|
Originally Posted by mrkz
(Post 15086232)
Thanks VH that is sobering -- 50% of their fleet counting the first affected plane. It's hard for me to understand why a design or maintenance issue would differentially affect Qantas aircraft, particularly with the maintenance done by Lufthansa Technik in any case. Any ideas?
Rolls Royce service all of QF's Trent 900s. Consequently this is a Rolls Royce issue, and not related either to anything done by either QF or LH Technik. Personally I see this latest report coming from Flight Global as very worrying as it suggests either a manufacturing or design flaw. If QF now have 3 aircraft requiring major engine repairs, I am surprised that either SQ or LH are not in a similar position. RR have managed to be the major supplier of engines for the A388 so it will be very interesting to see what happens over the coming days. Whilst I can understand your frustration as traveller affected by this crisis, I think you need to remember that the information is changing on a minute by minute basis. |
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
(Post 15086889)
This has nothing to do with Lufthansa Technik. As has already been discussed on this thread, engine maintenance and repair is separate to that carried out on the airframe.
Rolls Royce service all of QF's Trent 900s. Consequently this is a Rolls Royce issue, and not related either to anything done by either QF or LH Technik. Personally I see this latest report coming from Flight Global as very worrying as it suggests either a manufacturing or design flaw. If QF now have 3 aircraft requiring major engine repairs, I am surprised that either SQ or LH are not in a similar position. RR have managed to be the major supplier of engines for the A388 so it will be very interesting to see what happens over the coming days. Whilst I can understand your frustration as traveller affected by this crisis, I think you need to remember that the information is changing on a minute by minute basis. I think my point is actually the same as yours though -- my question is why SQ and LH would not also be affected. Elsewhere there has since been speculation that this is somehow related to the different power rating of the engines used by QF, perhaps 'revealing' a design issue earlier under greater strain. |
Looks like they're starting to move some people out of LAX, with some scheduled and some additional morning departures. Looks like two nights in LAX for me though :(
|
If loads on NRT-SYD have been as low as they appear (~40%), couldn't QF route some people stuck at LAX to NRT on AA or JL, then into SYD on QF22?
|
I am sure this has already been canvassed, looking at expert flyer, QF22 JL/JO771 are sold out until Monday where there's some J class.
|
Taken from a few personal and related experiences in the past few weeks on QF 21/22 they have been very full flights, at least in WHY but some space in J.
I do not know how you got 40% load factors.:confused: |
Originally Posted by Blackcloud
(Post 15088546)
Taken from a few personal and related experiences in the past few weeks on QF 21/22 they have been very full flights, at least in WHY but some space in J.
I do not know how you got 40% load factors.:confused: |
Originally Posted by number_6
(Post 15077059)
Don't know the current count, but recently (during the last downturn) QF had 3 744s in storage ... so they might be able to get those on short notice (few days). Additionally there are dozens of 747s in storage world-wide which would be available for wet-lease within a few weeks. But more likely QF would put 767s/A332s on some now-747 routes and use its existing fleet to cover for all 6 A380s. Lots of disruption operationally and pax discomfort with seat/cabin type, but no pax should be stranded for long.
Out of LAX I'd be surprised if QF cannot re-accomodate every single pax on the A380 flights on competing carriers (UA/DL/V.Australia/NZ) but probably they don't want to :) LHR loads are running high (QF32 had 96% load factor, 433 pax out of 450!), so LHR will get priority, also BA can easily assist with wet leases to QF (while AA cannot).
Originally Posted by Himeno
(Post 15088441)
If loads on NRT-SYD have been as low as they appear (~40%), couldn't QF route some people stuck at LAX to NRT on AA or JL, then into SYD on QF22?
|
there is also the SFO-SYD flight they can accommodate people on. I am flying QF74 on Wed Nov 10th and a few friends flying QF12 on thursday, hopefully they wont get bumped off their ticketed flight/date to get the remaining people out of LAX.
|
Originally Posted by Traveloguy
(Post 15086889)
Personally I see this latest report coming from Flight Global as very worrying as it suggests either a manufacturing or design flaw. If QF now have 3 aircraft requiring major engine repairs, I am surprised that either SQ or LH are not in a similar position. RR have managed to be the major supplier of engines for the A388 so it will be very interesting to see what happens over the coming days.
See http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...ml#post6044167 |
Originally Posted by fullrecline
(Post 15086365)
I am with you on this one goback. This is a very serious issues that is revealing an unhealthy culture underneath all of the "spin" at QANTAS. This spin includes all of you on this thread who are so blinded by the "Icon" that once was a great airline. Too many incidences occurring of a serious nature that can't and should not be ignored. I believe there has been a Qantas beat up in the media over the last couple of years with trivial issues, but there has been numerous that are definite cause for concern. Lets face it people, your beloved QANTAS is not infallible and is falling very rapidly from grace due to what seems to be typical corporate mismanagement (my opinion).
Lets just pray the only way the truth of all this, isn't out of a coronial inquiry. |
Originally Posted by mrkz
(Post 15088269)
Thank you for the reminder about RR servicing, I had forgotten this.
I think my point is actually the same as yours though -- my question is why SQ and LH would not also be affected. Elsewhere there has since been speculation that this is somehow related to the different power rating of the engines used by QF, perhaps 'revealing' a design issue earlier under greater strain. SQ: don't be too sure that it hasn't presented and been found in the mandated tests on [I think] one engine. Cheers |
Originally Posted by deeruck
(Post 15088358)
Looks like they're starting to move some people out of LAX, with some scheduled and some additional morning departures. Looks like two nights in LAX for me though :(
With the next MEL-LAX flight due out of Melbourne in 12 hours from now. Don't know the current count, but recently (during the last downturn) QF had 3 744s in storage ... so they might be able to get those on short notice (few days). Additionally there are dozens of 747s in storage world-wide which would be available for wet-lease within a few weeks. All former QF aircarft currently in storage would take many days, if not weeks to be setup ready for revenue service. The day after the airbus incident, there was a 'spare' or 'instorage' 747 in Melbourne which departed to the US for long term storage. It was not possible to return this aircraft to service to accommodate the current passenger backlog as the aircraft had been stripped of various necessary internal parts/equipment/furniture etc. |
Originally Posted by spacekiek
(Post 15086823)
Any ideas when the A380's will get back into service ?
I'm reading within 48 hours, but then again ... they apparently need to replace 2 engines which will take some time too. After that, the planes would need to get back to their locations. Curious to see which routes will get A380 service first. I'm traveling myself to LHR>SIN>SYD nov. 10th, so I'm very curious what will possible by then. Loads will dictate where the A380s go; LHR if QF only, but BA/CX can absorb a lot of the LHR load so LAX might get priority for A380 allocation. In any case going down to a fleet of only 2 is going to be a problem for QF for the short term. |
Imagine if all these events happen on Oprah's A380- returns to LAX. Gets on another 747 and returns to LAX again.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:13 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.