QF removes First from 747s and selected 380s

[Nick C]

Config of 4-class 388 will be 14F/60J/32Y+/380Y
LD: 14F/332Y
UD: 60J/32Y+/48Y

[Ash W]

How are they going to get 48 Y seats into the space vacated by 12 J seats on the upper deck? That equates to 6 rows at 8 abreast. Seems a bit much to me.

Arthur, you seem to forget that 6 of Qantas's 747's were delivered in 2002/2003 and there are also 3 or so -OJ series planes that were delivered 1999/2000. Hardly what I would call dangerous and aging aircraft.

As for the rest again they are far from mechanical poor or dangerous, -OJK was quite clearly a freak event rather than sign of poor maintenance. A cabin refresh will give a few more years use out of them, maybe by then Qantas will have worked out aircraft it wants for the markets where an A380 is just too big.

Also I don't think Qantas would be removing F from these aircraft if there was a market for them. Quite clearly over recent years the trend has been for pax who once brought F going to J and some J passengers going to premium Y. Indeed if you look at what is offered today and J and premium Y and compare it to F and J 10 years ago you would say they were very similar indeed.

[Montague S]

Originally Posted by D Chan

but times were good before the GFC

times are still good, just that people are spending a little less...

For several Asian cities like Hong Kong, Bangkok, New York and Tokyo I think the loadings for F should be positive, so I do wonder whether it is that worth for Qantas to remove the high revenue service to those cities with high demand.

Arthur, QF doesn't send aircraft with First Class to Tokyo.

[Philip Argy]

I hope the A380 IFE is fixed in J class before it's rolled out too extensively. It was shocking when I went to London and back last October - a very user friendly system plagued by a hardware or software bug that damaged the otherwise great A380 experience:
http://yssyforum.net/board/showpost....9&postcount=21

[NickN]

Furthermore, I feel angry and frustrated that Qantas still haven't learn the lesson from those aging and poorly maintained Boeing 747s (and that's why I am so scared about them), especially after the QF30 incident. Rather to waste money renovating the dangerous and aging B744s I think phasing them out and replace with A380s will be smarter and money saving move than renovating them.

Just about every carrier deploying 744's have aircraft of the same age which are still flying day after day with no issues.

Again, someone bandering about crticism and "poor maintenance", yet nothing to back up your claims. As far as I am aware QF don't have the worst maintenance programme going around, in fact it appears to be relatively decent.

Further to that you sunk to the level of calling the 744 "dangerous". If that's the case why are they still in service?

QF cannot replace ALL 744's at this stage with A380's as it would not be viable economically, add to that the fact that Airbus can only squeeze out around 20-30 or so A380's a year to accommodate all customers you wont see an ALL A380 fleet for a very long time to come.

I suppose you better get used to the idea of flying the "Dangerous and poorly maintained" 744 for a while longer.

[Marty H]

The thing against the B744 at the moment isnt that is dangerous but its fuel burn compared to say your B77W or B77LR and the A380 that is why airlines are dumping them very fast at the moment QF are clearly doing the same with their B744's but people must remember their ER's are only 7-8yrs old.

[Todd Hendry]

Arthur,

Why do you say the 747's are dangerous?They are very well maintained.
It will be nice for the customers to have a nice new interior to fly to their destination in. Lie flat skybeds (finally) and maybe, fingers crossed, new bins etc.

Todd.

[Owen H]

Furthermore, I feel angry and frustrated that Qantas still haven't learn the lesson from those aging and poorly maintained Boeing 747s (and that's why I am so scared about them), especially after the QF30 incident

You've got to be kidding me. They're aging (like everything), but they are as well maintained as any other operator, if not more so. They are perfectly serviceable aircraft with many years ahead of them, as they are so carefully and impeccably maintained.

If you seriously think that QF's 744's are badly maintained and you won't fly them, then you should give up air travel altogether.

As to premium to Hong Kong - CLEARLY the market isn't there, or they would be doing it! Qantas aren't stupid enough to spend a lot of money removing a class from the aircraft if it was profitable to keep it there! As others have pointed out - Cathay do the same thing. I wonder why...

[Andrew P]

Agree most in business just want to get from A to B, with the ability to work and/or sleep and/or rest. Food & wine are just an added bonus.

So the current lie flat bed in J more than adequately provides these needs.

Corporate will not now use F, and won’t go back to First in the long term, especially on flights of less than 9 hours, i.e. Aussie-Asia

Then only ones in First are politicians, movie starts & lotto winners (but then politicians & movie starts have their own business jets, so all that is left is Lotto Winners)

[Greg McDonald]

The cynic in me wonders how long it will be before the price of J moves closer to what F was and so on......