ALL QF's 330's to get lay flat Business seating - Including Domestic

[Awesom Andy]

The return QF6 SIN-SYD looks chockers... I wonder if that was the reason for the sub.

Although the 744 has only 1 more Y seat than the A333. Guess there are going to be some op-ups tonight. For the next few days, all ex-SIN flights are at or close to 100% capacity. Seems like there's some sort of great escape going on in SIN.

 

[wenglock.mok]

Although the 744 has only 1 more Y seat than the A333.

It does - but the W cabin has been remapped to Y so the actual config is 58J 306Y.

 

[maninblack]

Although the 744 has only 1 more Y seat than the A333. Guess there are going to be some op-ups tonight. For the next few days, all ex-SIN flights are at or close to 100% capacity. Seems like there's some sort of great escape going on in SIN.

Smoke haze has been very bad. some people may have had enough, need a break, especially families of ex-pats.

 

[ajw373]

I believe some of the newer A332s with the eX2 PTVs in the Y cabin will be operating both internationally and domestically to backfill the A333s.

This will happen regularly (and not on occasion like QF have suggested) as there just isn't enough A333s (even if all of them are in service) to maintain the schedule they have planned.

10x A333s:
- QF81/82 SYD-SIN-SYD
- QF23/24 SYD-BKK-SYD
- QF129/130 SYD-PVG-SYD
- QF117/118 SYD-HKG-SYD
- QF5/6 SYD-SIN-SYD
- QF3/4 SYD-HNL-SYD
- QF35/36 MEL-SIN-MEL
- QF29/30 MEL-HKG-MEL
- QF51/52 BNE-SIN-BNE
- QF97/98 BNE-HKG-BNE
- QF61/62 BNE-NRT-BNE
- QF19/20 SYD-MNL-SYD + QF41/42 SYD-CGK-SYD (these are not daily and so should be able to be done by one line of flying)

That's 12 lines of flying, not taking into account both planned and unplanned maintenance.

The 332's are not back filling, they have been an integral part of the schedule for many years now. The only recent change is some of the previously domestic A332's are now operating international, this is as a result of the the retirement of 2 of the 4 old config international 332's. Its been mentioned in this thread that these two when refurbished will become domestic only with more of the newer 332's sharing international and domestic duties.

So your list, is a list of A330 flights, NOT 333 flights. As I've said a few times QF41/42 has been nominally A332 for about a year and for the past few weeks has been operated by either EBV or EBS and as far as the schedule shows seems to be new config A332's (so maybe the first converted route). QF3/4 is much the same, eg sees mostly 333'2s and QF5/6 is 332 maybe 5 out of 7 days a week.

 

[Flyerqf]

The 332's are not back filling, they have been ian integral part of the schedule for many years now. The only recent change is the previously domestic A332's operating international, this is as a result of the the retirement of 2 of the 4 old config 332's. Its been mentioned in this thread that these two when refurbished will become domestic only with more of the newer 332's sharing international and domestic duties.

So your list, is a list of A330 flights, NOT 333 flights. As I've said a few times QF41/42 has been nominally A332 for about a year and for the past few weeks has been operated by either EBV or EBS and as far as the schedule shows seems to be new config A332's (so maybe the first converted route). QF3/4 is much the same, eg sees mostly 333'2s and QF5/6 is 332 maybe 5 out of 7 days a week.

Once EBG and EBL are refurbed, QF3/4 will need to go exclusively A333 as the A332 can only operate shorter international flights in the new config.

 

[maninblack]

Once EBG and EBL are refurbed, QF3/4 will need to go exclusively A333 as the A332 can only operate shorter international flights in the new config.

Is this because of toilets? Crew rest areas? Galleys?

 

[Flyerqf]

Is this because of toilets? Crew rest areas? Galleys?

The crew rest and galleys primarily but the number of toilets is not sufficient for a long haul flight either.

 

[moa999]

Somethings got to give. QF previously used 10 -300s and the 4 SkyBedI -200s -- or are you saying -300s on QF3/4, so more -200s on the Asian flights

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Once EBG and EBL are refurbed, QF3/4 will need to go exclusively A333 as the A332 can only operate shorter international flights in the new config.

This is puzzling. The A333 has(d) to operate weight restricted from PVG, whereas the 332 was fine. I can't understand why an airline would the 332 for shorter range?

 

[ajw373]

Once EBG and EBL are refurbed, QF3/4 will need to go exclusively A333 as the A332 can only operate shorter international flights in the new config.

Which should be possible as the refurb program will have ended.

 

[ajw373]

This is puzzling. The A333 has(d) to operate weight restricted from PVG, whereas the 332 was fine. I can't understand why an airline would the 332 for shorter range?

It has nothing to do with weight. It is about the way the aircraft is configured. Cannot recall if it was galley size or crew rest areas.

 

[Flyerqf]

This is puzzling. The A333 has(d) to operate weight restricted from PVG, whereas the 332 was fine. I can't understand why an airline would the 332 for shorter range?

I think they've chosen to have consistency across fleet types for operational efficiency. Therefore all 333s and all 332s with same config rather than a few long haul 332s as they had previously.

i think in the end QF81/82, QF5/6 and QF41/42 will likely be 332 ops and the rest 333. Given QF3/4 and 19/20 don't operate every day there will be days where 81/82 and 5/6 will be A333.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

It has nothing to do with weight. It is about the way the aircraft is configured. Cannot recall if it was galley size or crew rest areas.

I was told the 333s were weight restricted for longer routes, such as PVG. Maybe it was still commercially viable - I don't know. Hence the question.

It would seem to make sense to be able to run an aircraft that you could fill completely (ie the A332)

From the QF fleet page, the A333 range with full payload is listed as 7000km, the 332 is 8500km.

Distance wise:
SYD-HNL - 8105km
SYD-PVG - 7792km
SYD-NRT - 7753km
SYD-SIN - 6252km

 

[kermatu]

Smoke haze has been very bad. some people may have had enough, need a break, especially families of ex-pats.

I was in Singapore this week. Haze limited visibility but was otherwise ok from my perspective at least. It cleared by Wednesday, and the number of people who commented on "wow, great to see the sun" was quite striking. Also striking was every second voice I heard was an Aussie... Sorry, OT.

 

[ajw373]

I was told the 333s were weight restricted for longer routes, such as PVG. Maybe it was still commercially viable - I don't know. Hence the question.

It would seem to make sense to be able to run an aircraft that you could fill completely (ie the A332)

From the QF fleet page, the A333 range with full payload is listed as 7000km, the 332 is 8500km.

Distance wise:
SYD-HNL - 8105km
SYD-PVG - 7792km
SYD-NRT - 7753km
SYD-SIN - 6252km

Yeah the 332 does have a greater range, that is the reason why they got the 4 332's in the first place (Mumbai direct for example). The issue at hand is why the new config 332's cannot operate longer routes. As I said nothing to do with weight, or range etc and everything to do with the way the aircraft has been configured, if the rumours are to be believed.

And I think that is the key for the most part it is just rumor, may have some fact behind it, may also be wrong.

 

[wenglock.mok]

When the press releases first came out, they seemed to imply that once refurbished, the A332s would operate domestically and the A333s would operate internationally and the way they've been configured seems to suggest that.

However, operational realities have clearly meant that some compromise has to be reached. As such, they have decided to dedicate some of the newer A332s to operate internationally when required.

 

[madrooster]

I was told the 333s were weight restricted for longer routes, such as PVG.

The typical QF130 route has the flight travelling east towards Japan, before turning south. The other route it can take is to follow the coast of China down to near Taiwan then head south east. Both routes are not a straight great circle route.

 

[maninblack]

I was told the 333s were weight restricted for longer routes, such as PVG. Maybe it was still commercially viable - I don't know. Hence the question.

It would seem to make sense to be able to run an aircraft that you could fill completely (ie the A332)

From the QF fleet page, the A333 range with full payload is listed as 7000km, the 332 is 8500km.

Distance wise:
SYD-HNL - 8105km
SYD-PVG - 7792km
SYD-NRT - 7753km
SYD-SIN - 6252km

Airbus give a range for the older A333 such as Qantas have of nearly 11,000km at full payload. They flew A332's AKL-LAX that's 10,500km

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Airbus give a range for the older A333 such as Qantas have of nearly 11,000km at full payload. They flew A332's AKL-LAX that's 10,500km

I'm only going on the figures QF list. An 11,000km range with full payload would mean they wouldn't need to weight restrict PVG... which they were clearly doing on the couple flights I did (lots of room). A332s were packed to the rafters.

 

[maninblack]

I would tend to believe the figures published by Airbus themselves. A333 certainly has a greater range than 7,000km. I think those ranges Qantas has published are their range in miles and they have written km in error. http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/