Qantas: no plans for Airbus A380 to get new Business Suite seats

I'm not surprised by this, but wouldn't expect QF to say otherwise. I'm sure they are aware that the clock is ticking on the current business configuration. But it'll probably be timed around the 787's after the 330's are done... which will be around the 10 year mark for the A380's entry into the QF fleet.

Yep, VA will have the best J product across the pacific... shame they only have 5 B777's. 

EK still has a terrible J product on anything other than their A380s so I'd hardly call it 2 generations ahead of QF. 

I personally would still prefer the Skybed ahead of the staggered 1-2-1 alternate config like those on EY as I personally find those seats claustrophobic. 

As a six foot tall 110kgs make, give me a Skybed II over the tight narrow EK A380 J seat any day of the week....

Realistically for EK to update 140+ 777’s and 70+ A380’s would be a project that would take years. Even an expedited update would be a minimum 4/5 years surely?

Why would EK bother updating all their current aircraft? How many aircraft have they kept past 8ish years before passing them back to the leasor?

If EK were to change seats and push to roll them out, they'll stick them on new orders and newer (1-2 years) aircraft.

moa999, I'm in agreement with you. AusBT can of course report only what we know and what's said, but I would expect a mid-life refresh for the A380s, and we are now edging close to that point (assuming 20 year span starting with the late 2008 delivery of the first three) so I'd expect next year at latest would see such an annoucement and featuring the same updated Business Suite as the Boeing 787s.

I too am of the same view. Announcing something a year ahead only serves to undermine the exitsing product. Qantas took a few liberties with corprate travel arrangements and the perception that VA weren't a serious full service airline when they announced the raising of the bar with the A330 suites a year out. That was nearly two years ago and Qantas today is a much more cautious animal.

AirNZ on the 777 with a quick stop in AKL, extra couple hours but certainly worth it. Usually cheaper too.

I wouldn't compare a 1-stop product directly against a nonstop product....2 diff animals aimed @ slightly diff mkt segments.

For 1 thing, a 1-stop product between a city-pair typically can capture few(if any at all) connecting traffic demand beyond that city-pair(i.e. would become at least a 2-stop product in such cases).  In contrast, a non-stop product can easily capture significant connecting traffic demand beyond that city pair(i.e. still a 1-stop product in such case).

In this day & age, very few biz/corp travellers(i.e. the higher yield mkt segment) will accept more than 1-stop even for very long intercon flights(Probably except ultra-longhauls).  It's not just the extra total travel time but also the extra hassels of disemarking+security re-screening @ intermediate stops+queuing up for re-boarding. 

Same goes for shorthaul flew syd cairns monday on virgin business and cairns brisbane on tuesday business, qantas seats, food and wine all inferior to virgin these days.

Staff still great though

Sorry, but I have to disagree. The inconvenience of lack of immediate aisle access is only felt by thos occupying a window seat in each J class row, so yes, it affects 2 seats in each row. All other seats do have instant aisle acess in J. Perhaps, that window seat inconvenience is balanced by not having someone having to climb over you?

The seat coverings still look fairly smart, albeit on some of the older aircraft, compression-wear is beginning to show through - but this is simply 'wear abd tear' and can be replaced with a new cushion. A lot cheaper and cost-effective than ripping out and replacing seats every time a competitor comes up with something new.

I believe that QF will tie in a 'refurbishment' announcement within the next 12 months to leverage off the B787-9 introduction. That is how you keep the experience cogent and consistent across the fleet.

My only issue with the Skybed 2 is the IFE screen being in the arm. I haven't really noticed any of the issues others talk about.

the things is , they are making a lot of money from this product, I don't see them losing business any time soon, they have a very loyal client base that is forgiving of the hard product in lieu of great soft product, I agree they shouldn’t fall behind, but might as well maximise the initial investment. The trick will be to make the upgrade decision at the right time and not leave it until it’s too late. 

<<...don't see them losing business any time soon..>>

Me neither....but for more clinical reasons than the one cited by U.

<<they have a very loyal client base that is forgiving of the hard product in lieu of great soft product..>>

QF does hv a large+loyal client base but IMHO, it has little to do with a<<great soft product>>(Frankly, VA is no slouch in this dept these days...) but a lot more to do with:

a) A huge FFP base where most members are entrenched for yrs or even decades...trapped or addicted if U will.  VA's FFP base is just nowhere as large or addictive.  It's similar to why so many American flyers continued to fly the U.S. Big3 for decades despite their hard products used to be significantly inferior(Not any more) to foreign competitors'.

b) QF Group's network is simply much much larger globally than VA's.  In addition, QF is a senior member of a global alliance whereas VA is still not really in any(ok, may be in a quasi-alliance).  All these hv strong mkt implications in terms of network reach available to customers especially the corp sector with frequent int'l travel needs.  VA is not much useful fm Australia if U hv a meeting nex wk in Manila, Shanghai or Tokyo....

<<I agree they shouldn't fall behind>>

But QF can afford to...@ least for a while, due to reasons cited.  In a nutshell and I know many readers here won't like to hear this:  It's not critical for QF to lead in the product front(like VA must) as long as it continues to lead(Ahead of VA and by a wide margin currently) in the FFP & network front.

What is it you find good about these seats?

The hard seat?

The limited shoulder space?

Being climbed over when you are asleep?

The absence of storage space for books etc?

I've not felt it limited re shoulder space.

I always have window - and tbh there's too much storage. Could quite easily forgot things in those side storage compartments. 

And speaking of climbing over, I find you can easily walk around your neighbour, unlike Mark 1 skybed where you had to do an acrobatic manoeuvre to get out without disturbing your neighbour.

My biggest gripe is IFE which is embarrassingly bad for J, followed by service (wish domestic business class service standards were applied). However, if you and others feel strongly then I guess Qantas will need to respond to the market.

C'mon now. Remind me how many iterations of J Class seating Cathay has had in the last 6 years? I remember the universally hated fixed back bum-slider that was hard as hell, and then a couple of iterations with questionable and missing foot supports. Herringbone vs reverse herringbone. 

Changing this stuff every two years or less fleetwise is neither efficient or cost-effective. When you get a good design, you stick with it until a substantial advance arrives - and then you research the hell out of it, before committing funds to it.Not jumping at every competitor's change.

What I am trying to get across is that most people ascociate Qantas as the one true Australian airline with an almost perfect safety record, so they will generally not mind shelling out money for an outdated product as opposed to Virgin which doesn't have a lot of international exposure.

And by most people, I mean the general public who fly J just to experience the product.

<<I think the A380 wins hands down over 777s as an aircraft.>>

Interesting declaration.  The industry(i.e. airline operators/customers, leasing firms and investors/investment communities alike which are the ones who actually get to decide whether to buy a 380 or 777) itself certainly disagree with such declaration as per the cold hard sales figures:

a)  Yrs available for sale since program launch:

380=16yrs vs 77W=16yrs vs 779=2yrs+

b)  Total accumulated firm orders today:

380=319units vs 77W=796units vs 779=253units

Hypothetically if we run a poll today about what is their top favourite airliner EVER(i.e. wins hands down over anything else), I bet Concorde will be @ or near the top of the list....yet it's a type in which only 14units hv ever been sold.

To anti-Qantas brainiacs...one question

WHICH galaxy are you in?  I think it's called 2003(The yr when Skybed1 began Rev$ service on 330 with QF) time wrap!!

1.  Before the advent of the Business Suites product a yr ago, the best J class design available across QF's 330 fleet was Skybed1.  It's old today in terms of wear & tear beyond its seating surfaces/cushions since 2003(13yrs).

2.  Skybed1 was an inclined lie-flat seat design pitched @ no more than 60in.  This is no flat bed seat....a product config now very common for widebody flights between Asia and Australia.

3.  All J seat in QF 380 fleet is the Skybed2 which debuted in 2008(8yrs ago) along with 380 debut @ QF.  It's old but clearly younger than Skybed1 found on almost all QF 330s prior to Business Suites.

4.  While Skybed1 and Skybed2 are essentially the same hardwares in terms of design, their configs/specs are vastly diff.  Skybed2 is a horizontal flat bed pitched @ a minimum of 78in(i.e. 30% longer than Skybed1).  If we ignore direct aisle access, privacy/side table and the latest electronc gizmos, Skybed2 is actually on-par with the Business Suites product(And its equivalents @ competitors) purely in terms of sleeping comfort.....no way we can say the same about Skybed1.  In fact in nearly all functional aspects, Skybed2 is still on-par with the BEST J product  today @ UA(i.e. BusinessFirst), LH and CA....all 3 still hv no direct aisle access for example.

Skybed2(On 380) is good enough to a certain extent(@ least relative to other big dogs like UA, LH and CA) while Skybed1(On 330) wouldn't be.

<<I can understand the 744's..>>

Of course U can, some frames(Especially those 744ER x6) in the QF 744 fleet already hv been upgraded to Skybed2 since shortly after 380 debut in 2008.

<<youve lost me as a J customer on A380 routes>>

Fair call....the simple & elegant beauty of mkt competition.  But let's see QF will loose U to exactly which alternative carriers due to the <inferior> Skybed2 on those <<A380 routes>>:

A) SYD/MEL-DXB-LHR

Well, there's EK and its J class on 380 is indeed superior to Skybed2.  But hang on, isn't EK and QF in a JV and share all Rev$ on all routes between Europe and AU anyway?  Financially, will it really be a lost for QF even if U buy a EK ticket and superficially APPEAR like U're not giving your biz to QF?  Hmmm....interesting.

Of course if going only to/fm LHR and not via DXB, plenty of good J choices superior to Skybed2 such as BA, SQ, CX, QR, EY/VA, etc.

B) SYD-LAX

AA=Similar story as A)

VA=This J is superior to Skybed2 but are U willing to forfeit the far superior FFP earning+spending/benefits of the enormous+powerful OneWorld network?

DL=This J is superior to Skybed2 but unless U fly outside of AU much more often than within AU, a SkyTeam FFP is pretty useless.

UA=This J(Only on 787 & 777) is only on-par with Skybed2.

C) MEL-LAX

UA=Same as B)

D) SYD-DFW

QF is the only game in town so no alternative.

As I said..if Mk II was a good enough product A330's wouldnt be getting the suites. Im a paying pax on an airline which prides itself on being a "premium full service carrier"(not to mention it's almost always THE most expensive). Not my concern their profit and loss statements....if they are running an airline in this category and can't reach expected standards they need to reassess their strategy. To announce no upgrade is a negative for Qantas and their marketing department leaves alot to be desired. They could have said something a little more positive - such as upgrades are being considered at this stage or the like.

NB: the Mk II is hardly 180 fully flat; the footrest slopes down when in fully 'flat' sleeping position and has done so since soon after they were introduced. 

<<...if Mk II was a good enough product A330's wouldn't be getting the suites.>>

U are still referring to the incorrect tech facts in making your point:  QF 330 fleet did NOT hv Skybed2 before upgrade to BusinessSuites.  They had Skybed1 before their refurb in J class.

<<Not my concern their profit and loss..>>

Of course not.  But their financials clearly will dictate what product will appear in which particular airframe, in what time frame, and most importantly, on which routes against which competitor(s) and their products.

<<...running an airline in this category and can't reach expected standards...>>

1) Only 1 set of standards exists today applicable to most(let alone all) J class consumers across Australia and beyond?  2) Whoever establish/dictate such set of standards and decide other purchase priorities for consumer(e.g. a strong FFP, network size/frequency, etc.) can be disregarded?

<<...they need to reasses their strategy.>>

Frankly, for a corp like QF group, do U honestly believe it doesn't constantly assess /adjust /adapt fleet-wide product strategy @ least once a yr including decision/conclusion fm such assessment that e.g. Skybed2 stay on 380 for the time being?

<<They could have said something a little more positive - such as upgrades are being considered...>>

Fm a purely consumer point-of-view, U're probably right.  But U hv forgotten that such statement may also be a slightly NEGATIVE news/uncertainty fm the investor mkt/analyst community perspective.....especially when QF Group has only returned to profitability so recently after yrs of huge loss.  It may be interpreted as QF is now quickly heading back into a period of spending-spree.  Of course, U wouldn't care(as U've stated earlier) but someone sailing the QF ship(e.g. Alan Joyce) must care such boring details such as financial disciplines....

<<...the Mk II is hardly 180 fully flat..>>

Your descriptions are for Skybed1 product in which none has ever been installed on any QF 380.   If U still don't believe Skybed2 is a horizontal flat bed product, try this link on ausbt.com fm 2011 for clarifications:

www.executivetraveller.com/lie-flat-or-fully-flat-beds-we-put-the-truth-to-the-lie-flat-lie

But is there really many real choices by Oneworld that offer 1-2-1 in J for AU to Europe via Asia?

Except CX(Fares are on-par and in fact typically significantly higher than QF yr-round especially in J) and QR(But only for the upcoming ADL-DOH route on 350), the fact is that no Oneworld carrier offers a true 1-2-1 layout in J for a 1stop routing(defined as connecting duration being well within 12hrs @ the stop) all the way between AU and Europe.

You could just fly with another airline, thats what i do when i am unhappy, the FF and status points are not that hard to get if you are a regular flyer.

The one world scheme is good but not the be all and end all, the comfort of the singapore 777 business class to europe is superior to qantas business and first class, food and wine are better also.

<<You could just fly with another airline...>>

I think that's pretty basic and goes without the need to saying it out loud.  However, I suspect the problem is that folks(e.g. QF flyers) don't want to switch fm a carrier(e.g. QF) due to superior FFP but continue to complain about that carrier's inferior  product....basically they complain why 1+1 does not equal to 3. 

<<...the FF and status points are not that hard to get if you are a regular flyer>>

Theoretically true.  However, if a frequent flyer split all of his/her flying activities across FFPs fm 2-3 diff alliances, earning per FFP(And therefore account balance, loyalty status/tier, etc.) will be significantly lower in each than if he/she sticks with only 1 FFP no matter how we slice it or dice it.  It's really just basic math and all FFPs are fundamentally designed to trap a frequent flyer within a single FFP/alliance.  For most AU-based frequent flyers, it's hard to exclude a Oneworld FFP in his/her portfolio due to the leading mkt position of QF Group in AU mkt.

<<...comfort of the singapore 777 business class to europe is superior to qantas business and first class....>>

I strongly believe most frequent flyers on the AU-Europe routes already well understood the above.....not just today but since @ least 2 decades ago even before the 1st 777 entered service with SQ.   That's not even a subjective bias by SQ lovers when we look @ their diff in rating by SkyTrax QF vs SQ for over a decade.  Yet after decades, we still hv not seen flyers deflecting to SQ in droves(And QF forced to abandon such routes) and QF continue to be able to attract customers AND carry significant frequent flyer traffic volume on AU-Europe routes despite its product being inferior to SQ.  Why?  The only logical conclusion I can draw is that inflight product simply cannot be the only factor(or even just the most important factor) in consumer's purchase decision.

As a P One Qantas customer often flying to Europe I always select an EK A380 codeshare flight over a QF A380, as a 6" guy the feet support are not great on the skybeds compared to resting on something solid in the EK suites. The privacy, space for drink and food, screens, padding, comfort are superior on the EK A380s.

The bonus of the 1-2-1 config also means that you don't have to step over any to get in and out of your seat.

The screens on the QF flights are terrible for watching any movies. The most wonderful thing have been the A330 upgrades, which brings them back on a level playing field with their competitors. Food and service is is always better on the QF flights!

<<...makes me wonder why everyone would prefer QF over the likes of VA/DL....>>

No need to wonder.  <<why everyone would prefer QF>> because they are not only choosing QF.....they are actually choosing the entire combined network reach+FFP benefits of QF+JetStar+AA+EK regardless if U are a U.S.-based or AU-based flyer.  In contrast, VA+DL only work on Trans-Pcf routes or if U are U.S.-based mainly due to SkyTeam's or VA's FFP+network are much less useful for AU-based flyers especially on AU-Europe routes.

<<They do status matching most of the time for...>>

Yes, they can.  But they can't match network coverage as easily against QF & its buddies.....and corp travel depts do place high value on the network reach of an airline vendor+its close partners when awarding biz travel contracts typically on a global basis(i.e. 1 vendor to cover every route fm short hops like LAX-PHX or MEL-ADL to ULH intercon journeys like SYD-DFW or MEL-LHR.

<<DL even operates all flights out of T5...>>

Which is precisely the inferior aspect of the DL+VA combo even if a pax only care about AU-U.S. routes.  In LAX, all DL ops are really just in T5.  Where do U check in for VA?  T3....on the opposite side of T5 and involve either a very long walk outdoor or hopefully not too long a wait for the equally long free shuttle bus tour around T6->T7->T8->T1->T2.  Where do U arrive on a VA flight?  TBIT...closer than T3 if connecting to a DL flight @ T5 but still a bit of a hike if U hv large bags in tow after the mandatory U.S. custom @ TBIT.

Now compare the above mentioned LAX connecting experience against connecting between QF @ TBIT and AA @ T4.....not to mention the brand spanking new, fully a/c + movable walkway equipped indoor connector between TBIT and T4.

If we ignore the total frequency advantage of QF+AA over DL+VA @ LAX, I believe most J-class flyers connecting @ LAX will gladly trade direct aisle access on QF(Not an AA issue though) for the opportunity to avoid the difficult trail between any DL and VA flights....

<<make onward 40minute connections possible...and it absolutely works...>>

<<Absolutely works>> if your entire itin is operated by DL which offers a grand total of 1 daily frequency to/fm AU against @ least 3x daily for the QF+AA combo.  If your itin involve VA, a reliable connections will be closer to 140mins.....

You obviously work for Qantas or one of their marketing companies FLX, sorry but qantas are not what they were and each time i travel with a better airline the difference gets better.

BA first, Singapore First and Business, VA Business, Cathay Business and JAL Business all better than the four QF business flights i have made in the last 3 months.

The food on qantas really has become a joke now, so bad i pay for a meal before i get on the plane (sydney excepted where the QF first lounge is great).