the fact that the B744 is a dangerous aircraft and should be removed from service post haste, not a dangerous airline...