Qantas measured in delaying Airbus, Boeing orders

And for the love of God, do something about the A330 fleet!

Yes, there is a JQ one in Singapore getting repainted (according to QF source)... would have made sense to refurb it at the same. What I don't get, is whilst I understand the desire for fleet standardisation, the A330-300 should be getting a small W cabin - SQ doesn't have it and it gives QF a selling point. Something like 24J, 21W and the remainder Y

THIS

I00% agree with you hutch. Qantas are meant to have the best Premium economy in the world. I imagine a successful airline would want to show case this product to the world. I find it astonishing that the A330-300s at this stage look to have just economy and business (& no W class).

Not to mention they need a souped-up J - the current slopers just aren't good enough. The Skybed Mk II is alright, and I personally quite enjoy it, but to really be "world-beating" the A330s needed reverse-herringbone J about two years ago.

Since F is has been withdrawn from everything except flagship runs, I was thinking of a super-J (and W) to compensate. I was daydreaming about crossing CX J and BA F, but keeping the red and grey tones of QF J - and retaining the Marc Newson chinaware.

The new staggered suites might make a difference...

Yep - Flew the A330 from MEL to SIN in Oct 2013. It needs a clean up of the worn down interior.

In flight entertainment that's lacking compared to the A380 interior.

I've ranted about the A330s again and again here, so you're all probably bored to death of me saying this, bu they should have had a 24J21W2xxY reconfig using the Marc Newson product about five years ago.

Agree that the A330s need the refurb, and that adding PE (potentially with less J seats so you can still carry a decent number in Y) would be a smart move...

I previously understood that the reason for the seat install delay is that the new custom Mk III seats need to get all the technical, regulatory approvals etc.

Thus why the current JQ planes coming back are not immediately getting the new J

Then what are they putting up front in the "new" A330s?

Some pseudo-EK staggered J.

I meant the A330s that would be coming from Jetstar

"Thus why the current JQ planes coming back are not immediately getting the new J"

I disagree. I think the QF fleet is much smaller than it should be. In my opinion, I think the airline hould have a growing fleet of A330's, 787's and 777's for long haul. For domestic, basically what they have now but with new 787's in place of the 767's. Unfortunately, I can't see this coming to fruition though.

I think it's a bit too late to order the 777. If they wanted the 300ER option, they should've got them 5 years ago before it wasn't in demand and had reserve spots. Or if QF is interested in 777X, then they will have to wait another 6-8 years. By then who knows how much the aviation market would have changed? 

The only problem is that without any further A380's QF can't replace all the 747. With improved usage & another 4 A380's they could replace SYD-DFW and do 3 x wk SYD-SCL & 4 x wk JNB in addition to current A380 routes and SYD - HKG daily.  

In the unlikely event that QF actually ordered the 787-9, they could then replace SYD-LAX-JFK, BNE-LAX & SYD-NRT. With the remaining Asian routes can be served with upgraded A330's. 

End results - 16 x A380's, 6 x 787-9 and 10 x A330-3

I actually don't believe any of the above will happen on Thursday... I can't see QF ordering a new planes even though it would help bring down operational cost.

I have had other thoughts recently about fleet - and I have NO IDEA how to run an airline, but purely from myself having a few strategic thoughts twirling around in my head... I can't imagine that my ideas would cost much money but they do provide increase competitiveness without substantially affecting the fleet or the bottom line.

1. END A380 services to LHR - freeing up 4 aircraft - read on for why.. 

2. END some A330 services from SYD/MEL to PER - read on for why

3. Expedite the return of the A330's from JQ and make sure they all have idential A380 product (at least have equivalent J/W/Y seats, maybe remove the F offering)

4. 'enhance' the Qantas offering by launching 'new' A330 services BNE-XXX-LHR and PER-XXX-LHR. I believe that Qantas still have four slots into LHR but they leased two of them to BA a couple of years ago. Use the 'new' services to increase frequency and consistency from each city in Australia to Europe (Qantas is seen to be doing the right thing by the country, gaining support of Australians and importantly the government too)

5. Send the four new services via different cities such as DXB/BKK/SIN/HKG which creates multiple services to each city on top of their current service. For example, PER-HKG, MEL-BKK, BNE-BKK are under serivced, imagine if they were 'daily' or 'double daily' in some circumstances.

6. Virgin has been kicking Qantas ass on the SYD/MEL/BNE-PER services, imagine if there were four spare A380's free to run these services (didn't Virgin call it 'coast to coast' when they went to A330?). It would alsolutely KICK Virgin out of the park and bring back some business and QF will be seen to be doing the right thing) This also helps to keep the 65% line in the sand by adding capacity.

7. Relaunch services from AKL to LAX/JFK via JQ on the new 787s. Wouldn't this  put a kick into AirNZ who are helping to fund the Virgin madness? Imagine much cheaper offering from NZ into the US, they would be pi$$ed! The newly signed AA/JQ codeshare on this flight would help to fill aircraft I would have thought.

As I pointed out at the start of my post, I have nothing to do with running an airline - some of this might be madness, but as a QF Platinum I just see SO MUCH opportunity to stick it to the competition without too much financial outlay and it will add pressure to Virgin and importantly its financial backers, giving some added pain, rather than this seemingly 'lying down on the tracks before the train arrives approach' from current management. If you're going down - go down fighting!! Take the gloves off before its too late!!

I don't think the problem with QF is just laid at the feet of Joyce and Co. The problem is that the game plan they had was outplayed by their competition. Who hasn't been outplayed before in what they tried to achieve? Its time they think laterally!

One of the major issues with QF is fleet utilisation.  And to this date yes I know Sydney has a curfew but why do you have planes leaving to the same destination from two capital cities within an hour apart.

The A380's in LHR and LAX in particular sit on the ground for 12 hours no money earnt there! I think QF would do well to have a service to SFO with a morning departure with immediate east coast connections. At least 3 days a week. UA is killing it on this run. The SFO market is very different , there are a lot of business people in the tech Industry..I would say these individuals would fly on a A330 Nandi to avoid LAX!

This is going to be controversial but have a Syd LHR night flight and Mel LHR morning flight enough time for connections. Howevver terminate these flights in DXB and utilise EK as Frequent flyers are not going to object as change of flight number means more SC. If the connections are streamlined I doubt very much if QF looses business.

QF always should have invested in 777's CX kills it in the regions with the A330 and 777 combo's. Perhaps QF may have gone too far and AJ's vision is to kill off QF international as we no it...time to start using those points up..if you dont want to fly JQ star class!...

This is why the old QF31/32 timing was better.

But I disagree with your proposed changes to the MEL-LHR and SYD-LHR schedules. I'd rather see a night departure ex-MEL and the afternoon departure ex-SYD; then the evening arrival back in SYD and a morning arrival back in MEL.

That said, while the 777 would have been a good aircraft for Qantas to go for, it's not what Cathay is using to pummel it - just the A330.

I might build a schedule just for lols, but while I agree with some things like SFO and A330s, I don't agree with culling the LHR route and I certainly don't condone the Emirates slavery.

I agree with 31/32 timing and splitting timing. I would also think a perth lhr non stop within next 5 years is a viable possibility. The slow bleeding of QF is going to benefit one person. Lifting ownership limit and having a ME partner picking it up for a song. How do you expect to grow if you do not invest in product or routes. A morning dep  to SFOSFO with immediate east coast connection and returning at 1pm into Syd following night at least twice a week would be viable if notnot UA would not be investing in it.

On a separate note CX j product is far far superior. I also tried MH j recently and have to say even with the angle seats it is quite a good product. I would say service was far superior to QF. 

As I mentioned earlier, QF can only think about fleet upgrades IF they can make some money first. Otherwise with the possibility of the QSA overturned, then Emirates will probably buy all of QF's shares and make it a subsidary. This is a lose-lose situation for QF, unless a miracle happens. 

I couldn't agree more.

I've been watching, with sadness, the detiorating state of Qantas for several years now. This once great national icon is being, in my opion, trashed by its current management to the point of no return. Ridiculous decisions like abondoning Singapore in favour of the middle east to hub its London flights were meant to be its salvation. If anything, Qantas's fortunes have gone from bad to worse since its partnership with Emirates began. One party is benefiting from that relationship - and it's not Qantas.

We keep hearing that more people are choosing not to fly with Qantas in and out of Australia these days, with it's share of passengers continuing to fall. Well, no wonder! San Francisco, gone. Rome, gone. Paris, gone. Mumbai, gone. Frankfurt, gone. Denpasar, gone. Beijing, gone. Johannesburg and London? Let's wait and see. For heaven's sake, Qantas now expect its Perth customers to fly to South Africa via Dubai. Are they serious? It would be quicker to backtrack to Sydney and fly from there!

It's time for Alan Joyce and the board of Qantas to step aside and let people that know how to run an airline take over.

Absolutely 100% agree with you Oliver. 

It has been quite frustrating over the last couple of years watching cut routes, cancel/defer new aircraft orders and announce significant losses. 

HE NEEDS TO GET OUT OF THERE ASAP!

Some of those destinations were better off cut, like CDG and FCO - Paris was limited by bilateral to some hopeless 3x weekly, and it made a lot of sense to codeshare on the daily SIN-CDG by Air France.

Some of them were a shame to lose, such as SFO and FRA.

But the choice to abandon its forward hub in SIN was just stabbing itself in the jugular. The Emiroo is not good for Qantas, though it's great for QFF abuse on BKK-HKG and SYD-AKL.

Just over the last two years, it has taken a nosedive.

Alvin, the only other airline that flies the BNE-HKG route is CX... but I cannot fault your observation that Cathay's product is far superior (even though they stop in CNS half the time).

By "many other airlines" I included the rest of the routes (i.e. SQ, CX, etc.) as well, not just BNE - HKG.

Well to be honest, I'd choose the QF A330 services over SQ's A330 services, at least when flying business and not restricted to a tight schedule. I've found the SQ angled lie flats no more comfortable than the QF Skybed I and I also prefer the soft product (the service and amenities) that Qantas offers.

Out of Brisbane specifically, I would rank the A330 business cabins in this order (having flown all of them): CX first, EY (to SIN/AUH) second, QF third, SQ fourth, MH fifth.

True that, but SQ does fly two of those hefty A380s that have better seating. (fully flat)

Not to BNE, though.

just how does one not cut moneylosing destinations?  just because they might have made sense back in some monopolistic glory day past doesn't mean they are salvageable now.  either RASM is above CASM or no airline, those are the options and no management personality can shield anyone from that harsh reality.

That's why they have to update their inferior products. I'm sure SFO went because United had a fully flat bed while Qantas only had Skybed Mk I, and the former attracted all the passengers. Qantas cut PEK probably because they had inferior products or service, and people were more attracted to Air China. Maybe they would make a mistake flying to one or two of these routes, and then stop them, but look (as of Wikipedia), about 30% of all QF destinations have been terminated.

SFO went because QF decided there was more feed and better connections at DFW. If QF wants to serve SFO, it needs a smaller plane in order to fly more regularly than the 3 x weekly and better suited to the market (ie limited feed). I can't comment on Air China's product, but I will suggest that the cost of Air China putting a bird in the sky is significantly less than QF's. If you use WIki as a source, you need to remember that many of QF's routes were historical due to the old RTW style of operation in the golden days.

That's the issue. Qantas hasn't planned properly with regards to its fleet. Surely a 777 servicing San Francisco would have been more economic thatn a 747 three times per week.

Qantas planned its fleet very well. They choose the 787 over the 777 and the A380 and A330 over the 747-8 and 777. Right decisions at the time. Pity the A380 was delayed and the 787 for a good 5 years. So isn't hindsite a wonderful thing?

 Alvin, their product is not the issue. Proof domesticaly their load factor and that of their competitor Virgin Aus are on part, around 75%. The same is true internationally. Not saying upgrades are not needed, the A330 fleet is NOW at the point where it needs updating and Qantas are going to do that starting this year.

 The core issue with Qantas is cost base. Now lets get back to domestic, both Virgin and Qantas have near equal load factors, fares about the same, but one airline has a significantly higher cost. The same is true for international too. The obvious solution is something needs to be done to the cost base.

The days when QF flew to many of those destinations was a different world - primarily there were greater restrictions on who could fly here and there etc. The one thing airlines like Cathay have in their favour - without bringing in costs - is geography. Cathay can service all those places mentioned above non-stop. Qantas can serve PEK, YVR, SFO, CAN non-stop with the rest requiring a stop-over. As soon as you bring in a stop-over you bring in extra costs... you then face the problem of where to stop? If QF stops in SIN, it competes with SQ who can fly customers to a plethora of destinations. QF can never do that.

With the right metal and partnerships, QF could do SFO & YVR. They could do Beijing if they could get a good time slot.

Speaking of YYZ, would there be demand / cargo for a LAX-YYZ tag if QF could get pick-up rights? (ahhh dreaming I know)

Right now if QF had enough money and aircraft I think they would be able to do SYD - PEK - FCO, MEL - PEK, SYD - SFO - YYZ, SYD - YVR, SYD - CAN - FRA...and I don't think most of them would lose money. SYD - PEK - FCO can probably go ahead of CA (A330) with a solid 747/A380, MEL - PEK should attract enough for an A330, SYD - SFO - YYZ can do a 747 (like United, and the SFO - YYZ leg will definitely attract passengers from AC's A320), SYD - YVR will do with a 747-400ER (although it'll have to compete with a similar AC product), and SYD - CAN - FRA will do well on a 747 (no one flies CAN - FRA yet, and I think it'll be a pretty good passenger attracter).

It is easy to say a plane can fly to XYZ, but if you actually had the numbers you would realise that none of those routes would make a cent at the moment. If QF had a better fleet it could open up some routes (SFO, YVR, PEK) - ie tht 787 which was designed O&D airports.

But let's look at your suggestions

* SYD-PEK-FCO - no rights past PEK, PEK slot constrained, primarily leisure route from Aus, fleet & staff intensive route

* MEL-PEK - with the right plane it could work... assuming cost base drops, good slots were obtained, QF gets a chinese partner willing to feed them and QF could easily sells tickets in China

* SYD-SFO - with the right plane it could work... assuming cost base drops. Tag to YYZ? Not against flying to YYZ, but why from SFO? A united hub, SYD-SFO would be the only QF flight and QF would be better off shorting turn around times. But, since UA is doing SYD-SFO, why not do MEL-SFO or BNE-SFO?

* SYD-YVR - with the right plane has potential... assuming cost base drops and there is cargo there. Needs a Canadian partner ie Westjet

* SYD-CAN-FRA - no rights past CAN. It would be cheaper and make better sense for QF to serve FRA from a hub airport, not CAN - either SIN/HKG/DXB -  fleet & staff intensive route

*Worth noting that QF has no spare planes once the remaining non-refurb 747's are rightly retired this year

The actual gateway strategy that Joyce has, is the right strategy for an end of line carrier like Qantas (in my opinion, Joyce has had many a good idea over the years), he just cannot execute things. Qantas will never have a cost base close to its competitors, they can reduce it yes, but never to the extent of the others.

Finally someone who understands the core issue is cost base, and realises Qantas cannot ever be everything to everyone.

Well said Fonga. Qantas is improving the tired old A330 product but its fleet and network are too small, and deteriorate because Qantas itself is losing money. If Qantas is the spirit of Australia it definitely has to bring the spirit to more destinations right?

I've said in other comments, to make money in the international arm, Qantas needs to fly internationally.  How can it make money if it doesn't fly anywhere?

QFi will not be flying to many places unless its cost base drops dramatically. Management must share the blame for this for fleet choice etc, but so do the unions for not being realitsic. When SQ/EK's cost base is half that of QF's, it is impossible for QF to fly to many places.

Interesting point about QF serving Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane better.

Regretably Joyce has made it almost a personal vendetta to remove QF international from the WA market.  There is now only one QF marketed international flight on QF metal per day from the Wild West. We used to be well served here and the fligs were always busy.

Joyce has an ulterior motive, dispose of QF international except from the flagship city of Sydney and replace it with Jetstar. It falls in with his background from Ryanair sorry to say.  As earlier commentators have made, he needs to fall on his sword along with the rest of his team and allow new blood in to the board room before Qantas is unsalvagable.  Furthermore, the Federal government need to scrap the sales act.  It is a preposterous piece of legislation when Australia is trying and succeeding to make it in the global economy.  

Qantas problems started back in the 90 's.Under a guy by the name of Dixon.QF were one of the last major carriers to introduce in seat entertainment systems in economy,hence people traveled with other carriers that did so.They were also way behind most carriers when flat seats were introduced in first then later in business and they screwed that up with so called skybed 1,2 whatever-all the more reason to fly another carrier which many Australian an foreign customers do to this day.Catering on most services is boring and cut back.And worse is the inconsistant in flight service.

Premium economy is a bright spot but this came close to 2 decades after BA first introduced it,and to this day is still only limited to select aircraft.Dixon screwed up with aircraft purchases in a big way which AJ inherited.

I agree AJ and the board should be removed as they lack the necessary skills as  we have seen.They are constantly reacting rather than being proactive.They could of leased 777,s and while it may not of been the long term answer at least they could of rid themselfs of the older 747,s.So what do they do after years of nothing the upgrade the 747 interiors along with a330,s-much is still to be done and more people move to fly other carriers.

What really pisses me of is booth Dixon and Aj booth were aware of the initial A380 and 787 delays some five and seven years ahead of time and did nothing when the could of leased mor fuel eficient aircraft.As little as 3 years ago i can tell you that when i was renewing my offices Qantas corperate account they QF literally beged us to fly associates out of SFO at a fare some $2100 cheaper than the fare they offered out of LA.The load factor on the SFO route was very poor and to this day i only see a 787 when they ever get one as being viable.

But it gets better they hand over on a platter to NZ the AKL/LAX route but continue routes to asia on older non referbished aircraft that make even less money.Iget Sydney and to a lesser extent Melbourne being a the center of operations.But the huge neglect of flying international from other cities in particular Brisbane and Perth as a joke.No A380 sevices out of Brisbane to LAX,no first or upgraded international lounge.If Qantas does not repond with more point to point travel the even more pax will fly other airlines.

Remember as the great AJ said about a year to this day where on target,target to what.