Project Sunrise: A350 or 777X?

[jetset]

What we know so far is that Qantas wishes to make a decision by the end of this year (2019) to fly by 2022.
This was always a pretty tight schedule for Boeing. Remember that while the A350 has been flying for a few years now, the 777x series has never actually left the ground. Maiden flight isn't scheduled until next year! (2020) And now Boeing has delayed development of the 777-8, which was the only Boeing variant that can realistically fly the distance with a commercial payload. I don't think that Boeing is capable of delivering such a plane by 2022. Aviationweek suggests 2023 at the earliest.

It's pretty clear that within the time-frame that Qantas has specified, only Airbus can realistically deliver a plane. This is likely to be the speculated A350-1000ULR.

This puts Qantas in an interesting position. They realistically have two options. Either Qantas sticks to the original timeline and select Airbus by default or they delay the competition to give Boeing time to develop their 777-8. However delaying the competition would be perceived as preferential treatment and might lead to Airbus pulling out. Qantas probably doesn't want bad blood while they are negotiating their 737 fleet renewal. They need good relationships with both manufacturers to ensure the best negotiating position.

Either way this is a fascinating project.

 

[Himeno]

4 crew for what 42-44 hrs? of safety critical work seems tough - that’s still 11 hrs each without considering the (lack of) sleep considerations.

Where did you get 42-44 hours from?

The sunrise flights would be 21-22 hours in length, so roughly 24 hours duty time. Crew would then have approx 3 days rest in the outport before returning with another 24 hour duty period.

The issue is going to be (as with the PER-LHR flights) that if the flight has to divert somewhere, for any reason, it isn't going anywhere once in the diversion port until there has been a long enough rest period for the crew to complete the remaining flight.

 

[DC3]

4 crew for what 42-44 hrs? of safety critical work seems tough - that’s still 11 hrs each without considering the (lack of) sleep considerations.

A couple of shifts should do it?

Edit: Content

 

[dajop]

Where did you get 42-44 hours from?

The sunrise flights would be 21-22 hours in length, so roughly 24 hours duty time.

Assuming 2 crew in the coughpit. 2x 21-22 = 42-44 hours of work between 4 crew.

 

[DC3]

Assuming 2 crew in the coughpit. 2x 21-22 = 42-44 hours of work between 4 crew.

Probably 2 working and 2 resting/sleeping. Not that much different to PER-LHR really. Similar scenario?

 

[jb747]

For a flight time of, say, 18:30 hours, you'll have another hour before, and 30 minutes after. So, the actual tour of duty would be 20 hours. Everybody is 'on' for the hour before, and the first hour of the flight. Then all on again for the last hour, plus that 30 minutes.

So...the total duty time is (20*2) + (3:30*2) = 47 hours.

Looking at it another way. 18:30 flight time - 2 hours (all on time) = 16:30. Divide that by two, and you get the potential bunk time per seat. So, 8:15 off duty, and 11:45 on.

It all depends upon the design of the crew rest, and whether crew actually get any sleep in it or not. A quote from a management person (some years ago, and referring to another aircraft), when there were complaints about that aircraft's crew rest...."CASA says we have to give you a crew rest. Nothing says you have to be able to sleep in it". I thought he was pretty harsh at the time, but he's probably a coughcat compared to the new breeds of management.

 

[Himeno]

It all depends upon the design of the crew rest, and whether crew actually get any sleep in it or not. A quote from a management person (some years ago, and referring to another aircraft), when there were complaints about that aircraft's crew rest...."CASA says we have to give you a crew rest. Nothing says you have to be able to sleep in it". I thought he was pretty harsh at the time, but he's probably a coughcat compared to the new breeds of management.

The crew rest at the back of the 747 upper deck just in front of the stairs?

 

[jeremyaus]

I saw on youtube that Boeing is delaying the production of the 777X variant after the 737max disaster, so maybe Qantas will choose Airbus for the long flight if it comes out in time? But i hope it works out with Airbus or Boeing, coz im happy to give the trip a go.

I feel sorry for the crew and pilots. Im smashed already when i drive from sydney to melbourne with pitstops every so often. Even a 3hr drive makes me antsy and want to move around. Dunno how the pilots or crew get through a possible 20+ hour flight.

Going to put it out there for the travellers....would you prefer the 20+hr flight to London or like the Dubai/Singapore stop over?

 

[Daver6]

The crew rest at the back of the 747 upper deck just in front of the stairs?

That's to SO rest. I believe the FO and captain have theirs by the flight deck.

 

[jb747]

The 747-400 had one at the rear of upper business and another at the back of the coughpit. Both were flawed. But the one I was referring to was in the 767. The only decent one is in the 380.

 

[pauly7]

I saw on youtube that Boeing is delaying the production of the 777X variant after the 737max disaster, so maybe Qantas will choose Airbus for the long flight if it comes out in time? But i hope it works out with Airbus or Boeing, coz im happy to give the trip a go.

I feel sorry for the crew and pilots. Im smashed already when i drive from sydney to melbourne with pitstops every so often. Even a 3hr drive makes me antsy and want to move around. Dunno how the pilots or crew get through a possible 20+ hour flight.

Going to put it out there for the travellers....would you prefer the 20+hr flight to London or like the Dubai/Singapore stop over?

In J or above absolutely direct, especially when travelling for business. Want to minimise every second of travel time I can.

Don’t fly Y or W for long haul but if I did I think Y = stopover, W = on the fence.

 

[jb747]

If all of the J and above fly direct, would the airline even bother with flights for Y?

 

[juddles]

If all of the J and above fly direct, would the airline even bother with flights for Y?

But from what I have heard, those PER-LHR flights are extremely successful. Crazy people

 

[jb747]

But from what I have heard, those PER-LHR flights are extremely successful. Crazy people

They were never going to be unsuccessful, even if they carried zero passengers.

But, you'll note that in carrying the J class more or less directly (I really can't see how a stop in Perth differs from one in Dubai or Singapore), they actually managed to get rid of a couple of hundred Y seats. It's only a little aeroplane, and it replaced a big one. If you keep working that way, a single seater would be unbelievably successful.

 

[juddles]

The 747-400 had one at the rear of upper business and another at the back of the coughpit. Both were flawed. But the one I was referring to was in the 767. The only decent one is in the 380.

Given the long duration of Sunrise flights, and the carriage of a fairly "light" loading, I would believe that the crew rest facilities on these will be absolutely state of the art. Am I too optimistic?

 

[juddles]

Anything that involves buying the MAX is not an opportunity.
...

It seems from a couple of posts that my interpretation of Boeings situation as an "opportunity" for Qantas was somehow taken to mean something regarding 737 MAX's. NO! I am certain that Qantas will never ever, under any deal, accept the 737 MAX into service. I was talking about the usual sheer discounting, etc that goes on between airlines and the manufacturers.

 

[jb747]

Given the long duration of Sunrise flights, and the carriage of a fairly "light" loading, I would believe that the crew rest facilities on these will be absolutely state of the art. Am I too optimistic?

Almost certainly. Sadly.

 

[Pleb Status]

It seems from a couple of posts that my interpretation of Boeings situation as an "opportunity" for Qantas was somehow taken to mean something regarding 737 MAX's. NO! I am certain that Qantas will never ever, under any deal, accept the 737 MAX into service. I was talking about the usual sheer discounting, etc that goes on between airlines and the manufacturers.

QF will fly the 737MAX (or whatever Boeing renames it) in the future. Expect a big order a few months after it begins flying again.

 

[walter82]

I have a friend who flies the PER -LHR on a regular basis in J. He loves the direct flight and thinks Sunrise is the way to go whilst I think it sounds like a special kind of hell devised by a mathematical bean counter. Then again I miss the days of the stop over in HNL which was often an excuse for a day at the beach.

Of course the great irony is that his trip usually always starts in SYD and is often SYD -MEL - PER - LHR (and sometimes SYD -PER-LHR). He swears its a direct flight to LHR. Go figure. I'd prefer a shower in SIN.

 

[jb747]

It's direct if you live in Perth. If you live in Melbourne, why wouldn't you go any other way?