Qantas Project Sunrise goes ahead, 12 new A350-1000s ordered

[Quickstatus]

Food is food?

I have never why breakfast has to be different to lunch and dinner. So much simpler if food is time agnostic

 

[TeaKozy]

I have never why breakfast has to be different to lunch and dinner. So much simpler if food is time agnostic

You mean you don’t like having three breakfasts flying MEL-LAX (lounge, plane, lounge)?

 

[Quickstatus]

You mean you don’t like having three breakfasts flying MEL-LAX (lounge, plane, lounge)?

. No I mean why can't I have the dinner menu at breakfast and say the breakfast menu at dinner?

 

[RooFlyer]

And I'll likewise ask you to substantiate that.

No - it was stated as a belief, not a fact (“So I believe so far. …)

The Quest extract you mentioned doesn’t say that the ULR won’t be priced at a premium to standard air frame - they can stick the R&D cost anywhere they choose but then what they price the final product at is different - but if it is price exactly the same as all the other A350–1000s then good on Qantas! But like I say, the usefulness of the ULR generally versus the standard airframe is very limited. Why would you buy a custom-built plane with extended range and lower seat capacity if you don’t need it? Even if you say okay we won’t use the extra fuel tank and will put more seats in – why wouldn’t you buy the standard air frame which has a lot more proven capability and systems the same as all the others?

 

[justinbrett]

No - it was stated as a belief, not a fact (“So I believe so far. …)

The Quest extract you mentioned doesn’t say that the ULR won’t be priced at a premium to standard air frame - they can stick the R&D cost anywhere they choose but then what they price the final product at is different - but if it is price exactly the same as all the other A350–1000s then good on Qantas! But like I say, the usefulness of the ULR generally versus the standard airframe is very limited. Why would you buy a custom-built plane with extended range and lower seat capacity if you don’t need it? Even if you say okay we won’t use the extra fuel tank and will put more seats in – why wouldn’t you buy the standard air frame which has a lot more proven capability?

There's no point debating it because the price is confidential - what we do know is there's not really such thing as a list price (or more accurately its rarely used), so if there's a 10% premium but QF gets a 40% discount for a large order (noting it ordered A32Xs as part of the deal) - is it really a premium? Either way we won't know.

You keep saying "custom built plane". It's an official variant by the manufacturer. They've sold 12 - as a comparison they only sold 8 A330-800s, and that was to multiple customers. They only sold 7 A350-900ULRs to SQ. There's a a dozen or so variants from Airbus & Boeing which haven't sold well at all, so what's the difference? All aircraft are custom built.

Boeing didn't sell 747-400ERs to anybody else however it did re-use a lot of the R&D from that project into later generation 747-400Fs.

As for who would buy it - QF is converting two of it's 787 ULR routes (PER-LHR & AKL-JFK) to the type, so the numbers must look a lot better. That's only two of the 10 top longest routes - not to mention other routes that could be launched. I'd be surprised if SQ don't buy some eventually. I also wouldn't rule out QR (DOH-AKL is longer than PER-LHR), Not saying it will be wildly popular but I've got a feeling QF won't be the only buyer.

 

[Daver6]

. No I mean why can't I have the dinner menu at breakfast and say the breakfast menu at dinner?

You can....just no on QF. They don't believe in dine on demand, despite pretending they do on the printer J menus.

 

[RooFlyer]

You keep saying "custom built plane". It's an official variant by the manufacturer.

Qantas asked for it. Airbus developed it for Qantas; I haven't heard that they were planning to do it otherwise. That's what I mean by 'custom built'; I think most people would understand the meaning.

As for who would buy it - QF is converting two of it's 787 ULR routes (PER-LHR & AKL-JFK) to the type, so the numbers must look a lot better. That's only two of the 10 top longest routes - not to mention other routes that could be launched. I'd be surprised if SQ don't buy some eventually. I also wouldn't rule out QR (DOH-AKL is longer than PER-LHR), Not saying it will be wildly popular but I've got a feeling QF won't be the only buyer.

The A350-1000ULR may be more profitable on those routes than the B787 - but Qantas has also talked about fleet optimisation. Win-win for them.

I agree that there may be other buyers for it - although I reckon very limited. SQ, sure. But if if an airline can get away with an existing type, I still think they would (usual caveats on production time lines etc).

 

[elanshin]

Qantas asked for it. Airbus developed it for Qantas; I haven't heard that they were planning to do it otherwise. That's what I mean by 'custom built'; I think most people would understand the meaning.



The A350-1000ULR may be more profitable on those routes than the B787 - but Qantas has also talked about fleet optimisation. Win-win for them.

I agree that there may be other buyers for it - although I reckon very limited. SQ, sure. But if if an airline can get away with an existing type, I still think they would (usual caveats on production time lines etc).

I wonder if BA would get them out of left field and directly challenge QF. Rumor was that a UK based airlines was running the numbers on PER -LHR and considering direct to PER as well.

ME3 might get a fleet to expand certain regions potentially and who knows what the chinese airlines are up to. I know theres a lot of business between south America and China and it's an absolute slog to go back and forth there.

 

[offshore171]

I wonder if BA would get them out of left field and directly challenge QF. Rumor was that a UK based airlines was running the numbers on PER -LHR and considering direct to PER as well.

Not sure the poms are as resilient as aussies when it comes to ULH flights!

 

[mviy]

I wonder if BA would get them out of left field and directly challenge QF. Rumor was that a UK based airlines was running the numbers on PER -LHR and considering direct to PER as well.

I guess they’ll be interested to see how Sunrise goes for QF and also how BA’s one stop flights to MEL go to see whether it’s worth the risk.

 

[moa999]

If they have multiple daily flights on the Sunrise aircraft going to the same overseas destination they can improve aircraft utilisation. So whilst initially utilisation will not be great, it should improve.

Been no indication of that.

And remember a double daily SYD-LHR would take up five aircraft in the schedule. Qantas only have 12 on order...

Also a thread on Reddit but there have been some subtle design changes to the A359 shown on this page.

https://www.qantas.com/en-au/onboard/fleet/a350

Economy seats are now a deep red cloth with similar red leather headrest (previous renders were a grey with brown headrests similar to the A220).. Suggestions that the grey is showing marks way too easily on the A220.

Also noted that the light in Business has shifted from a circular tube to flat bar design.

 

[dajop]

ME3 might get a fleet to expand certain regions potentially and who knows what the chinese airlines are up to. I know theres a lot of business between south America and China and it's an absolute slog to go back and forth there.

China and South America is difficult, from PVG, apart from perhaps Bogota and Lima, the major centres are quite a bit further than SYD-LHR.

If you use great circle mapper, interesting to put in two circles at any given airport that shows the additional range gained by this aircraft (using SYD-LHR as the realistic range vs other ULR (eg PER-LHR, AKL-DOH)

Great Circle Mapper

Displays a map on which the great circle path for one or more routes is plotted and calculates the distance along each route. Ranges from one or more locations may also be plotted, along with go/no-go areas for ETOPS operations at various rule times.

gc.kls2.com

 

[justinbrett]

Qantas asked for it. Airbus developed it for Qantas; I haven't heard that they were planning to do it otherwise. That's what I mean by 'custom built'; I think most people would understand the meaning.

Developed, not built. That's the issue I have with your use of that statement - the costs of development are one off, the IP is owned by the manufacturer and can be reused (such as the Airbus CEO has said). The costs to then build aircraft of that variant is another matter - and there is nothing in the A350-1000ULR to suggest that the build costs of the aircraft are significantly more than the main variant - the main one being the extra fuel tank.

For an existing A350-1000 operator, it's not a significant step to order a subfleet of ULRs - in fact it's one of biggest selling points, is that it's based on a very popular type.

 

[downtheback]

Evening arrivals could work for Sunrise if there are multiple arrivals for the same city pair or QF actually does MEL flights so domestic connections are less necessary. Though having to take a short domestic flight to connect to a Sunrise flight defeats the purpose of paying a premium for direct non-stop in the first place.

Yes and no.

One of the biggest issues flying east from EU to AU is that the stopover always seems to interrupt the optimal time to be asleep to minimise jetlag. Being on the PS flight to SYD and then transferring to MEL/BNE/ADL whilst being a similar flight time overall would at least solve this problem.

Which brings us back to the situation that PS is ideal for a relatively limited number of people, plus QF diehards. If you want to arrive in London at sparrows (or will fly Qantas no matter what) - great! Anywhere else, stopover in Asia or ME and then fly on direct to your final destination, be it Birmingham or Brussels. You'll could be there quicker than via a PS flight and fly on Euro J to final destination.

But then, I'm def not the target market for PS, doing as I do, going to Europe in a stately fashion - a stop overnight in Asia, then a stop overnight in ME/Istanbul (or maybe several nights with QR's v cheap stopover Doha deal) and then onwards. All part of the holiday and all daytime flights with jetlag mostly solved by the time I reach Europe. Coming back often only one stop, as I care less how I feel on return.

I still think this is where Turkish will be a great option going forward once the non-stop istanbul flights start. Get the long flight both ways to maximise sleep when needed to minimise jetlag, whilst also being able to fly into nearly any city you could think of within Europe.

 

[mviy]

Been no indication of that.

If MEL is dropped from Sunrise for the foreseeable future there's every expectation that PER-LHR and/or AKL-JFK will likely move to Sunrise aircraft which would mean multiple flights to the overseas destination.

 

[RooFlyer]

Developed, not built. That's the issue I have with your use of that statement - the costs of development are one off, the IP is owned by the manufacturer and can be reused (such as the Airbus CEO has said).

Whatevs.

You’ve introduced a red herring again regarding IP. I used the expression custom built to describe the A350-1000ULR which was designed at the request of Qantas and is being currently built for Qantas; no one else. No other orders, although we agree there probably or may be.

If you want to keep hair-splitting and going into other areas regarding my use of the expression custom built and the context I used it, for the sake of argument, go for it. Lost interest.

 

[Melburnian1]

That is not how it works. They would have factored all that at the point of origin before takeoff

There are different types of "fuel"
1) Taxi fuel - fuel used prior to take off getting to the runway - which may need to be increased depending on local ground delays
2) Trip fuel - takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, landing, and taxi to gate.
3) Alternate fuel - after trying to land, fuel required from the missed approach point at destination, climb, cruise, approach to landing at the alternate
4) Contingency fuel - fuel required for additional fuel consumption due to route changes, headwinds. I understand there is a minimum +5% on top of trip fuel
5) Final reserve fuel - the legally required minimum fuel required to fly for 30 minutes at the destination or alternate. Aircraft should have this fuel after landing and taxxiing to gate.
6) Centre of Gravity fuel - fuel may be necessary to maintain CoG and usually cannot be burned during flight depending on CoG envelope.
7) Additional fuel - the pilot can add extra on top of all that - such as for holding at an airport known to make aircraft hold.

Then add it all up and see whether it will fit in the fuel tanks and not exceed max take off weight. If take off weight is = MTOW but more fuel is required, then payload including passengers will need to be offloaded. Or plan to land at an intermediate airport to uplift more fuel. The problem when PS is that any landing at an intermediate before the destination will likely also mean the pilots will be going to a hotel.

While unusual and not something I can recall previously occurring, today QF10 had to call in at remote KTA for a top up in fuel as the flight had encountered headwinds and lacked sufficient to make it nonstop from LHR to PER.

Apparently, weather conditions changed during the flight so the plane's route had to alter.

Embarrassing!

 

[AuSammy]

While unusual and not something I can recall previously occurring, today QF10 had to call in at remote KTA for a top up in fuel as the flight had encountered headwinds and lacked sufficient to make it nonstop from LHR to PER.

Apparently, weather conditions changed during the flight so the plane's route had to alter.

Embarrassing!

As you say first time. S…t happens, a nuisance. Not embarrassing. If it happens a few times, that would be embarrassing.

 

[justinbrett]

Whatevs.

You’ve introduced a red herring again regarding IP. I used the expression custom built to describe the A350-1000ULR which was designed at the request of Qantas and is being currently built for Qantas; no one else. No other orders, although we agree there probably or may be.

If you want to keep hair-splitting and going into other areas regarding my use of the expression custom built and the context I used it, for the sake of argument, go for it. Lost interest.

I'm not arguing semantics, I'm trying to show why your argument is flawed - as the cost is in that IP you so freely dismiss.

 

[SYD]

If MEL is dropped from Sunrise for the foreseeable future there's every expectation that PER-LHR and/or AKL-JFK will likely move to Sunrise aircraft which would mean multiple flights to the overseas destination.

The recent announcements suggested PER-LHR and MEL-DFW could be candidates for PS aircraft to free up B787s for new services. But that does also beg the question where they rotate to/from rather than just back and fourth.

Whatevs.

You’ve introduced a red herring again regarding IP. I used the expression custom built to describe the A350-1000ULR which was designed at the request of Qantas and is being currently built for Qantas; no one else. No other orders, although we agree there probably or may be.

If you want to keep hair-splitting and going into other areas regarding my use of the expression custom built and the context I used it, for the sake of argument, go for it. Lost interest.

We’ll probably never know the commercial arrangements between Airbus and QF (nor Boeing if they’d got the gig) for the non-recurring engineering (NRE) to adapt the A350-1000 to meet the PS requirements. It would make sense if Airbus sprinkled some of those costs across the total QF order but they probably wore some of it to be free to sell the end result.

It’s possibly a limited market for these type of aircraft? But SQ would be obvious, TK may or may not have ordered some (or just pinched the numbers on weight saving on a premium heavy config to stretch the range of a regular A351?). BA could well give it go? Not sure about other Euro airlines? The American airlines probably won’t touch it but the ME could while they still have cheaper fuel!