User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6831
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:46 am

Welcome to the New Zealand Aviation Thread November 2018. Please add your comments below.

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1405067&p=20824793#p20824793
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6831
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:16 am

aerorobnz wrote:
Interestingly, VA loads transtasman seem to have slumped away big time in the last few days, I have seen a number of flights to SYD depart with 35-50 passengers onboard. For VA's sake, I hope it is just a temporary slump.


Lets not exaggerate things, while there have been about 3-4 flights ex NZ with low numbers its not peak period yet and the loads coming into NZ have been quite healthy and flights ex AKL to TBU and RAR numbers are either holding or are performing better
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
QuayWeeAir
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 12:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:12 pm

qf789 wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
Interestingly, VA loads transtasman seem to have slumped away big time in the last few days, I have seen a number of flights to SYD depart with 35-50 passengers onboard. For VA's sake, I hope it is just a temporary slump.


Lets not exaggerate things, while there have been about 3-4 flights ex NZ with low numbers its not peak period yet and the loads coming into NZ have been quite healthy and flights ex AKL to TBU and RAR numbers are either holding or are performing better



Flew over to Brisbane from Auckland yesterday morning with VA and yes the flight was half full but according to the crew their return flight back to Auckland was full...... is this a case of Australians being loyal to an Australian carrier and the same goes for New Zealanders and their national carrier?

I do hope that with it being a quieter travel period that things do improve for VA. They are definitely a great airline to fly.

Cheers
QWA
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:06 pm

qf789 wrote:
quote]

Lets not exaggerate things, while there have been about 3-4 flights ex NZ with low numbers its not peak period yet and the loads coming into NZ have been quite healthy and flights ex AKL to TBU and RAR numbers are either holding or are performing better


The South Pacific is unaffected by the loss of codeshare so the passengers haven't been redistributed based on which side of the codeshare was booked. The alliance did not affect TBU, RAR, APW. Yes, it may well end up to be nothing permanent, but relative to the other carriers on the same routes their loads are lighter than any other trans-Tasman carrier right now. Load ex Australia is better on certain flights during some peaks but just as bad on most other flights, so I don't think it's just a question of national loyalties. Part of this is due probably to the additional flights and capacity, which has been considerable on both sides VA/NZ and now with same time competing departures, I think it's also about domestic feed, ex AKL VA is now reliant on just AKL to fill planes, and only has feed ex Australia whereas both NZ and QF have feed in both directions due to their new partnership. There is probably the same number travelling on VA just divided over the additional flights and once people get to know the new schedule this might correct, or VA might cut back the extra schedule to reflect demand. I expect NZ to do the same on the extra flights and on type capacity as required as well.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:20 pm

One thing's for certain, every fare paying passenger should be praying that VA survives and flourishes on the Tasman. History has shown us many times over that a QF/NZ duopoly benefits no one except their respective shareholders.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:17 am

NZ's TPE service launched today, and Cam Wallace has said "Demand ... has been strong." I'm super stoked about this route - really hope it does well, and lasts.

More shocking reporting/editing by Grant Bradley of the Herald, who says "Taiwan's China Airlines flies the route but via Sydney," which is wrong (CI is via BNE).

See: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12152859.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:20 am

The Commerce Commission today released its final report on pricing for a big chunk of the airport's business, and has found the return on capital the airport intends paying shareholders exceeds its own "midpoint" and the company's returns are not justified (hurray).

What'll happen next?

Cheers,

C.
 
decry
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 9:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:49 am

I've been told ZK-OKH returned from SIN yesterday repainted in the all black scheme. Can anyone confirm?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3023
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:48 am

QuayWeeAir wrote:
Flew over to Brisbane from Auckland yesterday morning with VA and yes the flight was half full but according to the crew their return flight back to Auckland was full...... is this a case of Australians being loyal to an Australian carrier and the same goes for New Zealanders and their national carrier?


Also don't forget NZ/VA have broken up, but there new timetable are fully into effect yet e.g. current NZ has the better flight at one end of the day, and VA at the other end currently.
 
MarcusG
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 6:41 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:24 pm

decry wrote:
I've been told ZK-OKH returned from SIN yesterday repainted in the all black scheme. Can anyone confirm?


Can confirm. Had a white nose cone last I heard though too which is a bit of an odd one...
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:17 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
The Commerce Commission today released its final report on pricing for a big chunk of the airport's business, and has found the return on capital the airport intends paying shareholders exceeds its own "midpoint" and the company's returns are not justified (hurray).

What'll happen next?

Cheers,

C.

This epitomises the sheer insanity of privatising a public utility like an airport.

You take an essential piece of public infrastructure. Privatise it for ideological reasons, not financial or practical ones. Hand it a monoploy (well two ALKs in Auckland would be just silly wouldn't it?) and set it free to generate as much income for its shareholders as it possibly can.

Then, act surprised when it does exactly that because as a monopoly, it's not subject to the usual free market autoregulatory forces. Then unleash the Commerce Commission to go "tsk tsk" to AIAL for doing too well the precise job it was created to do in the first place.

?????
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 11656
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:32 am

planemanofnz wrote:
The Commerce Commission today released its final report on pricing for a big chunk of the airport's business, and has found the return on capital the airport intends paying shareholders exceeds its own "midpoint" and the company's returns are not justified (hurray).

What'll happen next?

Cheers,

C.


The govt should nationalise it, this would be for the greater public good.

AIAL works for its own interests, which not necessarily coincide with the best interests of the country or even the city.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 9990
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:18 am

MarcusG wrote:
decry wrote:
I've been told ZK-OKH returned from SIN yesterday repainted in the all black scheme. Can anyone confirm?


Can confirm. Had a white nose cone last I heard though too which is a bit of an odd one...

Yes OKH has a white nose and black livery.
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,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6831
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:59 am

First A321neo for NZ now on delivery flight

https://twitter.com/FlightIntl/status/1 ... 5466683394
Forum Moderator
 
smi0006
Posts: 1911
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:07 am

MarcusG wrote:
decry wrote:
I've been told ZK-OKH returned from SIN yesterday repainted in the all black scheme. Can anyone confirm?


Can confirm. Had a white nose cone last I heard though too which is a bit of an odd one...


NZ repaints it’s own radomes black. Special black paint is required to reflect the infrared lasers used in the gate marshalling at airports. Otherwise the black aircraft can’t de detected and need hand marshalling, more resource intensive.
 
PA515
Posts: 1373
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 3:25 pm

qf789 wrote:
First A321neo for NZ now on delivery flight

https://twitter.com/FlightIntl/status/1 ... 5466683394


Arrived MCT about 20 mins ago. ZK-NNA is one of the three A321NEOs and two A320NEOs to be leased from ALC (Air Lease Corporation).

https://airleasecorp.com/press/air-leas ... ew-zealand

PA515
 
wawaman
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:05 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 4:11 pm

Changing the subject... slightly.... But there has been recent discussion here about the long haul replacement announcement in 2019. No secret that ULH flying out of Auckland is important to NZ. But pacific flying isn't going away. If an Airbus deal was on the table would the A330NEO addition to any deal for A359 and A359ULR allow Airbus to present a more complete proposition. The A330NEO would help where the A350 is just a bit much airplane and the 321 doesn't quite have the legs... The equivalent Boeing proposition is 789, and 778 which is a lot of capacity (and much more capital).
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:54 pm

wawaman wrote:
Changing the subject... slightly.... But there has been recent discussion here about the long haul replacement announcement in 2019. No secret that ULH flying out of Auckland is important to NZ. But pacific flying isn't going away. If an Airbus deal was on the table would the A330NEO addition to any deal for A359 and A359ULR allow Airbus to present a more complete proposition. The A330NEO would help where the A350 is just a bit much airplane and the 321 doesn't quite have the legs... The equivalent Boeing proposition is 789, and 778 which is a lot of capacity (and much more capital).


I can’t see it, while there are routes that won’t need the A359 capability, they don’t want to add another type even though it will likely be cross crewed A350/A330. Like the pacific routes you say aren’t going anywhere neither is the 789 going anywhere.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:34 pm

wawaman wrote:
Changing the subject... slightly.... But there has been recent discussion here about the long haul replacement announcement in 2019. No secret that ULH flying out of Auckland is important to NZ. But pacific flying isn't going away. If an Airbus deal was on the table would the A330NEO addition to any deal for A359 and A359ULR allow Airbus to present a more complete proposition. The A330NEO would help where the A350 is just a bit much airplane and the 321 doesn't quite have the legs... The equivalent Boeing proposition is 789, and 778 which is a lot of capacity (and much more capital).

Certainly no secret that ULH out of AKL has been hyped, but I don't see it as a major factor in NZ's next purchasing decision. ORD can be reached with existing equipment and there's no aircraft that can do AKL-LHR non stop. Which leaves New York ....and I don't see that one destination dictating an entire fleet purchase. The next gen of aircraft will, as always, be dictated by economics and the logistics of the entire route network.

In terms of the mid range Pacific routes you describe, the 797 could work well for them there.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:36 pm

Gasman wrote:
Which leaves New York ....and I don't see that one destination dictating an entire fleet purchase.

Don't forget Brazil (likely GRU), which NZ can't do with its existing fleet either - although AKL - GRU is not a great distance, the nature of the routing having few diversion points means additional fuel needs to be carried, impacting payload. GRU will be an important part of NZ's next 5-10 years, as it seeks to build Asia - South America traffic through AKL.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4159
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:23 am

wawaman wrote:
Changing the subject... slightly.... But there has been recent discussion here about the long haul replacement announcement in 2019. No secret that ULH flying out of Auckland is important to NZ. But pacific flying isn't going away. If an Airbus deal was on the table would the A330NEO addition to any deal for A359 and A359ULR allow Airbus to present a more complete proposition. The A330NEO would help where the A350 is just a bit much airplane and the 321 doesn't quite have the legs... The equivalent Boeing proposition is 789, and 778 which is a lot of capacity (and much more capital).

Not going to happen.

A350 (of any flavour except the LR) is perfectly effective/efficient around the Pacific and NZ has 789 anyway to use for the likes of HNL and DPS.
59 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
tealnz
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:49 am

Gasman wrote:
Certainly no secret that ULH out of AKL has been hyped, but I don't see it as a major factor in NZ's next purchasing decision. ORD can be reached with existing equipment and there's no aircraft that can do AKL-LHR non stop. Which leaves New York ....and I don't see that one destination dictating an entire fleet purchase. The next gen of aircraft will, as always, be dictated by economics and the logistics of the entire route network.

Might pay to take an interest in what NZ management actually say and do. They made it clear the 789 wasn't an option for the 77E replacement because it lacked payload/range for North America. They launched IAH. They talked up and then launched ORD (with the 789 - presumably just an interim solution). They have been clear they want to launch NYC. They have also made it clear they want to launch GRU once they have a suitable airframe. These will all be routes for the 77E replacement.

I don't know what you regard as ULH - seems to me it's anything much beyond 744 range - but it's plain enough that ULH capability is the defining factor in the 77E replacement decision. Otherwise they would stick with the 789 and maybe a 78J.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 4:19 am

tealnz wrote:
Might pay to take an interest in what NZ management actually say and do.


Which was to hype ORD for at least 10 years before it actually happened and when it happened, was using an aircraft that had been in the fleet for years. And don't forget that route has yet to start, and yet to prove itself viable.

Maybe they do have a genuine plan to launch NYC and GRU. But that plan will always be conditional on the market regardless of what aircraft are available. My point is, is that if an aircraft capable of flying these ULH routes is chosen, that aircraft decision will have to stack up *regardless* of the ULH routes. Because the market can change at any time, and there aren't seriously all that many potential ULH routes from AKL that can't be reached with a 789 anyway.
 
pbm
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:38 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:10 am

tealnz wrote:
Gasman wrote:
Certainly no secret that ULH out of AKL has been hyped, but I don't see it as a major factor in NZ's next purchasing decision. ORD can be reached with existing equipment and there's no aircraft that can do AKL-LHR non stop. Which leaves New York ....and I don't see that one destination dictating an entire fleet purchase. The next gen of aircraft will, as always, be dictated by economics and the logistics of the entire route network.

Might pay to take an interest in what NZ management actually say and do. They made it clear the 789 wasn't an option for the 77E replacement because it lacked payload/range for North America. They launched IAH. They talked up and then launched ORD (with the 789 - presumably just an interim solution). They have been clear they want to launch NYC. They have also made it clear they want to launch GRU once they have a suitable airframe. These will all be routes for the 77E replacement.

I don't know what you regard as ULH - seems to me it's anything much beyond 744 range - but it's plain enough that ULH capability is the defining factor in the 77E replacement decision. Otherwise they would stick with the 789 and maybe a 78J.


Has there been an update since June when they said that the 787 family was on the table?
 
PA515
Posts: 1373
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:53 am

Short video of ZK-NNA takeoff and painting. The construction part is ZK-NNB (msn 8542).

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12153913

ZK-NNA has departed MCT and is presently out of FR24 range. The last Air NZ A320s were delivered TLS-MCT-KUL-CNS-CHC.

PA515
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:42 am

pbm wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Gasman wrote:
Certainly no secret that ULH out of AKL has been hyped, but I don't see it as a major factor in NZ's next purchasing decision. ORD can be reached with existing equipment and there's no aircraft that can do AKL-LHR non stop. Which leaves New York ....and I don't see that one destination dictating an entire fleet purchase. The next gen of aircraft will, as always, be dictated by economics and the logistics of the entire route network.

Might pay to take an interest in what NZ management actually say and do. They made it clear the 789 wasn't an option for the 77E replacement because it lacked payload/range for North America. They launched IAH. They talked up and then launched ORD (with the 789 - presumably just an interim solution). They have been clear they want to launch NYC. They have also made it clear they want to launch GRU once they have a suitable airframe. These will all be routes for the 77E replacement.

I don't know what you regard as ULH - seems to me it's anything much beyond 744 range - but it's plain enough that ULH capability is the defining factor in the 77E replacement decision. Otherwise they would stick with the 789 and maybe a 78J.


Has there been an update since June when they said that the 787 family was on the table?


I’ve no idea, it certainly has been said by NZ that the 789 won’t be able to do the likes of GRU/NYC with a viable load, so for more 789’s to be ordered presumably it would be part of a 77X order?
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3336
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:52 am

smi0006 wrote:
MarcusG wrote:
decry wrote:
I've been told ZK-OKH returned from SIN yesterday repainted in the all black scheme. Can anyone confirm?


Can confirm. Had a white nose cone last I heard though too which is a bit of an odd one...


NZ repaints it’s own radomes black. Special black paint is required to reflect the infrared lasers used in the gate marshalling at airports. Otherwise the black aircraft can’t de detected and need hand marshalling, more resource intensive.


For those who aren't reading between the lines, this is why that's important:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=176233

OO-SNB
Most recent aircraft flown: A318 F-GUGQ, A319 F-GRHR, A320ceo D-AIZH, A320neo D-AINE, A330-300 VH-QPD, A350-900 B-LRA, A380-800 D-AIMH, 717 VH-YQW, 737-600 LN-RPA, 737-700 OY-JTY, 737-800 LN-NGA, 767-300 ZK-NCI, 777-300 ZK-OKN, 787-9 VH-ZNA, CS100 HB-JBG
 
tealnz
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:51 pm

Gasman wrote:
Maybe they do have a genuine plan to launch NYC and GRU. But that plan will always be conditional on the market regardless of what aircraft are available. My point is, is that if an aircraft capable of flying these ULH routes is chosen, that aircraft decision will have to stack up *regardless* of the ULH routes. Because the market can change at any time, and there aren't seriously all that many potential ULH routes from AKL that can't be reached with a 789 anyway.

You're digging yourself deeper mate. Face facts: There's been a step change in real-world ranges. SFW-SYD, PER-LHR, DXB-AKL, SFO/LAX-SIN etc are all now routine. Shifting to non-stop service from multiple Australian capitals to multiple ULH destinations is at the heart of AJ's strategy for QF. Luxon seems to be heading in the same direction for NZ. I say it again: ULH capability will be the defining factor in their selection of the 77E replacement. The 789 is unacceptably limited on payload/range to be more than an interim solution for the likes of IAH and ORD and it can't do NYC with a viable payload.

Gasman wrote:
Which was to hype ORD for at least 10 years before it actually happened and when it happened, was using an aircraft that had been in the fleet for years. And don't forget that route has yet to start, and yet to prove itself viable.

Nah, you're in denial mate. The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it. Including Buenos Aires and Houston. And they're going ahead with ORD in spite of their troubles with the Trents. Get used to it.
 
tealnz
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 4:08 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:
It certainly has been said by NZ that the 789 won’t be able to do the likes of GRU/NYC with a viable load, so for more 789’s to be ordered presumably it would be part of a 77X order?

From their last investor day presentation it sounded as if they were looking at a 78J more as part of an Asia strategy. It has the range and the extra premium space would work for Tokyo, HK, Singapore etc.
 
GW54
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 3:05 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:18 pm

Can't see Air NZ going anywhere other than Boeing. From an operational/engineering perspective why go to Airbus to complicate your long haul fleet. Why have a mix of 787,A350, 77E and 777W. Lets remember the 77E will still be in the fleet while a new type is being introduced. From a crewing perspective a 787, 77E, 77W and 778 makes far more sense. Already it is possible for a common type rating for the 787/777 fleets although at present apart from some management pilots Air NZ have not gone down the path. If you introduce the A350 that is yet another sub fleet. If it is decided to keep the 787 and 777 crews operating seperately you can still have a 777 crew operating the 77E,77W and 778. Economically a far more sensible approach.
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:47 pm

wawaman wrote:
Changing the subject... slightly.... But there has been recent discussion here about the long haul replacement announcement in 2019. No secret that ULH flying out of Auckland is important to NZ. But pacific flying isn't going away. If an Airbus deal was on the table would the A330NEO addition to any deal for A359 and A359ULR allow Airbus to present a more complete proposition. The A330NEO would help where the A350 is just a bit much airplane and the 321 doesn't quite have the legs... The equivalent Boeing proposition is 789, and 778 which is a lot of capacity (and much more capital).


I like your thinking but the obvious answer is the 787's already in the fleet and newish. Oldest would be around 8 years, newest 1-2 years. The life expectancy on these aircraft is predicted to be longer so you may see them serve 15-20 years vs 10-15 years for example. Part of this will be what the market does over the next couple of decades and what improvements are made.

My point being, the 787 is perfect for the likes of the Asian routes and we'll likely see them on there until 2030 and beyond for some. They may be replaced/upgraded or a new type ordered but that'll be some time away.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4159
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:24 pm

GW54 wrote:
Can't see Air NZ going anywhere other than Boeing. From an operational/engineering perspective why go to Airbus to complicate your long haul fleet. Why have a mix of 787,A350, 77E and 777W. Lets remember the 77E will still be in the fleet while a new type is being introduced. From a crewing perspective a 787, 77E, 77W and 778 makes far more sense. Already it is possible for a common type rating for the 787/777 fleets although at present apart from some management pilots Air NZ have not gone down the path. If you introduce the A350 that is yet another sub fleet. If it is decided to keep the 787 and 777 crews operating seperately you can still have a 777 crew operating the 77E,77W and 778. Economically a far more sensible approach.

While this is a consideration, it certainly doesn’t change what is a long term solution. NZ does have Airbus in the fleet already. Airlines transition all the time.
The decision could certainly go either way and while I do like Boeing’s, I think Airbus is going to win this one.
1) Ready and available now with improvements to come.
2) Lighter aircraft- more flexible and efficient except perhaps with a completely full load.
3) Better passenger experience - 9 across with wider seats in economy vs 10 across with narrower seats and aisles. No difference in Premium economy seat width wise but bigger aisle. No difference in Business Premier except possibly less wasted space depending on seats.
4) Smaller plane - easier to fill.

As for the changeover, they would likely be initially simply adding to the fleet rather than replacing 1 for 1. Once they had say 4 then they would start retiring the 77E 1 for 1. At that point they would have a big enough pool of crew to operate. While it is possible for techcrew to operate both 787 and 777, I can’t think of many/any airlines that actually do. It’s more of a case of making it simple to convert from one fleet to the other. As for canincrew it doesn’t make a difference, if NZ wanted to it could have all cabin crew operate 787/A350/77E/77W. For years QF had crew operating 763 GE/ 763 RR/ A332/A333/743/744.
Of course eventually the fleet will be either 789+77X or 789+A350. Either way you will have 2x pilot pools. They could stick with 2x cabin crew pools or merge them into 1 bigger pool.

Another factor is the world economy and oil prices. If the world economy is still ticking along then I expect NZ to pull the trigger earlier (2020) which would favour the A350. If there is a downturn then they might drag it out. Also the 77E aren’t that efficient so high oil prices are hurting. That said the cost of capital for those aircraft is cheap so does offset this significantly (which is why the likes of BA and QF still fly 744s around).
59 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:26 pm

Gasman wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Might pay to take an interest in what NZ management actually say and do.


Which was to hype ORD for at least 10 years before it actually happened and when it happened, was using an aircraft that had been in the fleet for years. And don't forget that route has yet to start, and yet to prove itself viable.

Maybe they do have a genuine plan to launch NYC and GRU. But that plan will always be conditional on the market regardless of what aircraft are available. My point is, is that if an aircraft capable of flying these ULH routes is chosen, that aircraft decision will have to stack up *regardless* of the ULH routes. Because the market can change at any time, and there aren't seriously all that many potential ULH routes from AKL that can't be reached with a 789 anyway.


Come on Gasman, take your foot off their throat it's boring.

NZ has stated numerous times their intention to fly deeper into the USA and simply listed ORD as one of their destinations of interest. I'm not sure what came first, the questions on if ORD was a place of interest or NZ using ORD as an example.

Either way, NZ never once said ORD was first or the most important.

NZ have said previously they need the right equipment for it when talking about their fleet and future orders. That doesn't say they can't do it with what they have but to make these routes sustainable long-term and to offer more frequency/capacity they need the right aircraft, it also suggests there's no point in launching them until they have some certainty their next generation widebodies are capable of taking over these routes.

In Early 2015 NZ announced IAH, commenced Ops in Dec of 2015, early 2018 announced ORD and flights commence this month.

Interesting how all this started, not long after the 787 finally joined their fleet, isn't it?

Just 3 years between launching IAH at 3x weekly they've got it going daily (seasonally) and opening a second mid-eastern port.

Based on this and the fact ORD is looking strong, will NYC being the first cab off the ranks with the new type in 2022 ish.
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:42 pm

GW54 wrote:
Can't see Air NZ going anywhere other than Boeing. From an operational/engineering perspective why go to Airbus to complicate your long haul fleet. Why have a mix of 787,A350, 77E and 777W. Lets remember the 77E will still be in the fleet while a new type is being introduced. From a crewing perspective a 787, 77E, 77W and 778 makes far more sense. Already it is possible for a common type rating for the 787/777 fleets although at present apart from some management pilots Air NZ have not gone down the path. If you introduce the A350 that is yet another sub fleet. If it is decided to keep the 787 and 777 crews operating seperately you can still have a 777 crew operating the 77E,77W and 778. Economically a far more sensible approach.


Short term maybe but looking at 2030+ you could see something like...

A320 family x 35ish
789 x 16
A350 family x 18

Wishful thinking but it's not an overly complex fleet which is my main point.
 
tealnz
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 12:01 am

Looks as if NZ wants to do more point-to-point routes (ie AKL non-stop to IAH/ORD/NYC) rather than hubbing everything via LAX. That won't help the 77X, which will be a much heavier aircraft with higher trip costs. And it won't have a capability edge – it looks as if both the 359 and 35K will be able to do at least full pax to/from NYC. Easy to imagine the lower capex, lower trip costs and lower risk of the 359 trumping any initial commonality advantages of the 77X. And there's the 35K available for when the 77W comes up for replacement.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:01 am

tealnz wrote:
There's been a step change in real-world ranges. SFW-SYD, PER-LHR, DXB-AKL, SFO/LAX-SIN etc are all now routine.

Very true - there has been a shift to ULH. I wonder though - is it sustainable? Will it last? How much higher will oil have to go before ULH expansion for more marginal routes (e.g. AKL - DOH or SIN - SEA) becomes unviable? For NZ, I think AKL - EWR and AKL - GRU will happen, and can sustain themselves in the face of higher oil prices.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:02 am

tealnz wrote:
The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it.

What about MNL?

Cheers,

C.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:28 am

planemanofnz wrote:
tealnz wrote:
The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it.

What about MNL?

PMONZ has a point. Obviously NZ cannot be trusted at all.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:59 am

DavidByrne wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
tealnz wrote:
The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it.

What about MNL?

PMONZ has a point. Obviously NZ cannot be trusted at all.

Precisely the kind of imbecilic comment which has lowered the IQ of this thread.

Of course NZ can't be trusted at all. If you're going to hold them (or any carrier) to a route based on a declared intention 2, 3 or 10 years ago on the basis on some loose concept of "trust"; you're an idiot. You can have the most well intentioned business road map in the world; but no route will ever commence unless all the ducks line up at the time - and suitable aircraft are only a small fraction of the ducks. Which is why I've tried (and failed) to make the point that NZs next long haul aircraft should not only be the best aircraft for AKL- EWR, but also LAX, LGR, SFO and IAH.
 
tealnz
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 3:44 am

Of course any new aircraft will have to stack up across the network. That's not the issue. The issue is that you're still insisting that ULH capability is not a defining criterion for the new fleet. You are clearly not listening to what NZ management have been saying. They have been clear about their future route plans – which require a step-change in payload/range. And that's why the 789 is not a candidate.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:04 am

Gasman wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
What about MNL?

PMONZ has a point. Obviously NZ cannot be trusted at all.

Precisely the kind of imbecilic comment which has lowered the IQ of this thread.

Of course NZ can't be trusted at all. If you're going to hold them (or any carrier) to a route based on a declared intention 2, 3 or 10 years ago on the basis on some loose concept of "trust"; you're an idiot. You can have the most well intentioned business road map in the world; but no route will ever commence unless all the ducks line up at the time - and suitable aircraft are only a small fraction of the ducks. Which is why I've tried (and failed) to make the point that NZs next long haul aircraft should not only be the best aircraft for AKL- EWR, but also LAX, LGR, SFO and IAH.


I’m not sure anyone has said otherwise though? The 789 like the 772, 763, 744/742, D10 all gave a little more than what came before them and allowed new routes or routes that required a stop to go non stop. The 789 continues to do that as will the 77X/A350 whatever they order, which will be able to fly all existing routes, unless they get some 78X which will be limited to Asia, the 78X is interesting, I can see them getting some should the whole order go Boeing, should they go Airbus they won’t imo get any 78X’s.
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:04 pm

tealnz wrote:
Looks as if NZ wants to do more point-to-point routes (ie AKL non-stop to IAH/ORD/NYC) rather than hubbing everything via LAX. That won't help the 77X, which will be a much heavier aircraft with higher trip costs. And it won't have a capability edge – it looks as if both the 359 and 35K will be able to do at least full pax to/from NYC. Easy to imagine the lower capex, lower trip costs and lower risk of the 359 trumping any initial commonality advantages of the 77X. And there's the 35K available for when the 77W comes up for replacement.


I agree the 77X is too big for what NZ wants, however, it'll be used predominantly on USA & LHR routes and potentially on the larger Asian routes HKG for example. Having said this, the 77X may have more legs depending on how the final product is delivered and how NZ configure it which is why I believe it's not a one-horse race.

On paper, the yet to be built 778 (most likely Boeing frame) is larger and goes further than the A350 but does that make it more economic and can NZ fill it, it'll be 30-50 seats larger, obviously, that depends what the airline does with it.

Also, is there confidence in a yet to be built (airworthy) aircraft at the moment?

My personal belief is, the 778 is an awesome aircraft and would suit a number of NZ routes nicely. However, when I look at the best aircraft for the fleet over all the routes it will likely be deployed on I believe the A350-900 wins.

It's still 50/50 as NZ may reduce the 777 fleet size and increase the number of 787 frames. For example

10x 778
21x 787 (two LOPA)
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:24 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
tealnz wrote:
There's been a step change in real-world ranges. SFW-SYD, PER-LHR, DXB-AKL, SFO/LAX-SIN etc are all now routine.

Very true - there has been a shift to ULH. I wonder though - is it sustainable? Will it last? How much higher will oil have to go before ULH expansion for more marginal routes (e.g. AKL - DOH or SIN - SEA) becomes unviable? For NZ, I think AKL - EWR and AKL - GRU will happen, and can sustain themselves in the face of higher oil prices.

Cheers,

C.

I raised this with regard to QR a few months back and you rubbished the idea.

I don't disagree that some of these longer routes may become more challenging with higher fuel prices but what I will highlight is

What is UHL? Is there is no definition of what ULH actually is? I've seen a number of variations but as a good example, look at Wikipedia, where they suggest it applies to all flights over 12 hours, well that includes all of NZ's North American services.

I disagree with this and believe it's a reference to flights over 15 hours myself. But that's obviously nothing more than opinion.

When you look at the longest flights in the world currently, most target the 'premium' market and publish fares accordingly.
SIN-NYC
PER-LHR
SYD-DFW
AKL-DOH ?? The odd one out?

Back to the point raised, one of the positive factors is the current generation of aircraft are so much more fuel efficient. This is enabling some of these longer routes to pop up as the operating costs of a slightly longer sector today may be similar to what was seen as LH 5-10 years ago.
 
NZ6
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:27 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
tealnz wrote:
The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it.

What about MNL?

Cheers,

C.


Thinking about routes they've launched or relaunched in recent years...

SIN, DPS, SGN, EZE, IAH, TPE, KIX, ADL, ORD (this month) :checkmark:
MNL :tombstone:

Yeah, valid point.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:56 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:
Gasman wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
PMONZ has a point. Obviously NZ cannot be trusted at all.

Precisely the kind of imbecilic comment which has lowered the IQ of this thread.

Of course NZ can't be trusted at all. If you're going to hold them (or any carrier) to a route based on a declared intention 2, 3 or 10 years ago on the basis on some loose concept of "trust"; you're an idiot. You can have the most well intentioned business road map in the world; but no route will ever commence unless all the ducks line up at the time - and suitable aircraft are only a small fraction of the ducks. Which is why I've tried (and failed) to make the point that NZs next long haul aircraft should not only be the best aircraft for AKL- EWR, but also LAX, LGR, SFO and IAH.


I’m not sure anyone has said otherwise though?


The tone of management speak which has been echoed by Grant Bradley as well as frequently here is that further ULH destinations are a certainty, only being held back for a moment while we wait impatiently for the "new aircraft" to arrive. Whereas the truth is more:

ZK-NBT wrote:
The 789 like the 772, 763, 744/742, D10 all gave a little more than what came before them and allowed new routes or routes that required a stop to go non stop. The 789 continues to do that as will the 77X/A350 whatever they order, which will be able to fly all existing routes


In other words, this is no different from a normal evolutionary aircraft procurement cycle and the "new aircraft" (whatever they may turn out to be) are NOT being purchased with the sole aim of flying to Newark or Rio. Sure, they may be able to and sure, it may be part of the equation but years out from the event these routes are nothing like even approaching a certainty. That's what I feel we should be discussing, rather than the finer points between the 778 and A359. And if the best aircraft for AKL-EWR turns out to be the second best aircraft for AKL-LAX/LHR/SFO; then NZ have a real tough decision on their hands.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 4187
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:13 am

NZ6 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
tealnz wrote:
The current team has a track record of doing what they say they're going to do. And succeeding with it.

What about MNL?

Cheers,

C.


Thinking about routes they've launched or relaunched in recent years...

SIN, DPS, SGN, EZE, IAH, TPE, KIX, ADL, ORD (this month) :checkmark:
MNL :tombstone:

Yeah, valid point.

Merely making the point that the carrier can say one thing, but due to various factors and influences changing on a day-to-day basis, the carrier may need to change its plans (as happened with MNL, which, I accept, is a rare case). In the context of fleet renewal, although NZ has said ULH is a key aspect of its decision-making process, it's possible that factors like the recent rise in oil prices might make ULH less of a core pillar of NZ's strategy going forward, and hence less of a factor in the fleet renewal decision. We should keep an open mind on fleet renewal.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4159
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:52 am

New NZ safety video is out https://youtu.be/dYu8kkD0Gy4
59 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Mon Nov 05, 2018 8:17 am

Regarding AirNZ to MNL, the discussion so far has overlooked
possible 'administrative issues' which might run counter to the
expected marketing and operational opportunity for that route.
Mr. Luxon would absolutely walk away from anything remotely
'under table'.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:13 pm

NZ6 wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Looks as if NZ wants to do more point-to-point routes (ie AKL non-stop to IAH/ORD/NYC) rather than hubbing everything via LAX. That won't help the 77X, which will be a much heavier aircraft with higher trip costs. And it won't have a capability edge – it looks as if both the 359 and 35K will be able to do at least full pax to/from NYC. Easy to imagine the lower capex, lower trip costs and lower risk of the 359 trumping any initial commonality advantages of the 77X. And there's the 35K available for when the 77W comes up for replacement.


I agree the 77X is too big for what NZ wants, however, it'll be used predominantly on USA & LHR routes and potentially on the larger Asian routes HKG for example. Having said this, the 77X may have more legs depending on how the final product is delivered and how NZ configure it which is why I believe it's not a one-horse race.

On paper, the yet to be built 778 (most likely Boeing frame) is larger and goes further than the A350 but does that make it more economic and can NZ fill it, it'll be 30-50 seats larger, obviously, that depends what the airline does with it.

Also, is there confidence in a yet to be built (airworthy) aircraft at the moment?

My personal belief is, the 778 is an awesome aircraft and would suit a number of NZ routes nicely. However, when I look at the best aircraft for the fleet over all the routes it will likely be deployed on I believe the A350-900 wins.

It's still 50/50 as NZ may reduce the 777 fleet size and increase the number of 787 frames. For example

10x 778
21x 787 (two LOPA)


What I’ve wondered for a while is how the 778 will perform on regular long hauls in NZ’s case mostly 12-14hrs? The other carriers to order it EK/QR operate some very long flights that need the legs of the 778.

Many here would say it’s a 1 horse race with the A350 certain to win, it may well do but not before a tight imo battle with the 77X. Same either way but it may just make sense for NZ to go 77X for the sake of long haul fleet commonality with the 777/787, I’ve said that all along.

Gasman wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Gasman wrote:
Precisely the kind of imbecilic comment which has lowered the IQ of this thread.

Of course NZ can't be trusted at all. If you're going to hold them (or any carrier) to a route based on a declared intention 2, 3 or 10 years ago on the basis on some loose concept of "trust"; you're an idiot. You can have the most well intentioned business road map in the world; but no route will ever commence unless all the ducks line up at the time - and suitable aircraft are only a small fraction of the ducks. Which is why I've tried (and failed) to make the point that NZs next long haul aircraft should not only be the best aircraft for AKL- EWR, but also LAX, LGR, SFO and IAH.


I’m not sure anyone has said otherwise though?


The tone of management speak which has been echoed by Grant Bradley as well as frequently here is that further ULH destinations are a certainty, only being held back for a moment while we wait impatiently for the "new aircraft" to arrive. Whereas the truth is more:

ZK-NBT wrote:
The 789 like the 772, 763, 744/742, D10 all gave a little more than what came before them and allowed new routes or routes that required a stop to go non stop. The 789 continues to do that as will the 77X/A350 whatever they order, which will be able to fly all existing routes


In other words, this is no different from a normal evolutionary aircraft procurement cycle and the "new aircraft" (whatever they may turn out to be) are NOT being purchased with the sole aim of flying to Newark or Rio. Sure, they may be able to and sure, it may be part of the equation but years out from the event these routes are nothing like even approaching a certainty. That's what I feel we should be discussing, rather than the finer points between the 778 and A359. And if the best aircraft for AKL-EWR turns out to be the second best aircraft for AKL-LAX/LHR/SFO; then NZ have a real tough decision on their hands.


I’d say the truth is newer generation 787/A350/77X can fly further in many cases without being optimised as ULH aircraft specifically bar the 778/A359ULR, I agree this order will be mainly for all long haul routes but atleast some of the order whatever it is must be able to fly ULH routes. I’d say either way it’s a tough decision.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - November 2018

Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:23 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
New NZ safety video is out https://youtu.be/dYu8kkD0Gy4


Hold my beer. I was wrong all along. Canceling all my booked QF travel and coming back to NZ. This one could be a serious contender for Palme d'or.

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