Comparing Qantas aircraft in Y

[xt_20]

Just had the pleasure of getting on 6 QF flights in 2 weeks, all in Y, including 27hrs at one go (in Y) from NYC to Perth via LAX and SYD.
Just thought I'll list some comparisons for anyone who is looking for slightly more comfort in Y.

Transpacific - Took the A380 from MEL to LAX and B747 (refurb) from LAX - JFK - LAX - SYD
1) The A380 is much quieter. The air-conditioning noise on the B747 is very loud.
2) Lower pressurization on the A380 - can definitely feel the difference.
3) Self serve snack bar on the A380 - couldn't find it on the B747.
4) 'Newer' aircraft - reading lights wasn't working well on the B747, seat seemed a little tighter.
5) Foot nets - Not present on the B747. Helpful as you are slightly more 'horizontal' when sleeping.

Big differences in comfort between the 2 planes - clearly the 'A380-style offerings' on the B747 doesn't cut it at all.
How can Qantas remain competitive using B747s?

Perth - East Coast - Had the A333 and A332.
1) A333's IFE reminds me of the ones in the late 90s.
2) Meals on both flights seemed to have shrunk since I last travelled last year.

 

[ajw373]

Big differences in comfort between the 2 planes - clearly the 'A380-style offerings' on the B747 doesn't cut it at all.
How can Qantas remain competitive using B747s?

Next time you fly to the US fly United in Economy, then you will know why what Qantas offers is competative, even on the 747.

 

[mannej]

Perth - East Coast - Had the A333 and A332.
1) A333's IFE reminds me of the ones in the late 90s.
2) Meals on both flights seemed to have shrunk since I last travelled last year.

The screen quality may not match the IFE on the 380 etc, however, the system is still AVOD.

The 330's that Virgin have from EK use a loop based system, and so do some of the regional carriers around the SE Asian region who use the planes on similar length flights.

 

[moa999]

The QF 747 refurb is a helluva lot better than that was there before.
On the US routes it is still competitive against UAs 747, VA/DLs 777
On the Asian/Euro routes agree it will struggle against all the A380s

 

[NM]

2) Lower pressurization on the A380 - can definitely feel the difference.

Lower? I think you will find its higher pressurization inside the A380 . The air pressure outside is the same for A380 and 747. but inside the A380 is slightly higher pressure than the 747 giving a slightly lower "Cabin Altitude" and hence more comfortable for the passengers. The pressure differential between outside and inside is slightly greater on the A380 than the 747. The A380 is capable of maintaining a "cabin altitude" of 5,000 feet when operating at 43,000 feet, while the 747 can only maintain closer to 8,000 feet cabin altitude - which means the A380 has a higher pressurization than the 747 at high altitudes.

 

[ajw373]

The QF 747 refurb is a helluva lot better than that was there before.
On the US routes it is still competitive against UAs 747, VA/DLs 777
On the Asian/Euro routes agree it will struggle against all the A380s

On Asian/Euro routes there are still plenty of non A380 that Qantas competes against. Take Thai for example who fly 747's or 'regional' 777's to Australia, a Qantas 747 or even an A330 are pretty competative compared to these. Then there is Malaysian, Cathay, the Chinese carriers and more.

Actually overall the Qantas product on a global scale is very competative and I say it time and time again to people who complain, go out to the real world and see what they get dished up. We in Australia have been very spoilt by our domestic offerings (compare to say intra Europe or American domestic for example) and when it comes to international most of our flights are long haul and served by quality carriers many so again we are very spoilt. On a global scale Qantas is most certainly up there with it's offerings, but most certainly not the best. But why does it need to be? The product they offer for the price is a good match.

 

[simongr]

Thankfully I don't fly whY int'l but I certainly agree that DOM whY in Oz is much better than the US or Europe. However it does come at a premium. A three hour discount whY fare in the US recently priced at about US$250 (rtn) compared to the same price for a one hour flight.

Also in the premium cabins the premium that QF charge over competitors is not warranted. If I can fly new J SYD-LHR on CX for $2K less than QF it is a no brainer.

 

[ozmille]

On Asian/Euro routes there are still plenty of non A380 that Qantas competes against. Take Thai for example who fly 747's or 'regional' 777's to Australia, a Qantas 747 or even an A330 are pretty competative compared to these. Then there is Malaysian, Cathay, the Chinese carriers and more.

Actually overall the Qantas product on a global scale is very competative and I say it time and time again to people who complain, go out to the real world and see what they get dished up. We in Australia have been very spoilt by our domestic offerings (compare to say intra Europe or American domestic for example) and when it comes to international most of our flights are long haul and served by quality carriers many so again we are very spoilt. On a global scale Qantas is most certainly up there with it's offerings, but most certainly not the best. But why does it need to be? The product they offer for the price is a good match.

A friend did TG/LH combination to Europe. Mainscreen entertainment for the whole trip. I had a giggle and fly QF

 

[Mal Ware]

1) A333's IFE reminds me of the ones in the late 90s.

Same as the 767's, I am sure I flew on the same aircraft over 20 years ago to Manila.

The screens are the same along with the ones that have the old projector with 3 different coloured lights on them. They were high tech 20 years ago as well. :mrgreen:

At least they have removed the ashtrays from the arm rests now......hello 21st century.

 

[ajw373]

At least they have removed the ashtrays from the arm rests now......hello 21st century.

You will find they had to keep the ash trays in the seats to comply with aircraft certification regulations. I believe the only place they are required now is in the toilet.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Actually overall the Qantas product on a global scale is very competative and I say it time and time again to people who complain, go out to the real world and see what they get dished up. We in Australia have been very spoilt by our domestic offerings (compare to say intra Europe or American domestic for example) and when it comes to international most of our flights are long haul and served by quality carriers many so again we are very spoilt. On a global scale Qantas is most certainly up there with it's offerings, but most certainly not the best. But why does it need to be? The product they offer for the price is a good match.

Compared to the USA I would agree, QF wins. Compared to Europe not so sure. Even on a short flight there I get a nice sandwich if flying economy, plus free drinks from the bar (outside meal times QF is pretty slim pickings...). But why set the standard so low? Why not compare to Asia where i get a full hot meal on just about every flight no matter what time?

QF doesn't have to be the best, but their prices aren't that low. Granted since the new management they seem to be a lot keener on prices, and fares to Europe seem to have become more in line with their competition (especially for premium classes). But they are out there with their 91 reason or whatever it is. They are marketing world leader, so that's the bar they have set. Not something lower that we should compare with domestic USA.

 

[ajw373]

Compared to the USA I would agree, QF wins. Compared to Europe not so sure. Even on a short flight there I get a nice sandwich if flying economy, plus free drinks from the bar (outside meal times QF is pretty slim pickings...). But why set the standard so low? Why not compare to Asia where i get a full hot meal on just about every flight no matter what time?

Which airline in Europe? BA certainly not, EZ no way, FR gotta be joking, IB no, AF no, KL no, SK no, EI no, OU no. In fact in my experiance intra Europe is just as "bad" as the US and I don't think I am setting the bar low, just being realistic.

And that is before even discussing seats. BA Club Europe anyone?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Which airline in Europe? BA certainly not, EZ no way, FR gotta be joking, IB no, AF no, KL no, SK no, EI no, OU no. In fact in my experiance intra Europe is just as "bad" as the US and I don't think I am setting the bar low, just being realistic.

And that is before even discussing seats. BA Club Europe anyone?

Sarnie and bar provided on BA. LH and LX give good snacks in economy. Can't compare low cost carriers with QF, have to compare like for like. I haven't put foot on an IB/AF/KL plane etc for some time so can't comment on those.

 

[mannej]

All I remember on BA was a bag of curry crisps;-)

 

[ajw373]

All I remember on BA was a bag of curry crisps;-)

It depends upon time of day, just like Qantas. In the morning I recall a bacon roll was often on offer, morning tea time some dry biscuits, lunch half a sandwich etc.

 

[medhead]

I had a morning flight to GLA on BA and got some snack pack nibblys and a G&T.

 

[hummel]

A friend did TG/LH combination to Europe. Mainscreen entertainment for the whole trip. I had a giggle and fly QF

I had a giggle when a friend told me they paid $10k+ to fly F to Europe. I told them I did it for $2800 on (TG/LH no less). No chance to watch the screen, was too busy relaxing in my suite and letting the champagne flow...