Qantas selects Airbus over Boeing for world's longest flights

[webfact]

Qantas selects Airbus over Boeing for world's longest flights

By Jamie Freed

 

FILE PHOTO: Workers are seen near Qantas Airways, Australia's national carrier, Boeing 737-800 aircraft on the tarmac at Adelaide Airport, Australia, August 22, 2018. REUTERS/David Gray

 

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia's Qantas Airways <QAN.AX> picked Airbus SE <AIR.PA> over Boeing Co <BA.N> as the preferred supplier for jets capable of the world's longest commercial flights from Sydney to London, dealing the U.S. planemaker its latest setback this year.

 

The choice of up to 12 A350-1000 planes fitted with an extra fuel tank for flights of up to 21 hours cements Airbus as the leader in ultra-long haul flying globally at a time when Boeing is battling delays on its rival 777X program and a broader corporate crisis following two deadly 737 MAX crashes.

 

The Qantas flights would begin in the first half of 2023, but remain subject to the airline reaching a pay deal with pilots, who would need to extend their duty times to around 23 hours to account for potential delays and switch between flying the A350 and the airline's current A330 fleet. A final decision on an order is expected in March, the airline said on Friday.

 

Qantas Chief Executive Alan Joyce said the airline "had a lot of confidence" in the market for non-stop services from Sydney to London and to New York based on two years of flying non-stop from Perth to London, where it has achieved a 30% fare premium over one-stop rivals in premium classes.

 

"The A350 is a fantastic aircraft and the deal on the table with Airbus gives us the best possible combination of commercial terms, fuel efficiency, operating cost and customer experience," he said.

 

Singapore Airlines Ltd <SIAL.SI> operates the world's current longest flight, nearly 19 hours from Singapore to New York, using an ultra-long range version of the smaller A350-900.

 

Airbus Chief Commercial Officer Christian Scherer thanked Qantas for its selection in a statement, while a Boeing spokesman said it was disappointed with the decision but looked forward to continuing its longstanding partnership with the airline.

 

Rico Merkert, a transport professor at the University of Sydney Business School, said the A350-1000 fit the Qantas brief well and was "a much safer bet", given Boeing has recently reported problems such as the grounding of the 737 MAX, structural cracks in 737 NGs and a fuselage split in a stress test of its 777-9.

 

Airbus no longer provides list prices for aircraft, but based on its 2018 price list, the Qantas order could be worth up to $4.4 billion before heavy discounts that are standard for airline customers.

 

Citi estimated on Friday the planes would cost A$3 billion ($2.04 billion) to $3.5 billion, with the investment likely to be phased over three years.

 

Mark Sedgwick, president of the Australian and International Pilots Association, said the pilot union was looking for a win-win deal that benefited the company and pilots, but so far the negotiations had not struck that balance.

 

"We continue to discuss matters with Qantas," he said.

 

The selection of the A350-1000 will add to growing doubts over Boeing's plans to produce the 777-8 that it had proposed to Qantas for the mission.

 

Boeing had already said the entry into service for the plane, a smaller, longer-range version of the 777-9, would be delayed beyond 2022 but has declined to give a new date, saying it would be based on customer demand.

 

Customers Emirates and Qatar Airways have indicated they could switch orders for the 777-8 to the 777-9.

 

(Reporting by Jamie Freed; Editing by Sam Holmes, Stephen Coates and Muralikumar Anantharaman)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-12-13

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Mavideol]

13 minutes ago, webfact said:

Rico Merkert, a transport professor at the University of Sydney Business School, said the A350-1000 fit the Qantas brief well and was "a much safer bet",

way to go Qantas, congratulations on your choice of the best plane maker

[Somewhere In Time]

This is a big win for Airbus, Qantas, and the quest for 21-hour ultra-long haul flights.  Nearly a full-day in the air when the A350-1000 takes flight.  Wow!

 

SIT

[Vacuum]

4 minutes ago, Somewhere In Time said:

21-hour ultra-long haul flights

Sounds fun, not.

[ThaiBunny]

Given the horror stories that have emerged about rushed and botched testing at Boeing for the 737MAX and the new 777 I'm not surprised

[Andrew65]

3 minutes ago, Vacuum said:

Sounds fun, not.

...especially not in Monkey-class!????

[canopus1969]

Would not now trust Boing to fly to the end of the runway, let alone half way roung the world

[canuckamuck]

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

[mfd101]

I remember doing the Auckland-to-Paris or -London run a couple of times in the early 70s. Took around 28 hours in a DC8 with about 8 refueling stops, including interesting places like Damascus & Bombay. Not allowed off the plane at most of the stops.

[peterpop]

19 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

 

19 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

I think that you are spot on.  The airlines operating these very long duration flights must find a seat/bed combination at a decent price for ALL their passengers.

[sunnyboy2018]

19 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

Both!

[neeray]

19 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

Both !

[BoganInParasite]

Qantas still don't have a pilots agreement, regulatory approval or final business case approval by the board. The pilots agreement is looking difficult. Quite frankly, Qantas is looking to screw the pilots even more to do these flights and the pilots would rather not fly them under any conditions. These flights are a long way from being a certainly, let alone happening. Personally, I'd like to see them happen.

[KhunBENQ]

21 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

Premium economy is the minimum seating they will supply.

Same like Singapore to New York (17 to 18 hours).

 

It's a prestige win for Airbus.

But it's neither sure whether the Sunrise project will materialize nor will it be big business. Might even be a loss or a zero-sum game.

Australia is an interesting place but not big volume.

And how many will pay a significant premium for saving a fuel stop (like Bangkok or Singapore) and maybe three hour added total travel time?

Probably only two routes London and New York to Sydney.

And nonstop from US west coast is reality.

 

If you are interested, a comprehensive video about the test flight London-Sydney. Only 40 (test)passengers (incl CEO) on a 777:

 

 

[natway09]

There will not be any cattle class.

The A340 handled from Singapore or Bangkok to New York quite well but you are right unless specially configured would not want to be in normal economy

[ThaiBunny]

4 minutes ago, natway09 said:

There will not be any cattle class.

The A340 handled from Singapore or Bangkok to New York quite well but you are right unless specially configured would not want to be in normal economy

No cattle class on the Singapore-to-New-York service Singapore Airlines runs then? Or the Qantas Perth-to-London?

[Isaanbiker]

I wasn't on a long distance flight for almost ten years now, but 21 hours in the air would definitely not be fun. 

 

  Here's an interesting article about long distance flights

 

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/planes-can-now-fly-for-21-hours-non-stop-but-are-humans-ready/

 

   But what about the crew? Ultra-long-haul flights require four pilots to share the workload. On-board bunks allow them to rest while their colleagues fly the plane. But it’s not without risks, especially if pilots aren't able to fall asleep in-flight.

 

  

 

  

[Andrew65]

1 hour ago, natway09 said:

There will not be any cattle class.

The A340 handled from Singapore or Bangkok to New York quite well but you are right unless specially configured would not want to be in normal economy

Thai stripped down their A340-500 from 285 to 210 seats to get the range for the BKK - NY flight. I'm sure some seats were economy, a friend flew on it. Stopped due to it being a loss maker in the end.

For a while the A340 was the longest range aircraft, until they put bigger fuel tanks on the B777.

 

 

[KhunBENQ]

1 hour ago, ThaiBunny said:

No cattle class on the Singapore-to-New-York service Singapore Airlines runs then?

Premium Economy as written.

38 inch pitch, 19.5 inch width.

Far from the standard cattle (31-33/17-18).

[KhunBENQ]

1 hour ago, ThaiBunny said:

Or the Qantas Perth-to-London?

They DO cattle class.

32 / 17.2

Have a nice dream in the Dreamliner.

[Will E Vormer]

Dreamliner has crazy tight economy.. most do 3 3 3. 

[KhunBENQ]

16 minutes ago, Will E Vormer said:

Dreamliner has crazy tight economy.. most do 3 3 3. 

That's indeed what they offer.

Todays flight with reg.nr. VH-ZNH.

 

3-3-3:

https://www.qantas.com/content/dam/qantas/pdfs/qantas-experience/onboard/seatmaps/B787-9.pdf

 

17h 45min flight time.

Have fun.

 

[GinBoy2]

I flew on the TG BKK-LAX flights twice before they were cancelled.

 

Even though I was in business class it was way too long for me. 

 

I don't really care what aircraft it is, give me a 1 stop flight any day over these ultra long haul flights sitting in an aircraft for 20 hours

[alex8912]

9 hours ago, Andrew65 said:

Thai stripped down their A340-500 from 285 to 210 seats to get the range for the BKK - NY flight. I'm sure some seats were economy, a friend flew on it. Stopped due to it being a loss maker in the end.

For a while the A340 was the longest range aircraft, until they put bigger fuel tanks on the B777.

 

 

There were large economy sections on Thai air from NYC to Bangkok I flew it many times when it was available and liked it. About 16 1/2 hours to 17. The flights were always full but I heard they were losing on the cargo end of it.  Also a few posters say there is not economy from NYC to Singapore but there is. 

[KhunBENQ]

11 hours ago, alex8912 said:

Also a few posters say there is not economy from NYC to Singapore but there is. 

Do you see anything else than premium economy or does it not matter for your argument?

[VocalNeal]

Surely it is a psychological endeavour. Just to prove to themselves that Australia, while a nice pace to live, is remote and at the ass end of the world.

 

I would think a mid-flight stop with included hotel night and a shower would be more appealing?

[tiptoejoe]

On 12/13/2019 at 6:06 AM, Andrew65 said:

...especially not in Monkey-class!????

no monkey class...all premium seating, no economy class for this route.

[Beggar]

On 12/13/2019 at 2:21 PM, canuckamuck said:

21 hours in a plane? I would need drugs or a premium seat.

Or perhaps this