Qantas results 28Aug .

[RAM]

So add 5 more to my total. Care to point any others errors in my figures. They are still higher than Jetstar by a long shot.

As for the metric what was being discussed here, not in Qantas fiscal reports is how many aircraft they have received in the past 5 complete fiscal years.

I stand by my figures with maybe a few minor mistakes (I am using an iphone at present internet access). They may not be what is in fiscal reports however the Qantas finances are so complicated you can read what you like into them and selectively quote what you like to suit your argument which is what you seem to have done.

My figures are from fleet lists and include Qantas link which is 100% part of QantS an of course jetconnect who again are 100% Qantas especially from an aircraft ownership perspective. My metric and the metric of the conversation has not changed and the fleet list quite clearly show Qantas has received more new a/c over the past 5 financial years.

As much as I hate to disagree with you.

Have you noticed the title of this thread.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
That's OK, no apology necessary!

 

[ajw373]

As much as I hate to disagree with you.

Have you noticed the title of this thread.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
That's OK, no apology necessary!

And if you follow the actual discussion you will see the original statement was made in generic terms. I have proven without doubt Qantas has received more new aircraft over the past 5 complete FY's yet you change metrics to percentage exclude this exclude that, quote this quote that (with no context) just to suit your agenda.

But I am wrong. Ha ha.

That's OK, no apology necessary.

 

[VA777]

Funny how QFi isn't financially performing so can't get any new and efficient aircraft but when JETi isn't profitable it still is on track for new efficient aircraft. Consistency continues !

 

[ajw373]

Funny how QFi isn't financially performing so can't get any new and efficient aircraft but when JETi isn't profitable it still is on track for new efficient aircraft. Consistency continues !

Define Jet*i? Does it include Jetstar Asia, Jetstar japan, Jetstar pacific and Jetstar HK of just the australian based operations. The reason I ask is the non australia operations have an effect on the bottom line but are aeperate companies where Qantas is the major investor but doesn't completely own them. Unlike in Aus where they are fully owned. Now unless I am mistaken the Jetstar loss is mainly due to startup costs with Hong Kong plus minor losses on other Jetstar overseas airlines rather than specifically the Australian domestic and international operations.

 

[RAM]

Some useful data points for the B747-400 vs B777 - Philippines Airlines is retiring the last of its B747-400s (2 down and 2 to go shortly) and detailed the difference in both operating efficiency and maintenance costs. It expects to save USD $120m on 1 long haul route per year.

The airline expects to save as much as $120 million per year in fuel and maintenance costs by flying the Boeing 777 to the United States, rather than the Boeing 747. According to PAL President Ramon Ang, the Boeing 777 aircraft consume 25 percent less fuel compared to the Boeing 747 fleet. In addition, the maintenance costs are approximately 40 percent lower, while the Boeing 777 aircraft is overall 25 percent more efficient.

Given Q's fleet size and similar ages the equivalent saving should be in the order of USD400m pa. Then add to that the increase in other cargo capacity gained - why such reluctance? Especially as Boeing is desperate to write orders for 300 additional current B777s to keep the production line operating until the next generation B777 enters production. Prices are being talked of at 55% of list. Similarly Boeing has 9 early B787-8s wanting to find a buyer (models 11-19) at any price.

Although they are less efficient than current production models (3-5% higher fuel burn and approx 6 fewer seats or lower range trade-off) at a price they should be compelling vs 12 yr old A330s. Maintenance savings alone should make it worth exploring if the aim of Q mgmt is to reduce operating costs and improve reliability.

 

[dajop]

On two of the current 747 routes the efficiency may not be as great as suggested due to longer flight paths due to current ETOPS restrictions, as VA found out running MEL-JNB. Of course that is only 2 of the 744 routes though.

 

[ajw373]

On two of the current 747 routes the efficiency may not be as great as suggested due to longer flight paths due to current ETOPS restrictions, as VA found out running MEL-JNB. Of course that is only 2 of the 744 routes though.

Read on another board that the issue with VA to JNB was not ETOPS rather some additional CASA restriction and the same restriction would apply to DFW too. So that leaves LAX which is pretty well served by the A380 LHR that is also wrll served by the A380, Asia where the A330 is PERFECT and a few minor routes where the 777W would be perfect. Guess no surprise Qantas has no 777's then.

 

[markis10]

Read on another board that the issue with VA to JNB was not ETOPS rather some additional CASA restriction and the same restriction would apply to DFW too. So that leaves LAX which is pretty well served by the A380 LHR that is also wrll served by the A380, Asia where the A330 is PERFECT and a few minor routes where the 777W would be perfect. Guess no surprise Qantas has no 777's then.

Its a CASA ETOPS restriction and not applicable to DFW. They won't go over ETOPS180. EZE has the same issues.

 

[ajw373]

Its a CASA ETOPS restriction and not applicable to DFW. They won't go over ETOPS180.

Go look at the YSSW message board. The person was clear it was not an ETOPS issue and would effect DFW. It was something about rescue times rather than diversion times aka ETOPS.

 

[markis10]

Go look at the YSSW message board. The person was clear it was not an ETOPS issue and would effect DFW. It was something about rescue times rather than diversion times aka ETOPS.

It's rubbish, as the ETOPS maps show, and why VA always tracked north. If DFW had an issue then LAX would as well, not to mention all those HNL bound domestic OPS.

 

[michaele]

Although they are less efficient than current production models (3-5% higher fuel burn and approx 6 fewer seats or lower range trade-off) at a price they should be compelling vs 12 yr old A330s. Maintenance savings alone should make it worth exploring if the aim of Q mgmt is to reduce operating costs and improve reliability.

Would there be big issues/hassles getting current 330 pilots certified?

 

[harvyk]

Would there be big issues/hassles getting current 330 pilots certified?

Certified to do what exactly?

 

[moa999]

I might simply say if Qantas management (whose bonuses depend on profit) though the 777 or 787 would make more money than the 747 then they would have jumped on it.

Reality is a new type involves a whole list of things including: new pilot/ FA contracts, AOC approval, all the ops and technical manuals, pilot/ staff training, probably purchase of a simulator etc etc, plus the cost (interest+depreciation or lease) versus older (and probably paid for) 747s

And as for the early 787-8s there is a reason why Boeing is struggling to get rid of them. If Qantas wanted 787s it could have taken some from the slimmed down Jetstar order and/or activated its 789 options - which are all for latter manufactured aircraft.

 

[dajop]

Its a CASA ETOPS restriction and not applicable to DFW. They won't go over ETOPS180. EZE has the same issues.

As would SYD- SCL although the great circle path traverses a little further north than the EZE path, it' still well into the "shaded" zone on the above great circle map.

 

[michaele]

Certified to do what exactly?

Fly 777/787s...?

 

[harvyk]

Fly 777/787s...?

Well apart from actually needing the physical planes, once an A330 pilot is certified to fly a B777 / B787, they can't go back to A330's (without becoming recertified on A330's). You can only hold one type certification at a time. So it's not like they can simply throw some A330 pilots at a B777 and say problem solved for both types.

It's not just having pilots, there is ground crew, cabin crew and maintenance issues to sort out.

 

[dajop]

It's not just having pilots, there is ground crew, cabin crew and maintenance issues to sort out.

It is not impossible, although it seems the domain of - perhaps shall we say - less profit focused airlines. In recent memory there have been an (admittedly small) number of airlines that have added a small number of 777's to their fleet, the ones that come to mind are GA and PR but there are probably others. But most, particularly of QF's size or smaller seem to avoid adding too many types, with the exception of TG - who not exactly a beacon of profitability- who seem to want to collect one or two of just about everything that is flying (A300, 320, 330, 340, 380, 737, 747, 777, 787 and 350 on order)

 

[RAM]

It is not impossible, although it seems the domain of - perhaps shall we say - less profit focused airlines. In recent memory there have been an (admittedly small) number of airlines that have added a small number of 777's to their fleet, the ones that come to mind are GA and PR but there are probably others. But most, particularly of QF's size or smaller seem to avoid adding too many types, with the exception of TG - who not exactly a beacon of profitability- who seem to want to collect one or two of just about everything that is flying (A300, 320, 330, 340, 380, 737, 747, 777, 787 and 350 on order)

Q mgmt and board say that the A3xxs are similar enough that the model range is 'cost effective', with a similar claim on the Boeings. Q does not have any B777s though and that seems to be the $2.8bn question. Even TG has more B777s than B747s.

It is not that small a number of airlines that have added B777s to their fleet in fact have a look at this.

How about a like-for-like comparison - sounds fair.

Hmmm I wonder what the airlines flying the long haul into/out of Australia to Asia/Mid East/US are using mostly B747 or B777?

Air Canada - B777
Air China - B777
Air NZ - B777
Asiana Airlines - B777
British Airways - B777
Cathay Pacific - B777
China Airlines - B777
China Eastern Airlines - B777
China Southern Airlines - B777
Etihad -B777
Emirates - B777
Garuda - B777
Korean Air - B777
Qatar - B777
Royal Brunei - B777 (B787)
Singapore Airlines - B777
Scoot - B777
Thai - B777
United Airlines - B777

And of course;

Qantas B747

Well what do you know, every other competing airline is flying B777s over B747s on routes competing against Q out of/into Australia. Thanks for getting me to do the numbers.

I hit my 30 minute limit - please feel free to add other airlines I have not covered yet.

It does appear the B777 is PERFECT vs the B747 for virtually every other airline competing against Q AND they are flying them.

Qantas is the ugly duckling with this comparison.

 

[RAM]

I might simply say if Qantas management (whose bonuses depend on profit) though the 777 or 787 would make more money than the 747 then they would have jumped on it.

Reality is a new type involves a whole list of things including: new pilot/ FA contracts, AOC approval, all the ops and technical manuals, pilot/ staff training, probably purchase of a simulator etc etc, plus the cost (interest+depreciation or lease) versus older (and probably paid for) 747s

And as for the early 787-8s there is a reason why Boeing is struggling to get rid of them. If Qantas wanted 787s it could have taken some from the slimmed down Jetstar order and/or activated its 789 options - which are all for latter manufactured aircraft.

Well there is a price for everything.

Boeing is selling off the slots relinquished by Q for between 30-80% more than Q was paying (and making other airlines happy about getting their cost saving and customer drawing planes sooner). Boeing was happy to give Q 250mn as it booked an estimated additional 690m for the cancelled orders AND gained a number of previously Airbus clients. The old WIN/WIN/WIN except for QI.

Q mgmt have been cutting QI to the bone for years with shedding routes that Emirates (and others) has then eagerly filled for example EK flies from SYD to BKK (B777), SIN (B777) and then on to Europe via Dubai as you well know. Q to Europe on Q metal means extensive delays as you fly past Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Greece, Spain etc to Heathrow to then board another plane back. On the other hand Australia sends a lot of air freight direct to all of these countries, air freight that a B777 has room for 30 tonnes of AND a full passenger cabin. The A380 does not hold even half that additional cargo and neither does the B747.

Q has been run into the ground unfortunately, it's Net Tangible Assets per share fell by 2/3rds in the last financial year and are down by close to 6/7ths over the last few years. The credit rating agencies have rated it accordingly and AJ & Co maintain the same storyline throughout this entire period. Is it the old case of people being promoted above the level of their competence? Who knows.

What I do know is Q's international market share has never been lower and JQ is being given a leg-up consistently by the decisions made at QI's expense.

 

[medhead]

But the age of the ZX's aren't relevant though to this topic, as they are long gone from the QF fleet.
If you were using the A330's as an example (i.e likes of EBB etc), different story.

They were not long gone when the write-down was done at 30.6.14 - they were included in the write-down that was announced on 28.8.14 relating to the 2013/14 accounts. They are not long gone but still in service as I type.

The 4 B767 planes detailed above are all still in service. They are:

22.88	VH-OGI	Named City of Port Augusta
22.74	VH-OGJ	Named City Of Port Macquarie
22.65	VH-OGL	Named City of Wangaratta
21.86	VH-OGM	Named Bundaberg

None of those 4 aircraft are the BA ZX 767s that were mentioned. There is an easy way to work this out the ZX aircraft all have registrations starting with VH-ZX(Y). Not of the aircraft you've listed are ZX aircraft. The ZX aircraft also started leaving the fleet in Dec 2012, at least according to a thread here.

I fail to see how listing non-ZX aircraft supports your claim the ZX aircraft are still in the fleet.