Qantas increases A380 order

[oz_mark]

As serfty has linked below, it looks like a total of 8 new A330-200s. Now that is some compensation for A380 delays and option conversions. It would be really interesting to know just what deals have been struck, but of course that is privileged information between vendor and customer (commercial in confidence) so we are unlikely to ever know.

After all the previous comments about how much Qantas disliked the A330, imagine how many they would have bought if they liked it

 

[NM]

After all the previous comments about how much Qantas disliked the A330, imagine how many they would have bought if they liked it

The only thing Qantas did not like about the A330 was the turn-around time with the A330-300 for short-haul domestic ops. I believe the are very happy with the A330-200 on the longer domestic ops and with the A330-300 for medium range international ops. These new ones will be used primarily for international ops where they ate a good fit.

 

[Flying Fox]

So let me ask this -

Why are the turn around times on the A330 so slow vs the B767 that are used domestically?

Or is it a case of the A330 being a larger aircraft?

 

[NM]

So let me ask this -

Why are the turn around times on the A330 so slow vs the B767 that are used domestically?

Or is it a case of the A330 being a larger aircraft?

Its a larger aircraft and has 2x4x2 seating compared with the 767's 2x3x2. So that means more people standing waiting for access to overhead locker space and access via the same number of aisles. I know one extra seat across should not make a huge difference, but it does seem to. Also the longer aircraft means longer time to clean/check the cabin between flights.

 

[Altair]

Its a larger aircraft and has 2x4x2 seating compared with the 767's 2x3x3. So that means more people standing waiting for access to overhead locker space and access via the same number of aisles. I know one extra seat across should not make a huge difference, but it does seem to. Also the longer aircraft means longer time to clean/check the cabin between flights.

Does QF use "cans" for domestic baggage or bulk load them? Jetstar A320 use "cans" and that measn fewer baggage handlers are required and also faster loading times compared to the 737. The turnaround times were what Qantas found that made the A330-200 non-viable for a 767 replacement on their east coast Cityflyer service as they would have one cycle less than the 767. Besides the A330 were not designed for these short routes and when QF switched them to the medium hauls which they were designed for then they became quite happy. Note the A330-300 are weight limited on the long routes, BOM & PEK so that is why they have ordered the A330-200 that are perfect for these routes.

 

[serfty]

So let me ask this -

Why are the turn around times on the A330 so slow vs the B767 that are used domestically?

Or is it a case of the A330 being a larger aircraft?

Qantas originally intended to use it's 332s and some 333's Domestically. However, it was found they were not as suited to this for quite a few reasons.

I seems to remember one of the main reason was that it took a lot longer to refuel the beast than its Boeing conterparts.

Subsequently, all 333's were configured for QF international. The 332's probably would have been but apparently, they are not strong enough to handle SkyBeds in the J cabin. However, this make them good candidates for JetStar International.

There a bit more here: A330's - 200s vs 300 (For QF Ops)

 

[oz_mark]

Qantas originally intended to use it's 332s and some 333's Domestically. However, it was found they were not as suited to this for quite a few reasons.

I seems to remember one of the main reason was that it took a lot longer to refuel the beast than its Boeing conterparts.

Subsequently, all 333's were configured for QF international. The 332's probably would have been but apparently, they are not strong enough to handle SkyBeds in the J cabin. However, this make them good candidates for JetStar International.

There a bit more here: A330's - 200s vs 300 (For QF Ops)

One would hope that the new 332's (or at least the ones for QF, and I suppose if they think ahead the JQ ones as well), will have a stronger floor.

 

[NM]

Does QF use "cans" for domestic baggage or bulk load them? Jetstar A320 use "cans" and that measn fewer baggage handlers are required and also faster loading times compared to the 737.

Yes, they use containers for domestic baggage, just as they do for 767.

Note the A330-300 are weight limited on the long routes, BOM & PEK so that is why they have ordered the A330-200 that are perfect for these routes.

And their existing A330-200s would need the cabin floor strengthened to install the Skybeds.

I guess there is also an issue with airport landing fees that are based on the aircraft's registered maximum take-off weight, which is higher for the A330-300 than the A330-200 which is also higher than the 767. So unless they need the extra capacity (either passengers of freight), it can affect operating costs.

 

[mainly tailfirst]

Its a larger aircraft and has 2x4x2 seating compared with the 767's 2x3x3. So that means more people standing waiting for access to overhead locker space and access via the same number of aisles. I know one extra seat across should not make a huge difference, but it does seem to. Also the longer aircraft means longer time to clean/check the cabin between flights.

It's been a while since I've flown on one, but methinks you mean a 767 is 2x3x2 in Y. A typo I'm sure . Either that or they've got serious about improving yield on these old birds!

mt

 

[Altair]

Yes, they use containers for domestic baggage, just as they do for 767.

And their existing A330-200s would need the cabin floor strengthened to install the Skybeds.

I guess there is also an issue with airport landing fees that are based on the aircraft's registered maximum take-off weight, which is higher for the A330-300 than the A330-200 which is also higher than the 767. So unless they need the extra capacity (either passengers of freight), it can affect operating costs.

Sorry I was talking about the new A330-200. QF originally took the reduced MTOW option, lighter floors but also de-rated engines, on the original 4 A330-200 that they planned for domestic operations to reduce the airport charges. If they plan to use these aircraft on long haul international operations, once they return from JQ then they will need the costly floor strengthening, the engines are software de-rated so that should be a quick fix. Then again they may just use them for PER operations or Trans-Tasman work.

 

[NM]

It's been a while since I've flown on one, but methinks you mean a 767 is 2x3x2 in Y. A typo I'm sure . Either that or they've got serious about improving yield on these old birds!

mt

Yep, you are right. That's my lysdexia coming thruogh again. I will go back and edit its just so as not to confuse anyone else. Me being confused is bad enough.

 

[NM]

Sorry I was talking about the new A330-200. QF originally took the reduced MTOW option, lighter floors but also de-rated engines, on the original 4 A330-200 that they planned for domestic operations to reduce the airport charges. If they plan to use these aircraft on long haul international operations, once they return from JQ then they will need the costly floor strengthening, the engines are software de-rated so that should be a quick fix. Then again they may just use them for PER operations or Trans-Tasman work.

I don't think they modify the aircraft when they are finished with JQ. I think they will be happy to used them for long-haul domestic ops (SYD/MEL-PER) and trans-Tasman. Those routes will fit with their current construction.

 

[maninblack]

Its a larger aircraft and has 2x4x2 seating compared with the 767's 2x3x2. So that means more people standing waiting for access to overhead locker space and access via the same number of aisles. I know one extra seat across should not make a huge difference, but it does seem to. Also the longer aircraft means longer time to clean/check the cabin between flights.

Surely though they were using twin bridges to load/unload passengers at MEL & SYD, this seemed to make quite a difference. And an extra cleaner should have sorted out the other issue.

 

[NM]

Surely though they were using twin bridges to load/unload passengers at MEL & SYD, this seemed to make quite a difference. And an extra cleaner should have sorted out the other issue.

How many gates at SYD and MEL domestic terminals have twin-bridge capability?

 

[serfty]

Surely though they were using twin bridges to load/unload passengers at MEL & SYD, this seemed to make quite a difference. And an extra cleaner should have sorted out the other issue.

Un/Loading of PAX was not the issue. It seems the A330-300s were originally pulled from domestic operations mainly because of problems with refuelling.

Apparently this is substantially more laborious and time consuming than on the 767, meaning turn-around times are significantly longer, reducing the operating efficiency of the aircraft; especially for routes such as the MEL-SYD-BNE triangle.

 

[maninblack]

How many gates at SYD and MEL domestic terminals have twin-bridge capability?

QF domestic terminal at MEL has at least 4 such gates as for SYD, dunno, I think you still have to walk from the shed across the tarmac, but they do have stale Krispy Kreme

I mean seriously, as if any peak hour flight has actually arrived or departed on time from SYD anytime in the last decade anyway

 

[NM]

QF domestic terminal at MEL has at least 4 such gates

Ahh yes, gates 3, 11, 21 and 23. I had not taken any notice since I rarely fly on anything than a 737 to/from Melbourne domestic these days.

... as for SYD, dunno

Can they use some of the paired gates in the satellite for dual-bridge operations? I think they would be gates 9/10 and 11/12 from memory.

I mean seriously, as if any peak hour flight has actually arrived or departed on time from SYD anytime in the last decade anyway

Hmm, its been a while for me :evil: .

 

[NM]

Note that Australian Aviation magazine is reporting EK as stating that the A380 is still 5.5 tonnes over-weight. That is a lot to be found. I wonder if that is also affecting delivery?

 

[Flying Fox]

I read on another forum that EK are looking to send a 'team of engineers' to Airbus to review their progress and to determine how the delays will effect their airline.

I'm not sure whether this is simply a way to put additional pressure on Airbus for compensation/discounts OR whether they are seriously considering some cancellations.

As an aside they could also be trying to signal Boeing that they might also be considering the 747-800.

Just food for thought.

 

[NM]

I read on another forum that EK are looking to send a 'team of engineers' to Airbus to review their progress and to determine how the delays will effect their airline.

I'm not sure whether this is simply a way to put additional pressure on Airbus for compensation/discounts OR whether they are seriously considering some cancellations.

As an aside they could also be trying to signal Boeing that they might also be considering the 747-800.

Just food for thought.

With the huge values represented by these orders, I am sure there are lots of games being played out to influence other parties to see things in different ways. It is indeed going to be interesting to see what happens in the next little while.