camfloss
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:58 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:03 am

If you're achieving 5- 6% domestic passenger growth every single year by focussing on the major markets why bother with the little guys and the complexities it brings to your business?

I expect Air NZ will do some more culling, with airports less than 200K per annum being obvious targets.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:11 am

camfloss wrote:
If you're achieving 5- 6% domestic passenger growth every single year by focussing on the major markets why bother with the little guys and the complexities it brings to your business?

Precisely.

Evaluating a fleet of Cessna Caravans. Negotiating with iwi. Setting up a maintenance contract. Relocating pilots and flightccrew who demand the same pay and conditions as their main trunk counterparts. Why even bother, when the profit forecast overlaps with the margin of error?
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4118
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:27 am

Gasman wrote:
camfloss wrote:
If you're achieving 5- 6% domestic passenger growth every single year by focussing on the major markets why bother with the little guys and the complexities it brings to your business?

Precisely.

Evaluating a fleet of Cessna Caravans. Negotiating with iwi. Setting up a maintenance contract. Relocating pilots and flightccrew who demand the same pay and conditions as their main trunk counterparts. Why even bother, when the profit forecast overlaps with the margin of error?


At some point it is worth it. After all you do still have to feed into your other services and also prevent a new competitor from growing too much (Qantas could easily turn to those competitors and offer to buy them up a la NZlink style for example).

The problem is more aircraft.... NZ doesn't want to go really small (not worth their time and also can impact on brand safety image). The 1900 was a good sized aircraft that was still big enough. The problem was that it was an overly complicated aircraft for it's size and probably cost a ton to run without a reasonable alternative. NZ should help one or more of these small airlines out and have them operate services but with NZ selling the seats (like how AA has AAEagle etc). People still want to maintain their FF status, earn points, have interlined baggage etc and end of the day even if the individual route doesn't make money (so long as it isn't a significant loss) then so what? it's feeding pax into the rest of their network giving it critical mass (and profitability).
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
DavidJ08
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:18 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:18 am

Zkpilot wrote:
NZ should help one or more of these small airlines out and have them operate services but with NZ selling the seats (like how AA has AAEagle etc). People still want to maintain their FF status, earn points, have interlined baggage etc and end of the day even if the individual route doesn't make money (so long as it isn't a significant loss) then so what? it's feeding pax into the rest of their network giving it critical mass (and profitability).

If NZ sells the seats and does FF and interlined baggage, how does that differ from Air NZ Link? Also if NZ put their brand on it, then said small airline can start affecting the brand safety image.

And I'm of the opinion that NZ would have considered that before they withdrew from regional destinations like PPQ, KAT or WHK. Destinations with enough feeder traffic wouldn't have been dropped in the first place, since NZ is the one with the data on where people booked to travel with them after all. True, people with onward connections with a different airline won't get counted, but those people aren't feeding the NZ network (they're feeding someone else's network) so they won't matter anyway for NZ's analysis (beyond their NZ flight.)
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:29 am

It's great to see that DUD is keeping its options open, and talking to both VA and NZ regarding DUD - BNE.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/dunedin-airpo ... ane-route/.

IMO, NZ won't take on VA on DUD - BNE. The route is likely not reliant on NZ code-sharing (holiday route).

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4118
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:00 am

DavidJ08 wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
NZ should help one or more of these small airlines out and have them operate services but with NZ selling the seats (like how AA has AAEagle etc). People still want to maintain their FF status, earn points, have interlined baggage etc and end of the day even if the individual route doesn't make money (so long as it isn't a significant loss) then so what? it's feeding pax into the rest of their network giving it critical mass (and profitability).

If NZ sells the seats and does FF and interlined baggage, how does that differ from Air NZ Link? Also if NZ put their brand on it, then said small airline can start affecting the brand safety image.

And I'm of the opinion that NZ would have considered that before they withdrew from regional destinations like PPQ, KAT or WHK. Destinations with enough feeder traffic wouldn't have been dropped in the first place, since NZ is the one with the data on where people booked to travel with them after all. True, people with onward connections with a different airline won't get counted, but those people aren't feeding the NZ network (they're feeding someone else's network) so they won't matter anyway for NZ's analysis (beyond their NZ flight.)

By not putting their brand on it - just like how some airlines overseas do it....It isn't an Air NZ flight but NZ can sell you seats on it. So if the worst happens there isn't a burnt out koru on the side of a hill etc and NZ can say not our plane etc (since small planes are exponentially more dangerous).
NZ can also avoid the whole having their own employees etc operating it and have the 3rd party operate it.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:15 am

DavidJ08 wrote:
If NZ sells the seats and does FF and interlined baggage, how does that differ from Air NZ Link? Also if NZ put their brand on it, then said small airline can start affecting the brand safety image.


Image

If NZ sells seats on it, and worse puts its branding on, then it is just NZ Lite, and might as well be sold as such - the first step in the very thing of which I was scared.

The whole point of this was that NZ was stopping service to various cities, thus giving an opportunity for small airlines to take over those cities and to grow - independently as Air Chathams is:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zeala ... outes.html

Air Chathams benefits from Air New Zealand dropping regional routes

They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:05 am

mariner wrote:
DavidJ08 wrote:
If NZ sells the seats and does FF and interlined baggage, how does that differ from Air NZ Link? Also if NZ put their brand on it, then said small airline can start affecting the brand safety image.


Image

If NZ sells seats on it, and worse puts its branding on, then it is just NZ Lite, and might as well be sold as such - the first step in the very thing of which I was scared.

The whole point of this was that NZ was stopping service to various cities, thus giving an opportunity for small airlines to take over those cities and to grow - independently as Air Chathams is:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zeala ... outes.html

Air Chathams benefits from Air New Zealand dropping regional routes

They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.

mariner


Put simply, we'll operate it, but can you help sell it to the airline who doesn't want to operate it because they're lead by a man who's sole focus is commercial success. Bit stupid of these airline in even expecting it.

On another topic CEO's..

Mr Norris
Turns the airline to having an economicfocus, strips cost out of the business, introduces "Express", "Zeal", Kiosks, Seats to Suit (I think), online booking and offline fees. You could argue he got the airline back on it's feet and in a position for the following two to succeed.

Mr Fyfe
Continues with cost control with mid pacific adjustments but starts to also focus a lot on brand by tapping into global awareness, Bio Fuel, his crazy suits, Racing a A1GP car, introduction of safety video, opening China and BJS alongside the Olympics, HKG-LHR to be spanning the entire globe.

Mr Luxon
Massive focus on sales and distribution, extensive investment behind the scenes in systems to drive more dynamic pricing, alliances (SQ, UA, NH, AR, CX, CA...), continues with cost control and axing of rubbish "dead weight" BJS, WAG/KAT, Eagle but opens SIN, DPS, SGN, IAH, EZE, ORD, increases domestic traffic year on year, commences night flying into ZQN... Brings in a new chief digital officer from offshore for the next generation of online sales and marketing tools.

I wonder what the next era will have..
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 9978
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:06 am

WLG is closed due to severe weather after a lightning strick destroyed runway lights.

Was driving on SH1 after being called into work early and I couldnt see where the road was muitple times due to the severe hail and extensive downpours. Lightning totally blocked my vision muitple times
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/W,B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ
 
NZ321
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:24 am

Wow it's okay up on the Kapiti Coast
Plane mad!
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Wed Apr 11, 2018 10:04 pm

mariner wrote:
They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.


More on Air Chathams and Norfolk Island:

https://www.radionz.co.nz/international ... m-auckland

"Air Chathams may fly to Norfolk direct from Auckland"

Assuming it all happens It makes a lot of sense and gives Air Chathams a pretty good - if basic - route network in the North Island.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:15 am

mariner wrote:
mariner wrote:
They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.


More on Air Chathams and Norfolk Island:

https://www.radionz.co.nz/international ... m-auckland

"Air Chathams may fly to Norfolk direct from Auckland"

Assuming it all happens It makes a lot of sense and gives Air Chathams a pretty good - if basic - route network in the North Island.

mariner

I’d definitely be up for a holiday there flying on a CV580.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Sylus
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:48 am

planemanofnz wrote:
It's great to see that DUD is keeping its options open, and talking to both VA and NZ regarding DUD - BNE.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/dunedin-airpo ... ane-route/.

IMO, NZ won't take on VA on DUD - BNE. The route is likely not reliant on NZ code-sharing (holiday route).

Cheers,

C.



I agree, although as mentioned this route could easily be on the TT radar.

Changing topics here (although the same region), after working at ZQN for some months now it has become increasingly clear that ATR operations into and out of ZQN simply cannot be consistently reliable. In the last few weeks there has been countless ATR cancellations on NZ's CHC/WLG - ZQN services due to weather at times when JQ/QF/VA/NZ 320's and 737's are having no issues (minus the odd missed approach). Today CHC, canceled. Yesterday CHC, canceled. I certainly only book a 320 if travelling to CHC from ZQN.

Clearly, despite the newer 600's, the ATR's don't have the same minima as the 320's and thus weather cancellations are more common. With that in mind, it raises the question, why do NZ bother sending the ATR's in at all?. During summer CHC-ZQN was 2 daily 320 and 1-2 daily ATR. WLG is currently 2x daily A320 and 1-4x weekly ATR. While clearly the ATR's allow for more frequency, it doesn't seem to be a justified trade-off for whats clearly much worse reliability. For the small quantity of ATR flights, one wonders why they don't just stop flying that equipment to ZQN completely and move to a 2x daily 320 WLG service and a 2-3 daily CHC A320 service?
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:10 am

Sylus wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
It's great to see that DUD is keeping its options open, and talking to both VA and NZ regarding DUD - BNE.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/dunedin-airpo ... ane-route/.

IMO, NZ won't take on VA on DUD - BNE. The route is likely not reliant on NZ code-sharing (holiday route).

Cheers,

C.



I agree, although as mentioned this route could easily be on the TT radar.

Changing topics here (although the same region), after working at ZQN for some months now it has become increasingly clear that ATR operations into and out of ZQN simply cannot be consistently reliable. In the last few weeks there has been countless ATR cancellations on NZ's CHC/WLG - ZQN services due to weather at times when JQ/QF/VA/NZ 320's and 737's are having no issues (minus the odd missed approach). Today CHC, canceled. Yesterday CHC, canceled. I certainly only book a 320 if travelling to CHC from ZQN.

Clearly, despite the newer 600's, the ATR's don't have the same minima as the 320's and thus weather cancellations are more common. With that in mind, it raises the question, why do NZ bother sending the ATR's in at all?. During summer CHC-ZQN was 2 daily 320 and 1-2 daily ATR. WLG is currently 2x daily A320 and 1-4x weekly ATR. While clearly the ATR's allow for more frequency, it doesn't seem to be a justified trade-off for whats clearly much worse reliability. For the small quantity of ATR flights, one wonders why they don't just stop flying that equipment to ZQN completely and move to a 2x daily 320 WLG service and a 2-3 daily CHC A320 service?


Having the aircraft spare to do it.

Personal view is NZ could do with another 2-3 A320's or even 2x A321's for Domestic ops as there are a couple of routes/sectors which consistency sell well but NZ doesn't have the equipment for it.
 
aerohottie
Posts: 748
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:44 am

NZ6 wrote:
mariner wrote:
DavidJ08 wrote:
If NZ sells the seats and does FF and interlined baggage, how does that differ from Air NZ Link? Also if NZ put their brand on it, then said small airline can start affecting the brand safety image.


Image

If NZ sells seats on it, and worse puts its branding on, then it is just NZ Lite, and might as well be sold as such - the first step in the very thing of which I was scared.

The whole point of this was that NZ was stopping service to various cities, thus giving an opportunity for small airlines to take over those cities and to grow - independently as Air Chathams is:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zeala ... outes.html

Air Chathams benefits from Air New Zealand dropping regional routes

They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.

mariner


Put simply, we'll operate it, but can you help sell it to the airline who doesn't want to operate it because they're lead by a man who's sole focus is commercial success. Bit stupid of these airline in even expecting it.

On another topic CEO's..

Mr Norris
Turns the airline to having an economicfocus, strips cost out of the business, introduces "Express", "Zeal", Kiosks, Seats to Suit (I think), online booking and offline fees. You could argue he got the airline back on it's feet and in a position for the following two to succeed.

Mr Fyfe
Continues with cost control with mid pacific adjustments but starts to also focus a lot on brand by tapping into global awareness, Bio Fuel, his crazy suits, Racing a A1GP car, introduction of safety video, opening China and BJS alongside the Olympics, HKG-LHR to be spanning the entire globe.

Mr Luxon
Massive focus on sales and distribution, extensive investment behind the scenes in systems to drive more dynamic pricing, alliances (SQ, UA, NH, AR, CX, CA...), continues with cost control and axing of rubbish "dead weight" BJS, WAG/KAT, Eagle but opens SIN, DPS, SGN, IAH, EZE, ORD, increases domestic traffic year on year, commences night flying into ZQN... Brings in a new chief digital officer from offshore for the next generation of online sales and marketing tools.

I wonder what the next era will have..

Interestingly, quite a few of the Norris achievements were initiatives driven by Fyfe in his former CIO role.

Nevertheless, I think the next phases will be Product Development and UX (user experience). I think this will cover a complete inflight product refresh (seats and service), new uniforms, and possibly a livery update or change. The UX will be a refocus on the digital customer journey, touch points, and maybe an airpoints program refresh
What?
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:41 am

aerohottie wrote:
... new uniforms ...

I sure as hell hope so - the current ones are absolutely horrendous - especially those male vests with the patch art-work on the back, which IMHO, are just totally unprofessional! :ill: :thumbsdown:

Why NZ feels the need to have crew wearing phrases like "Sweet as!" is one thing, but "blow" is something else (generally refers to a sexual act or cocaine, for non-New Zealanders).

Image

Cheers,

C.
 
jrfspa320
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:18 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:58 am

[/quote]I agree, although as mentioned this route could easily be on the TT radar.

Changing topics here (although the same region), after working at ZQN for some months now it has become increasingly clear that ATR operations into and out of ZQN simply cannot be consistently reliable. In the last few weeks there has been countless ATR cancellations on NZ's CHC/WLG - ZQN services due to weather at times when JQ/QF/VA/NZ 320's and 737's are having no issues (minus the odd missed approach). Today CHC, canceled. Yesterday CHC, canceled. I certainly only book a 320 if travelling to CHC from ZQN.

Clearly, despite the newer 600's, the ATR's don't have the same minima as the 320's and thus weather cancellations are more common. With that in mind, it raises the question, why do NZ bother sending the ATR's in at all?. During summer CHC-ZQN was 2 daily 320 and 1-2 daily ATR. WLG is currently 2x daily A320 and 1-4x weekly ATR. While clearly the ATR's allow for more frequency, it doesn't seem to be a justified trade-off for whats clearly much worse reliability. For the small quantity of ATR flights, one wonders why they don't just stop flying that equipment to ZQN completely and move to a 2x daily 320 WLG service and a 2-3 daily CHC A320 service?[/quote]


This issue should be somewhat solved once the RNP for the ATRs come through, should be this year, if anyone else has an update?
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:05 am

aerohottie wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
mariner wrote:

Image

If NZ sells seats on it, and worse puts its branding on, then it is just NZ Lite, and might as well be sold as such - the first step in the very thing of which I was scared.

The whole point of this was that NZ was stopping service to various cities, thus giving an opportunity for small airlines to take over those cities and to grow - independently as Air Chathams is:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zeala ... outes.html

Air Chathams benefits from Air New Zealand dropping regional routes

They're planning to reinstate the Norfolk Island route, too.

mariner


Put simply, we'll operate it, but can you help sell it to the airline who doesn't want to operate it because they're lead by a man who's sole focus is commercial success. Bit stupid of these airline in even expecting it.

On another topic CEO's..

Mr Norris
Turns the airline to having an economicfocus, strips cost out of the business, introduces "Express", "Zeal", Kiosks, Seats to Suit (I think), online booking and offline fees. You could argue he got the airline back on it's feet and in a position for the following two to succeed.

Mr Fyfe
Continues with cost control with mid pacific adjustments but starts to also focus a lot on brand by tapping into global awareness, Bio Fuel, his crazy suits, Racing a A1GP car, introduction of safety video, opening China and BJS alongside the Olympics, HKG-LHR to be spanning the entire globe.

Mr Luxon
Massive focus on sales and distribution, extensive investment behind the scenes in systems to drive more dynamic pricing, alliances (SQ, UA, NH, AR, CX, CA...), continues with cost control and axing of rubbish "dead weight" BJS, WAG/KAT, Eagle but opens SIN, DPS, SGN, IAH, EZE, ORD, increases domestic traffic year on year, commences night flying into ZQN... Brings in a new chief digital officer from offshore for the next generation of online sales and marketing tools.

I wonder what the next era will have..

Interestingly, quite a few of the Norris achievements were initiatives driven by Fyfe in his former CIO role.

Nevertheless, I think the next phases will be Product Development and UX (user experience). I think this will cover a complete inflight product refresh (seats and service), new uniforms, and possibly a livery update or change. The UX will be a refocus on the digital customer journey, touch points, and maybe an airpoints program refresh


Norris initiated this strategy. It all originated form his banking background with ATM's and the automation that industry was leading especially Bank Direct at the time.

You'll see a lot of the digital stuff come out over the coming years with the new CDO.

Can't see a livery change so soon after the last, the long haul fleet has just been refubed so don't expect anything new until the 2022 mark when the next generation come in.
 
NZ321
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:57 am

Does anybody know why LATAM 789s operating LA800/801 seem to have such a long scheduled stop in AKL in both directions? This seems strange for a through-flight. Even airlines like SQ and MH and CX turn their aircraft around in AKL in about 1 hour 30 or less but LA seem to like in excess of 2 hours in each direction. Is this because flight times over the southern ocean can vary greatly? Thoughts?
Plane mad!
 
PA515
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:01 pm

jrfspa320 wrote:
This issue should be somewhat solved once the RNP for the ATRs come through, should be this year, if anyone else has an update?


No update, but this is what was reported in Feb 2016.

Air NZ plans to install it's fleet of ATR turboprops with Required Navigation Performance (RNP) technology at a cost of NZ$25 million.

The Star Alliance carrier will become the first ATR operator to use RNP, which allows aircraft to fly along predefined routes, saving fuel and emissions as well as minimising potential delays due to bad weather.

AIr NZ said on Thursday the first ATR with RNP capability was expected to take to the skies in 2018, following certification and regulatory approval.


http://australianaviation.com.au/2016/0 ... echnology/

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 2908
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:29 pm

NZ321 wrote:
Does anybody know why LATAM 789s operating LA800/801 seem to have such a long scheduled stop in AKL in both directions? This seems strange for a through-flight. Even airlines like SQ and MH and CX turn their aircraft around in AKL in about 1 hour 30 or less but LA seem to like in excess of 2 hours in each direction. Is this because flight times over the southern ocean can vary greatly? Thoughts?


Probably more than anything is just to build some slack into the timings. LA is pretty good at being late, more than often by a couple of hours.

If they are really late, they drop the AKL-SYD-AKL sector and return to SCL. Then find passengers for SYD onto to other services.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4118
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:30 pm

Sylus wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
It's great to see that DUD is keeping its options open, and talking to both VA and NZ regarding DUD - BNE.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/dunedin-airpo ... ane-route/.

IMO, NZ won't take on VA on DUD - BNE. The route is likely not reliant on NZ code-sharing (holiday route).

Cheers,

C.



I agree, although as mentioned this route could easily be on the TT radar.

Changing topics here (although the same region), after working at ZQN for some months now it has become increasingly clear that ATR operations into and out of ZQN simply cannot be consistently reliable. In the last few weeks there has been countless ATR cancellations on NZ's CHC/WLG - ZQN services due to weather at times when JQ/QF/VA/NZ 320's and 737's are having no issues (minus the odd missed approach). Today CHC, canceled. Yesterday CHC, canceled. I certainly only book a 320 if travelling to CHC from ZQN.

Clearly, despite the newer 600's, the ATR's don't have the same minima as the 320's and thus weather cancellations are more common. With that in mind, it raises the question, why do NZ bother sending the ATR's in at all?. During summer CHC-ZQN was 2 daily 320 and 1-2 daily ATR. WLG is currently 2x daily A320 and 1-4x weekly ATR. While clearly the ATR's allow for more frequency, it doesn't seem to be a justified trade-off for whats clearly much worse reliability. For the small quantity of ATR flights, one wonders why they don't just stop flying that equipment to ZQN completely and move to a 2x daily 320 WLG service and a 2-3 daily CHC A320 service?


Yes would make sense I can imagine that is the way NZ will eventually go. They probably just don't have enough aircraft for it right now.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
PA515
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:44 pm

jrfspa320 wrote:
This issue should be somewhat solved once the RNP for the ATRs come through, should be this year, if anyone else has an update?


Found a 11 July 2017 Press Release from ATR giving more details. It says ATR has now obtained EASA certification for RNP Standard 3 which will be installed in new ATR -600s starting from the end of 2017. This means the about to be delivered ZK-MVR (msn 1487) will have this RNP capability.

It also says that RNP-AR 0.3/0.3 has been jointly financed by Air New Zealand who first asked ATR to look into it.

http://atr.fr/newsroom/atr-obtains-easa ... 56-en.html

PA515
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:28 pm

zkojq wrote:
Will be interesting to see how long these profits are sustainable, now that the North America monopoly has come to an end.


Clearing out my bookmarks and found this interesting quote from 2 years ago (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1341461)

Not just sustained post the "monopoly" but added two additional destinations while maintaining existing Ops.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:59 pm

Sylus wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
It's great to see that DUD is keeping its options open, and talking to both VA and NZ regarding DUD - BNE.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/dunedin-airpo ... ane-route/.

IMO, NZ won't take on VA on DUD - BNE. The route is likely not reliant on NZ code-sharing (holiday route).

Cheers,

C.



I agree, although as mentioned this route could easily be on the TT radar.

Changing topics here (although the same region), after working at ZQN for some months now it has become increasingly clear that ATR operations into and out of ZQN simply cannot be consistently reliable. In the last few weeks there has been countless ATR cancellations on NZ's CHC/WLG - ZQN services due to weather at times when JQ/QF/VA/NZ 320's and 737's are having no issues (minus the odd missed approach). Today CHC, canceled. Yesterday CHC, canceled. I certainly only book a 320 if travelling to CHC from ZQN.

Clearly, despite the newer 600's, the ATR's don't have the same minima as the 320's and thus weather cancellations are more common. With that in mind, it raises the question, why do NZ bother sending the ATR's in at all?. During summer CHC-ZQN was 2 daily 320 and 1-2 daily ATR. WLG is currently 2x daily A320 and 1-4x weekly ATR. While clearly the ATR's allow for more frequency, it doesn't seem to be a justified trade-off for whats clearly much worse reliability. For the small quantity of ATR flights, one wonders why they don't just stop flying that equipment to ZQN completely and move to a 2x daily 320 WLG service and a 2-3 daily CHC A320 service?


My understanding is that the RNP upgrade for the ATR -600 fleet will allow them to operate to lower minimums, but will still not allow them to descend as low as the 737s and A320s due to OEI Missed Approach requirements. Does anyone know how low that is likely to be? Still, should be a bit of an improvement which will be well received.

WLG-ZQN is already (largely) twice daily A320s throughout the year is it not? ATR flights seem to be few and far between and generally to provide for additional capacity above and beyond the twice daily jet operations. CHC seems to be going the other way, with more ATR flights compared to the same time last year and less A320 ops. Reverts to twice daily A320 (plus 2-3 ATR flights as well) later in the year.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
NPL8800
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:50 pm

PR to go A330 to AKL from June 17. Good to see them follow thru from the non stop A340 launch last year where they said it was a possibility for 2018 if things worked out. Definitely a product improvement.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=12031266
 
getluv
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:34 am

NZ6 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
Will be interesting to see how long these profits are sustainable, now that the North America monopoly has come to an end.


Clearing out my bookmarks and found this interesting quote from 2 years ago (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1341461)

Not just sustained post the "monopoly" but added two additional destinations while maintaining existing Ops.


It's almost like there's still a "monopoly".
You meant lose, not loose.
 
bonzolab
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:38 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:55 am

Proving flights for 600 AR capability are to begin spring 2018. All 600s arriving now have the INS installed giving the required redundancy and accuracy for AR ops. Rest of fleet to be retrofitted in the future. Operations should be to 1500AGL.
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 5:39 am

getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
Will be interesting to see how long these profits are sustainable, now that the North America monopoly has come to an end.


Clearing out my bookmarks and found this interesting quote from 2 years ago (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1341461)

Not just sustained post the "monopoly" but added two additional destinations while maintaining existing Ops.


It's almost like there's still a "monopoly".


Almost, would've thought we'd see QF and AA do more in this time frame though. Would love to see QF back on AKL-LAX
 
zkncj
Posts: 2908
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 6:09 am

NPL8800 wrote:
PR to go A330 to AKL from June 17. Good to see them follow thru from the non stop A340 launch last year where they said it was a possibility for 2018 if things worked out. Definitely a product improvement.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=12031266


Making VA,JQ and FJ the only remaining airlines flying International routes to New Zealand with aircraft without seat back TVs? At least FJ's 332/333 have seat back TV's.
 
getluv
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 7:20 am

NZ6 wrote:
getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

Clearing out my bookmarks and found this interesting quote from 2 years ago (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1341461)

Not just sustained post the "monopoly" but added two additional destinations while maintaining existing Ops.


It's almost like there's still a "monopoly".


Almost, would've thought we'd see QF and AA do more in this time frame though. Would love to see QF back on AKL-LAX


Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8088
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 7:57 am

US departures are shortly to start the additional screening required and -4h check-in restriction. They will also be moving from gates 6/8/10 to 16/17/18. I believe there may even be a new NZ Lounge going in out there to reduce the distance for those passengers.
Flown to 128 Airports in 48 Countries on 81 Operators. Visited 56 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
zkncj
Posts: 2908
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:04 am

aerorobnz wrote:
US departures are shortly to start the additional screening required and -4h check-in restriction. They will also be moving from gates 6/8/10 to 16/17/18. I believe there may even be a new NZ Lounge going in out there to reduce the distance for those passengers.


Now to see if NZ will use dual airbridge boarding :lol:
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:14 am

zkncj wrote:
Making VA,JQ and FJ the only remaining airlines flying International routes to New Zealand with aircraft without seat back TVs?

There are a few others, such as NF to VLI, SB to NOU (as they don't use their 332's here now, AFAIK), OL to APW and D7 to OOL.

IMO, VA really stands out as having a poor product without them - particularly as it doesn't really market itself as being on JQ's level.

NPL8800 wrote:
PR to go A330 to AKL from June 17.

This is fantastic to see - a few points:

- This will raise PR's capacity to AKL by 22%
- PR has been able to attract Chinese traffic

See: https://blueswandaily.com/philippine-ai ... -a330-300/.

It'll be interesting to see if 5J considers AKL now too, and whether NZ will re-look at MNL after its botched launch announcement.

NZ321 wrote:
Does anybody know why LATAM 789s operating LA800/801 seem to have such a long scheduled stop in AKL in both directions?

Separately, does anyone know why LA hasn't yet de-tagged AKL and SYD? I could see AKL having a dedicated 3x weekly flight.

It's also interesting that the 321LR (if LA ever converted some 321NEOs) is capable of flying AKL - IPC, connecting to LIM / SCL.

getluv wrote:
Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.

There's still a point, albeit not as much of a point - but more AA to AKL may hurt NZ, which would in-directly benefit the QF Group.

aerorobnz wrote:
US departures are shortly to start the additional screening required and -4h check-in restriction. They will also be moving from gates 6/8/10 to 16/17/18. I believe there may even be a new NZ Lounge going in out there to reduce the distance for those passengers.

Wow - this is very interesting - thanks for the insight. Do you know where exactly the lounge would be going? Building up, perhaps?

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:24 am

How will NPL be affected by the government's policy announcements this week, regarding the oil industry? Reduced demand? Only last month, the airport recorded its highest ever passenger movements - 41,051, which is up 3.8% on last year. In addition, NPL is getting a new terminal, which is expected to open in late 2019.

See: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1804/S ... irport.htm.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:40 am

mariner wrote:
"Air Chathams may fly to Norfolk direct from Auckland"

There's another article on this topic, too - see: http://impactpub.com.au/micebtn/146-new ... ute-likely.

3C's fares to the Chathams are already extremely high - assuming the fares to NLK are the same, and adding on the international flight taxes, I worry that they'll struggle to attract traffic.

The NLK economy is not doing great at the moment (reducing demand), and 3C's planes are more expensive to operate than the jet aircraft that NZ and N5 used to operate on the route.

AFAIK, CHT has a lot of profitable cargo (like from the fishing industry) which 3C uplifts, and which is vital to the commercial viability of its flights - does NLK have lots of cargo traffic too?

Separately, logistically, where would 3C's flights check-in and board from at AKL's international terminal? It's been a long time since AKL received any turbo-prop international services!

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:43 am

Air New Zealand now has the best business reputation in the country, according to Colmar Brunton.

See: https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/103069 ... businesses.

It'll be very interesting to see whether this reputational prestige lasts, given negative PR, such as:

- The alleged insensitivity of the Antarctica safety video
- Shane Jones' criticism's of NZ's new regional pull-back
- Winston Peters questioning the Obama visit sponsorship

Whether or not these topics have any merit to them or not, they were given lots of air-time in the media.

Cheers,

C.
 
Kashmon
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:31 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
Air New Zealand now has the best business reputation in the country, according to Colmar Brunton.

See: https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/103069 ... businesses.

It'll be very interesting to see whether this reputational prestige lasts, given negative PR, such as:

- The alleged insensitivity of the Antarctica safety video
- Shane Jones' criticism's of NZ's new regional pull-back
- Winston Peters questioning the Obama visit sponsorship

Whether or not these topics have any merit to them or not, they were given lots of air-time in the media.

Cheers,

C.

None of those issues affect business reputation....
very different from airline or brand reputation which those may affect.

business people think
- good marketing esp with all the save the environment bruhahahah
- why run loss making routes?
- it is Winston Peters....
 
getluv
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:12 pm

planemanofnz wrote:

getluv wrote:
Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.

There's still a point, albeit not as much of a point - but more AA to AKL may hurt NZ, which would in-directly benefit the QF Group.



UA expanding flights to Australia does more hurt to NZ than a AA daily 788 service between AKL-LAX ever could.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
PA515
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 6:11 pm

ATR 72-600 ZK-MVR (msn 1487) is on delivery as SXI1809, over Kish Island after tracking over Iran.

http://www.flightradar24.com/SXI1809/1107048b

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 2908
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 6:30 pm

getluv wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:

getluv wrote:
Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.

There's still a point, albeit not as much of a point - but more AA to AKL may hurt NZ, which would in-directly benefit the QF Group.



UA expanding flights to Australia does more hurt to NZ than a AA daily 788 service between AKL-LAX ever could.


It’s really an YES/NO answer, even though the JV only covers NZ/US flights, the two would of been fully aware of each other’s plan, and it helps the two them claim more market share of the Pacific.

It also opens up more options eg. and passenger now might fly IAH-SYD-AKL-IAH on an single trip etc
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:13 pm

getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
getluv wrote:

It's almost like there's still a "monopoly".


Almost, would've thought we'd see QF and AA do more in this time frame though. Would love to see QF back on AKL-LAX


Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.


Really, even though both carriers have done it before standalone? Even though they're both One World Carriers so already in an alliance or sorts?

Sure - alliances are the way forward but given NZ has a monopoly on such "lucrative" route I'm surprised and disappointed neither carrier has done more.
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:43 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
Air New Zealand now has the best business reputation in the country, according to Colmar Brunton.

See: https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/103069 ... businesses.

It'll be very interesting to see whether this reputational prestige lasts, given negative PR, such as:

- The alleged insensitivity of the Antarctica safety video
- Shane Jones' criticism's of NZ's new regional pull-back
- Winston Peters questioning the Obama visit sponsorship

Whether or not these topics have any merit to them or not, they were given lots of air-time in the media.

Cheers,

C.


The insensitivity of the safety video was largely generated main stream media picking away at a topic that was seen as sensitive therefore creating contraversy, all of a sudden people had an opinion. Ford or Holden, Boeing or Airbus, thankfully it didn't effect us all the way it did the families of those involved, even some of them were in support.

A bit of time has past and all has gone quiet, I've flown several times since it's release both International and Domestic, I've not heard or seen a negative reaction on-board. I've looked around while it's playing and see the occasional smile (of course most looking out the window, reading a book or talking like usual)

My point being, to the general public, they don't know or care anymore, they've simply moved on. I will acknowledge this may still upset some but the majority don't sit in this camp.

I've heard and read the name Shane Jones on this forum in the last two months more than I have the rest of his career. If you're looking for media articles on a topic and hold an interest on the topic it may seem like he's front and centre on an important topic where in fact most of this debate is falling on death ears in my opinion.

All that HAS happened in NZ pulled out of PPQ-AKL route, that's it, as we've debated to death the sole reason it's been unsuccessfully given it's size is that it's so close to WLG which offers much more affordable pricing. A few years earlier they pulled out of other routes so that's still a healing scab to some.

Again the key word is majority as the majority of Kiwi's live in the main centers of AKL, WLG and CHC which are extensively served, then second and third tier airports, IVC, DUD, ZQN, NSN, BHE, NPL, PMR, NPE, GIS, TRG,HLZ, KKE which are all served well.

There may be some nervous people around TIU, HKK, TUO, WRE etc

Obama is extremely creditable, NZ sponsored an event which gave an international arm of their business exposure. How many people when they think NZ think of this event and what involvement NZ had?

My point of all of this is....

You're typical blueprint kiwi family, mum dad, two kids with dog outside. When asked about Air NZ, these things aren't important to them unless directly impacted.They're important on this forum because you're an aviation enthusiast.

Sort of things people think about are...

- They will help you when you're in trouble
- Solid reliable and trustworthy brand (this sums it up)
- You have confidence in what you'll get when you spend money
- They're safe
 
getluv
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:52 pm

NZ6 wrote:
getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

Almost, would've thought we'd see QF and AA do more in this time frame though. Would love to see QF back on AKL-LAX


Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.


Really, even though both carriers have done it before standalone? Even though they're both One World Carriers so already in an alliance or sorts?

Sure - alliances are the way forward but given NZ has a monopoly on such "lucrative" route I'm surprised and disappointed neither carrier has done more.


I don't think its that 'lucrative' if NZ is the cheapest option for Australian based pax.

Both of them being in oneworld without having a JV would mean they're nothing more than just good friends. Legally they have to compete against each other.

zkncj wrote:
It’s really an YES/NO answer, even though the JV only covers NZ/US flights, the two would of been fully aware of each other’s plan, and it helps the two them claim more market share of the Pacific.


It would actually be against Australian and USA competition laws if NZ knew about UA's plans and no other airline did for SYD-IAH. That's anti-competitive behaviour.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6130
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:05 pm

getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
getluv wrote:

Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.


Really, even though both carriers have done it before standalone? Even though they're both One World Carriers so already in an alliance or sorts?

Sure - alliances are the way forward but given NZ has a monopoly on such "lucrative" route I'm surprised and disappointed neither carrier has done more.


I don't think its that 'lucrative' if NZ is the cheapest option for Australian based pax.

Both of them being in oneworld without having a JV would mean they're nothing more than just good friends. Legally they have to compete against each other.

zkncj wrote:
It’s really an YES/NO answer, even though the JV only covers NZ/US flights, the two would of been fully aware of each other’s plan, and it helps the two them claim more market share of the Pacific.


It would actually be against Australian and USA competition laws if NZ knew about UA's plans and no other airline did for SYD-IAH. That's anti-competitive behaviour.



NZ have to take pax off QF somehow, both have a good product but not that many are going to take NZ if they charge the same as QF’s non stop MEL-LAX, it’s lucrative for NZ just like MEL/SYD-US is lucrative for QF, AKL-US is lucrative for NZ and so is that feeder traffic from OZ.

I’d imagine if QF/AA get their JV approved AKL-LAX will become year round operated by AA. QF are stretched with capacity while AA have a large 787 fleet.

I would be surprised if NZ/UA didn’t no what each other were doing in this part of the world regards SYD-IAH since it’s not part of the JV, they would have talked about it surely.
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Sat Apr 14, 2018 12:21 am

getluv wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
getluv wrote:

Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.


Really, even though both carriers have done it before standalone? Even though they're both One World Carriers so already in an alliance or sorts?

Sure - alliances are the way forward but given NZ has a monopoly on such "lucrative" route I'm surprised and disappointed neither carrier has done more.


I don't think its that 'lucrative' if NZ is the cheapest option for Australian based pax.

Both of them being in oneworld without having a JV would mean they're nothing more than just good friends. Legally they have to compete against each other.

zkncj wrote:
It’s really an YES/NO answer, even though the JV only covers NZ/US flights, the two would of been fully aware of each other’s plan, and it helps the two them claim more market share of the Pacific.


It would actually be against Australian and USA competition laws if NZ knew about UA's plans and no other airline did for SYD-IAH. That's anti-competitive behaviour.


From the original post, a comment was made about profits and questioning if they were sustainable now NZ had lost the monopoly. From this you take it that the poster is implying the routes are 'lucrative'. NZ is cleaver in how they attract price sensitive customers ex Australia to support their NZ-US operations, they do this by pricing themselves in the market for non direct AU-US without lowing their NZ-US booking classes.

QF could do the exact same thing, QF have a added advantage of creating a circle trip on their own mental for people wanting to visit all 3 countries for either business or leisure, no other carrier can do this. It's also support by AA internally. For example

SYD-LAX
LAX-AKL
AKL-SYD

You could also do

NYC-LAX
LAX-AKL
AKL-MEL
ADL-SYD
SYD-DFW

With the final leg back to NYC on AA.

NZ, AA, UA, DL can't compete as aggressively like QF can, don't forget JQ domestic also offers domestic NZ options.

One World and your usual agreements mean AA and QF can code-share AKL-LAX and sell on each others metal. You can buy AKL-LAX now operated by AA on the QF website.
 
zkncj
Posts: 2908
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:14 am

[url]http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12032557
[/url]

Looks like the early models of the RR Trent engine installed on 9 of NZ's 789s - is now causing more issues, with an service directive to now inspect every 300 cycles rather than 2000 cycles.

Could we see HiFly return?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6130
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:35 am

zkncj wrote:
[url]http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12032557
[/url]

Looks like the early models of the RR Trent engine installed on 9 of NZ's 789s - is now causing more issues, with an service directive to now inspect every 300 cycles rather than 2000 cycles.

Could we see HiFly return?


NZ have plenty of capacity over winter and often have 3-4 frames out, though this year YVR/HNL see longer periods with additional capacity and DPS is a longer season aswell pretty much entire NS period.

Hopefully they will be prepared at the discretion of RR if anything happens.
 
NZ6
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:04 am

I give it till 2040 still.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=12031322

"Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull yesterday pledged $5b towards a $10b project to run trains from downtown Melbourne to Tullamarine Airport. The Victorian Government is expected to fund the other half.

Auckland councillor Mike Lee said Melbourne has the most extensive and most sophisticated tram system in the world and to choose to go with trains is based on experience operating trams and trains, confirming international best practice.

"The Australian decision is instructive and should give our new Government (reason to) pause. To blindly push ahead with a multibillion-dollar tram connection to Auckland airport would be a grave mistake," said Lee, a big player in the renaissance of rail in Auckland.

In Sydney, a 12km inner city tram project has be called a "horror story", the cost has soared from $1.6b to a new estimate of $3.3b, Spanish contractors are demanding more money and businesses have been starved of customers and gone bust."
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - April 2018

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:50 am

getluv wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:

getluv wrote:
Not much point in QF helping AA there without a JV.

There's still a point, albeit not as much of a point - but more AA to AKL may hurt NZ, which would in-directly benefit the QF Group.



UA expanding flights to Australia does more hurt to NZ than a AA daily 788 service between AKL-LAX ever could.

So? More - maybe, but it's not a zero-sum equation - AA at AKL without a doubt also has some negative effect on NZ's North American operations, even if only to LAX.

Is it in QF's interests for AA to continue to fly to AKL, even at the expense of QF losing some New Zealand - North America traffic on its own metal via SYD? Definitely.

Kashmon wrote:
... people think ... why run loss making routes?

Ed and Mary in PPQ won't see it that way, as 1) AFAIK, NZ never said that PPQ lost money, and 2) media reports implied profitability (leaving aside whether true or not).

Many people won't think in a more complex manner, like as to how although NZ didn't lose money at PPQ, with its limited resources, it could make more money elsewhere.

ZK-NBT wrote:
I’d imagine if QF/AA get their JV approved AKL-LAX will become year round operated by AA.

What's interesting is additional potential routes. AKL is clearly doing well and growing for AA, albeit only in NW - a seasonal AKL - DFW flight may also be on the cards.

Cheers,

C.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ab345, acrimmo, ARASantos, BenChSFO, carl50mq, DNDTUF, Google Adsense [Bot], ILS28ORD, Internaute, jfklucky777, jplatts, MartijnNL, mats01776, OA940, Oilman, sirtoby, TYSflyer, winGl3t and 73 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos