Qantas FY14/15 F/Y Results [Dreamliner in 2017]

[TomVexille]

As other posters have also said - if QF go 9 abreast for long haul B787 fleet then they are going to have to have some awesome service, IFE and food to differentiate themselves from the JQ B787 product and superior and cheaper competitors with B787s and A350s. Are the QF soft products that awesome enough to justify the price differential between QF and everyone else? Time will tell.

Especially since QF's standard seat pitch is already 31in.

 

[njba]

Am I right in thinking that nine abreast is 3-3-3? Or is it 2-5-2? Both seem awful.

 

[Pleb Status]

Yes interesting comments there - I think Boeing may have stuffed up by the 787 being late and being close to obnoxious in the 3-3-3 in Y configuration. Wheras by making the A350 fuselage a little wider than the B787 I think Airbus have made the A350 just wide enough to be tolerable (and better than the B787) even in a 3-3-3 Y cabin but just narrow enough to prevent the accountants (or laws of physics?) from attempting to try 3-4-3 in the A350. Pretty smart in hindsight because the average traveller will probably associate the B787 with discomfort and the A350 with similar 3-3-3 but slightly wider and more tolerable Y cabin.

The airlines would say that Boeing have got the width just right (tightly wedging in 3-3-3) and most do not care what the customers in Y think anyway.

SQ almost got it perfect by getting the 787 for Scoot and the 350 for themselves. There would have been an inherent comfort difference between the budget and premium brands. Unfortunately they stuffed this up when they then ordered the 787-10 (which appears to be going to be in SQ colours).

QF could have done the same thing by ordering the 787 for JQi and then ordering the 350 for themselves (and/or the A330neo). I believe the 330 pilots can move over to the 350 quite easily therefore limiting retraining costs etc.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Am I right in thinking that nine abreast is 3-3-3? Or is it 2-5-2? Both seem awful.

3-3-3. The 2-5-2 is usually a pretty good configuration... unless the flight is chockers, everyone gets to sit in pairs with no 'middle'. It was adopted on the DC-10 and MD-11 (also maybe some L10-11s).

The problem with 2-5-2 as I understand it is with delivery of IFE, which these days which is more suited to groups of 2 or 3 (not 5).

 

[eminere]

3-3-3. The 2-5-2 is usually a pretty good configuration... unless the flight is chockers, everyone gets to sit in pairs with no 'middle'. It was adopted on the DC-10 and MD-11 (also maybe some L10-11s).

And also on MH's B772s when they flew them.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

And also on MH's B772s when they flew them.

And of course AA's 772s also 2-5-2!

 

[TomVexille]

Am I right in thinking that nine abreast is 3-3-3? Or is it 2-5-2? Both seem awful.

AA still have some 777 in 2-5-2. It wasn't the worst on that aircraft as long as the flight wasn't full

The airlines would say that Boeing have got the width just right (tightly wedging in 3-3-3) and most do not care what the customers in Y think anyway.

SQ almost got it prefect by getting the 787 for Scoot and the 350 for themselves. There would have been an inherent comfort difference between the budget and premium brands. Unfortunately they stuffed this up when they then ordered the 787-10 (which appears to be going to be in SQ colours).

QF could done the same thing by ordering the 787 for JQi and then ordering the 350 for themselves (and/or the A330neo). I believe the 330 pilots can move over to the 350 quite easily therefore limiting retraining costs etc.

I thought SQ had originally ordered the 787 for themselves, and then found that pushing them onto Scoot (who came along later) worked for them.

But I think you're right that airlines don't really care what Y pax think, as they are the ones that are most price sensitive.

 

[Awesom Andy]

They should probably try for a 2-4-3 config. Best of both worlds in the 9 abreast universe.

 

[dajop]

They should probably try for a 2-4-3 config. Best of both worlds in the 9 abreast universe.

From memory, NH do have that configuration in some of their 77W's.

 

[eminere]

They should probably try for a 2-4-3 config. Best of both worlds in the 9 abreast universe.

And something already done by NH on some of their B77Ws. A very clever configuration imo.

 

[njba]

As if 9 abreast wasn't horrifying already but the (evil) people at Airbus now think 11 (eleven!) abreast is somehow sane Airbus looks to fit more passengers onto the A380 - Australian Business Traveller

I need a drink

 

[dajop]

As if 9 abreast wasn't horrifying already but the (evil) people at Airbus now think 11 (eleven!) abreast is somehow sane Airbus looks to fit more passengers onto the A380 - Australian Business Traveller

I love the quote:

"Every airline that flies the A380 says this airplane is a magnet for passengers"

Maybe it wouldn't be such a magnet with 11 across!

 

[Mr_Orange]

I love the quote:



Maybe it wouldn't be such a magnet with 11 across!

It's not a magnet for me, any more or less than other aircraft.

 

[downgraded]

An A380 is a known quantity ( generally positive). A 787 is a known quantity for evil. Add 11across to the A380 and it'll no longer be recognised as a positive. Indeed with still only 2 aisles it could instantly drop to the bottom in terms of amenity with that many extra people competing for space.

 

[dajop]

It's not a magnet for me, any more or less than other aircraft.

I think the remarks are probably attributable to Tim Clark (Emirates CEO) and have read several articles where he mentions that customers love them. But that's understandable up against their 777's which have 2-3-2 layout in J and squeeze the Y pax in at 10 across, same config as the wider A380 cabin, and the 777's noisier to boot. Going from Ek's 777 in Y to their A380 is like going from Y to Y+ almost.

 

[Altair]

I think the remarks are probably attributable to Tim Clark (Emirates CEO) and have read several articles where he mentions that customers love them. But that's understandable up against their 777's which have 2-3-2 layout in J and squeeze the Y pax in at 10 across, same config as the wider A380 cabin, and the 777's noisier to boot. Going from Ek's 777 in Y to their A380 is like going from Y to Y+ almost.

And premium passengers also get a better hard product as well.
Personally I am now favouring Airbus products over the offering from Boeing. I definitely will not consider 10 across 777 or 9 across 787 but will try a 9 across A350, favour the A380, they 747 because I love it so.
777 is too noisy but comfortable at 9 across, 3-3-3 or even 2-5-2 but I found it too cramped at 10 across (EK) and I am not too large 73kg.
I have not tried the 787 and will avoid choosing it for economy travel.

 

[dajop]

I have not tried the 787 and will avoid choosing it for economy travel.

Probably no need to avoid it altogether -at least at the moment - might be OK on JL's 2-4-2 configured 787's.

 

[Ash Davis]

Long time coming ! Will be very good for Qantas.

 

[Wingin..it]

As if 9 abreast wasn't horrifying already but the (evil) people at Airbus now think 11 (eleven!) abreast is somehow sane Airbus looks to fit more passengers onto the A380 - Australian Business Traveller

I need a drink

Many people like the A380 but MOST I talk too advise of the economy woes .Average people and mainly tourists but people will not suffer it anymore than needed .I reckon MORE people would travel more if there was a bit more passenger comfort put first.Yes we can get cheap flights but we are talking about Qantas being a more premier airline .Leave the deals to Jetstar.Not to say Q cannot have specials etc. An extra few hundred would pay for the loss of one seat in every row .Not to mention less baggage and weight in general.On long flights this could make a difference for extra fuel for emergencies.Boeing sell the planes yes but is this the best weight ratios etc for this type a/c.

 

[Wingin..it]

Meaning the best weight 8 across (economy)seems boeing at least have a heart and design planes with some semblance of sanity??????