Ground towing collision at Avalon

[Mick F]

Towing of aircraft is not a very easy task in itself either. Mistakes happen. They're certainly not the first to break an aircraft because of a towing mishap.

Mick

[Sarah C]

Originally Posted by Jack Brownbill

bye bye OJH, OJK and OJM perhaps?

Some of Qantas 744's are getting very old. I know it's all related to A380 delays but Qantas really should of ordered 777's

Those three aircraft were manufactured in 1990/1991. Since when is that old? For some reason, if an aircraft is over 10 years old people think it is 'old'.

[Jack B]

18 years...

For a first rate, world class airline like Qantas-thats old

I know they aren't the only airline stuck with old 744's.

The -ER's certainly aren't old, and I think there may be 1 or 2 RR's that are fairly new too, but -OJA is from 1989!

Anyway, I just think Qantas should of ordered 777's, and I think they still should. A380's don't suit routes like Sydney-Buenos Aires, Sydney-Joh'burg

And who knows how long they will have to wait on 787's

[Matt_L]

Originally Posted by Jack Brownbill

18 years...

Anyway, I just think Qantas should of ordered 777's, and I think they still should. A380's don't suit routes like Sydney-Buenos Aires, Sydney-Joh'burg

And who knows how long they will have to wait on 787's

That's the million dollar question- why they haven't ordered 777's as some might remember they were initially poised to be the 777 launch customer and then pulled out. We have seen the Asian airlines and middle eastern such as EK, SIA, cathay operate extremely successfully and efficiently with 773's and 772's and now with the LR'S, it was just extremely poor decision making not to order the 777's.

I think the decision making is perhaps best described back in 2002 when QF ordered the a330-200's for domestic routes, and retrofitted gates with 2 aerobridges yet it was slow as to turn these planes around on like SYD-MEL and then they realized they couldnt even put skybed in as floors weren't strong enough- hence them going to JQ intl.
It's moves like this that makes me wonder sometimes.

I'm not trying to inflame Qantas, as many know I have great admiration for them, I just think the decision making of fleet manager/whoever else could have been wiser.

[Tom PER]

Well said Matt_L, couldn't of said it better myself.

Their upper management have made some really questionable decisions the last few years like buying 'base version/poverty pack' A332's as you have already mentioned.

A few other examples that spring to mind are: Why is a world class airline still flying B743's (and yes I know they are going to be phased out at the end of the year) but they are still doing MEL-AKL-LAX duties. EBJ and EBK flying domestically whilst B763's still flying Internationally. The lack of IFE/PTV's in EBJ and EBK.

B777's 'would' of been perfect for QF.

I wish QF would follow and convert some of the older B744's to BCF's and operate freighters in their own colours.

[Nathan Long]

Originally Posted by Jack Brownbill

A380's don't suit routes like Sydney-Buenos Aires, Sydney-Joh'burg

Neither do 777s as both of these routes have sections outside of 207 minute ETOPS.

[Johannes C]

Thinking about 777, yes it should have been in the fleet long before.

About A330, well, it is the only type of airplane that all 6 Skytrax 5-star airlines (Asiana, Cathay, Kingfisher, Malaysia, Qatar, Singapore Airlines) operate, don't know for what reason. But all i know is that A330-200 is the best Airbus product that when compared to Boeing's, it is superior all in all. Boeing 777-200ER is super in its class, 777-200LR would soon be dead by 787, and Boeing 777-300ER has no match in its payload, range, and efficiency altogether.

On topic: should we believe in superstition? And age would not cause a thing as long as the maintenance is good. Let the economic factor decide for its retirement.

Yes, 777-300ER is the perfect replacement for 747-400, not A380.

[damien b]

Originally Posted by Johannes C

Yes, 777-300ER is the perfect replacement for 747-400, not A380.

As Nathan has said above the 777 is limited in some areas due to ETOPS, which does not effect the A380 or A340 for that matter. The 777 could certainly replace the 744 in some areas, but not on all routes for the above reasons.

The A380 in my mind is a brilliant replacement for the 744 and brings a new era of flying with it. It certainly offers Qantas more flexibility than a 777 would offer in terms of configuration, loads, routes etc without having more aircraft types in the fleet which creates headaches for all concerned.

On topic - aircraft have their own traits/issues from rego number to rego number. Both aircraft involved have had some bad luck but given their high utilisation rate, you'd exect the same rego to occasionally creep into incidents. Age has nothing to do with aircraft being problematic - good maintenance and quality control are more important in this area.

[Bill S]

Originally Posted by Sarah C

Those three aircraft were manufactured in 1990/1991. Since when is that old? For some reason, if an aircraft is over 10 years old people think it is 'old'.

I'm constantly mystified as to why people think an 'old' aeroplane is no good.
If they are maintained correctly they are very nearly as good as a brand-new one.
As for the 747-300's being 'too old', I might remind you all that they are basically the same plane as a -400, just older avionics, engines, and slightly less efficient aerodynamics. When you take lease costs into account, a Classic can often be cheaper to run than a newer -400.

[Andrew M]

Originally Posted by Tom Barber

Why is a world class airline still flying B743's (and yes I know they are going to be phased out at the end of the year) but they are still doing MEL-AKL-LAX duties.

EBJ and EBK flying domestically whilst B763's still flying Internationally. The lack of IFE/PTV's in EBJ and EBK.

B777's 'would' of been perfect for QF.

743 - Because they have no other planes to operate the routes until 2 more A380's come along in December. Also because Qantas can get away with it

B777's would have been nice but too late now to worry about that it's all about B787/A350 now!

Without thinking too much on a Saturday, The 777-200 wouldn't be that useful for Qantas. The 777-300ER and the 777-200LR would be better suited, however

777-200LR - Only entered into service in 2006
777-300ER - Only entered into service in 2004

Even if QF did get these they would have problems operating the Australia-USA routes, where a current 744 or 744ER can go on the Kangaroo OR Pacific routes without too many problems, except the ER is better for the MEL-LAX route and is already a subfleet in QF.

Either way, too late now!

So any updates on re-entry into service dates for the Avalon birds! Where are they resting now ? Hangars ?