Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5620916/

Topic: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ1
Posted 2012-11-27 20:14:35 and read 23443 times.

Continue discussion here. The last part can be found here:

New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 121 (by ZKOJH Oct 29 2012 in Civil Aviation)

NZ1
Forum Moderator

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-11-27 20:26:35 and read 23465 times.

Zk-OKP is on approach for the WLG flyover right now... And I think FR24 lost him at 2700ft.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Megatop747-412
Posted 2012-11-27 20:34:42 and read 23443 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 1):

Just saw it "from the top" via One News Live Broadcast - totally awesome. But wished we were back in Welly to witness it though!  

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: texan
Posted 2012-11-28 00:04:34 and read 23263 times.

Looked great from atop Mt Vic. Flew straight up Kent Tce.

Texan

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-11-28 04:09:24 and read 23107 times.

Quoting texan (Reply 3):
Looked great from atop Mt Vic. Flew straight up Kent Tce.

OKP departed AKL at 1624, 38,000 ft at 1637, descent at 1649, two circuits off Queen Charlotte Sound at 9,300 ft, over Island Bay at 1,400 ft, Kent Tce / Cambridge Tce at 1,300 ft, back in AKL at 1815. Good rate of climb.

Also, QFA27 SYD-SCL overflew WLG at 1640 and RAAF Challenger A37-002 as 'ASY343' arrived WLG from CBR at 1708.

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-11-29 21:20:41 and read 22635 times.

Just booked a WLG-AKL-LAX and return flight for christmas and I was able to see/select my seats before I paid. How long has NZ allowed this? Didn't see the option when I booked a flight to AKL two days before the new seat purchase choices took effect!

Also booked a US F fare to DTW after reading/talking to Koruman about US fares and looking at UAs fares/options and yip US was certainly cheaper in EVERY fare class - especially F and NZs connecting fares. Thank you Kman for the advice! After booking I then discovered something that well......made me a little unhappy......I could have booked a Dreamliner ticket from Houstan - LAX at the time I was wanting!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKOJH
Posted 2012-11-30 05:58:03 and read 22447 times.

''Air NZ to extend partnership with Cathay to other Asian cities''

Air New Zealand's strategic partnership with Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific Airways will "in time" expand beyond the Auckland-Hong Kong route to include parts of southern China and Southeast Asia, the airline's chief executive, Rob Fyfe, said.

Fyfe said on the sidelines of a Star Alliance gathering in Shenzhen that expanding the Cathay Pacific tie-up won't be easy.

"There are some constraints or respect we'd need to show to our alliance partners in terms of working with a member of another alliance," Fyfe told The Wall Street Journal.

He said the development of its strategic tie-up with Cathay Pacific would take place "only in areas where we don't have a viable Star Alliance solution". These include Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam and Malaysia, he said.

http://www.cargonewsasia.com/

We can rule out NZ flying to Vietnam or Malaysia in the future then

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ6
Posted 2012-11-30 11:46:09 and read 22384 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):
Just booked a WLG-AKL-LAX and return flight for christmas and I was able to see/select my seats before I paid. How long has NZ allowed this? Didn't see the option when I booked a flight to AKL two days before the new seat purchase choices took effect!

A few weeks, I'm very surprised this whole project hasn't been brought up here to be honest. It's been on the cards for a few years now.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
We can rule out NZ flying to Vietnam or Malaysia in the future then

Was it every ruled in? I mean AKL-HAN or AKL-SGN? Then, head to head with MH to KUL, on point to point traffic only? As well as all European traffic is trying to be forced over PVG and all Asian traffic is trying to be moved over HKG.

There is more network news coming in the near future.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-11-30 12:07:54 and read 22361 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 7):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):Just booked a WLG-AKL-LAX and return flight for christmas and I was able to see/select my seats before I paid. How long has NZ allowed this? Didn't see the option when I booked a flight to AKL two days before the new seat purchase choices took effect!
A few weeks, I'm very surprised this whole project hasn't been brought up here to be honest. It's been on the cards for a few years now.

Well I guess good things take time. Guess it also puts to rest the problem many passengers have of not being able to see what seats are still free before booking, even if it means you've got to do a 50% dummy booking first to see if the seats you want are there like I did.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ6
Posted 2012-11-30 18:30:41 and read 22189 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 8):
Well I guess good things take time. Guess it also puts to rest the problem many passengers have of not being able to see what seats are still free before booking, even if it means you've got to do a 50% dummy booking first to see if the seats you want are there like I did.

Its part of the paid seat and pre paid bag project, the time was spent in IT development. The potential of these enhancements are now endless.

The benefit isn't design to be you seeing the seat map prior to payment (there is still hight risk that someone wont complete a booking based on not have their ideal seat available).The basis of this is to allow passengers to purchase their seat preference or excess baggage.

Depending on who you are the "good things take time" may not be so good

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-11-30 20:16:08 and read 22131 times.

IIRC It was available as an option from about the 14th to prepay your baggage, pay for a priority seat or assign yourself a seat for all flights after about the 22nd November. Golds can still select a bassinet or exit row FOC. At the same time Golds can now select a seat only fare and still check in 1 bag@23KG.

Yes it has been a long time, and if I had the choice I would have implemented it all at the same as the S2S was introduced, but US DoT once again forced the hand of the airlines with direct services to the USA to streamline all the baggage charges, so that all the baggage fees for an itinerary must now be charged at Origin, not at Point of Transfer.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-11-30 20:21:59 and read 22124 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 10):
At the same time Golds can now select a seat only fare and still check in 1 bag@23KG.

When was this announced? I must have missed it. I can't see this being updated on NZ website though.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: byronicle6
Posted 2012-12-01 02:36:19 and read 21946 times.

I was lucky enough to get ZK-MVA on a ROT-CHC flight yesterday, and want to echo the already glowing comments of both the outside and inside. Felt very spacious for a narrow-body turboprop and don't know if it was just me but it seemed quieter than the ATR-72 500 and other turboprop. Great little aircraft!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Zkpilot
Posted 2012-12-01 03:42:35 and read 21925 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 7):

A few weeks, I'm very surprised this whole project hasn't been brought up here to be honest. It's been on the cards for a few years now.

About 5 years after most other airlines... NZ has really dragged the ball on this one!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Kaiarahi
Posted 2012-12-01 04:40:06 and read 21895 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 7):
A few weeks, I'm very surprised this whole project hasn't been brought up here to be honest. It's been on the cards for a few years now.

Strange you didn't say so on the many occasions I've raised it in the last 3 years.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 9):
The potential of these enhancements are now endless.

It's pretty clunky compared to most other sites. You have to go through the complete booking process, short of paying, before you can see the seats. On most other airline sites, you can just select a flight and see what's available.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 9):

The benefit isn't design to be you seeing the seat map prior to payment (there is still hight risk that someone wont complete a booking based on not have their ideal seat available).

What a 1960's "we know what's good for you" attitude. This doesn't seem to be an issue for most other airlines. In my case, if I can't get a satisfactory seat on AC when it matters (e.g. red-eye YVR-YOW), I just look for alternate flights (on AC first). End result - I'm happy I'm not in a window/middle seat on a 5+ hour transcon, AC gets my repeat business because I can view available seats prior to booking.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ6
Posted 2012-12-01 14:32:04 and read 21753 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 11):
When was this announced? I must have missed it. I can't see this being updated on NZ website though.

It's on there, go and make a booking and you will see the options.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 13):
About 5 years after most other airlines... NZ has really dragged the ball on this one!

Has it really?

Interesting comment and really shows your knowledge of where Air NZ is at, what it's working towards and where they are at with customer interaction.

I don't mean that to be a personal attack I just don't think you're aware of the bigger picture here.

I don't know if "dragging the ball' is the right analogy here when as you've seen over the past few years the introduction of more and more "add-on's" such as insurance, seats to suit, sky couch, credit card fees, grabaseat+bag, One Up etc

When you have a strategy like this you want to ensure they are launched when the right IT inferstructure is in place and when the time is best suited for customers, for example you will note this all started with a low impact credit card fee several years ago. Also other projects have taken priority and as I said earlier this IT work now opens the door to many more possibilities.

It will be interesting to see the annual results mid next year when QF announces another massive loss and NZ reports a profit again. I wonder then if some will still continue to pick apart NZ's performance and changes.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
Strange you didn't say so on the many occasions I've raised it in the last 3 years.

And why would I share this confidential information on these forums?

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
It's pretty clunky compared to most other sites.

That's a matter of opinion, personally I find it fantastic and I find the seats maps easier to read than other sites.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
"we know what's good for you

As I said, the seat map is in there as way of "selling" something extra, there is strong opinion that offering a seat map when there an't 'good' seats available would deter potential purchasers. Personally I would go with the experts on this, the have done the industry research and watch user usage on the website so they know what customers look for and want.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-01 16:48:46 and read 21644 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
It will be interesting to see the annual results mid next year when QF announces another massive loss and NZ reports a profit again

I know both the initial projections for profits generated by this latest change, and the projections after the first 2 weeks of sales, and it will certainly help the bottom line in no small way.

Personally I think all the changes are fair and reasonable and for everyone who keeps within the bell curve (particularly regarding the prepaid luggage) they will find it advantageous.
Couples, Families and small groups now have a way of ensuring that they are getting seated together even if they do not book together without running the risk at the airport.
Seat only passengers have a means of not being sat down the back if they choose a priority/forward seat
Infants who require bassinets pay for them.
Tall people who cannot afford business or PE but who currently always miss out on exit rows gain a way of ensuring a seat is to their liking.
space seats are available for purchase at the airport (space available) which are a bargain for a 12h flight!

All I will say, as a single passenger I finally feel like I have options onboard NZ now - single customers having previously been shafted to fit between every other group on the plane.
The onus is on me as an informed consumer to decide what I value and whether or not I am prepared to pay to guarantee a specific seat.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-01 16:49:22 and read 21644 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
Interesting comment and really shows your knowledge of where Air NZ is at, what it's working towards and where they are at with customer interaction.
Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
When you have a strategy like this you want to ensure they are launched when the right IT inferstructure is in place and when the time is best suited for customers

Reading another discussion board and it sounds like the customer interaction hasn't been that great with this new scheme. IT had a few hiccups as well with some not so happy customers (high value ones too apparantly)

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-01 18:07:58 and read 21588 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
It will be interesting to see the annual results mid next year when QF announces another massive loss and NZ reports a profit again. I wonder then if some will still continue to pick apart NZ's performance and changes.

To be fair, NZ's success or otherwise should not be measured by how QF is performing. I am sure anyone will agree that NZ does't have the level of competition (both domestic and international) and the very ugly politics QF has to face everyday. NZ has most of their domestic and long haul routes to itself. The only long haul route ex AKL which they have direct competition will end up with an alliance with that very competitor (CX). I can't imagine similar pact getting regulatory approval in Australia. They are also allowed to established a Shanghai base where crew are paid Chinese rates. QF's unions would never let that happen.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-01 20:06:02 and read 21508 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
It's pretty clunky compared to most other sites.

That's a matter of opinion, personally I find it fantastic and I find the seats maps easier to read than other sites.

I thought the seat map was well presented and very easy to read compared to when I was looking at the US and UA seat maps several days ago for flights in the USA

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 17):
Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
Interesting comment and really shows your knowledge of where Air NZ is at, what it's working towards and where they are at with customer interaction.
Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
When you have a strategy like this you want to ensure they are launched when the right IT inferstructure is in place and when the time is best suited for customers

Reading another discussion board and it sounds like the customer interaction hasn't been that great with this new scheme. IT had a few hiccups as well with some not so happy customers (high value ones too apparantly)

I booked a few weeks ago a WLG-AKL day trip and couldn't select a seat on the WLG-AKL sector but could on the 'night rider' service coming back. The same thing happened last week after booking the NZ LAX sector, couldn't select the AKL-LAX seat but could on the other 3 flight. Phoned NZ reservations and a few mins later could select a seat. Teething problems maybe?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ6
Posted 2012-12-01 21:04:47 and read 21454 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 16):
I know both the initial projections for profits generated by this latest change, and the projections after the first 2 weeks of sales, and it will certainly help the bottom line in no small way.
Quoting xiaotung (Reply 18):
To be fair, NZ's success or otherwise should not be measured by how QF is performing. I am sure anyone will agree that NZ does't have the level of competition (both domestic and international) and the very ugly politics QF has to face everyday.

I didn't mean to allude to the fact that this one or these projects will be the difference but overall they will all contribute to the bottom line.

Compare QF and NZ - QF is still flying around a fleet of aging 767 and 747's and in my opinion is doing all it can to keep it's in-flight product at a minimal level. They have had to cut half their 787 order and JQ and QF domestic are all but the only areas of the Qantas Group which is prevents them from being another Pam Am

NZ on the other hand has positioned itself well given the 787 was to be a game changer in 2009 or 2010 (I can't recall originally).

It's developing the China market well (to Koruman's horror) even though China is the fastest growing inbound market for New Zealand. Koruman will now claim it's low cost tourist that fly that route, well 74% of NZ's market is leisure.

You've seen NZ claim back $20+M in credit card fees, you've seen all 10% the growth in the Tasman go to NZ after the seats to suit option, you've seen the alliance with DJ be a winner for everyone.

DPS, MCY were successful, PER is now a 777 and LAX is back to 14x a week
PVG is working towards weekly

If you know the figures for what this latest add-on is predicted to earn annually then you'll need to increase it as it's increased already, you add that as 100% profit to the bottom line and when you're earning $70M a year (average) you'll know this is invaluable.

Do I need to go on?

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 17):
Reading another discussion board and it sounds like the customer interaction hasn't been that great with this new scheme. IT had a few hiccups as well with some not so happy customers (high value ones too apparantly)

I believe so as well, so to quote zkpilot, is NZ "dragging the ball?" probably not. Does this change need to happen, probably if NZ wants to increase revenue. Is there a right time for this? No, did NZ wait as long as possible to ensure the right measures where in place to build on it. Yes!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Kaiarahi
Posted 2012-12-02 04:10:21 and read 21237 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 19):
I thought the seat map was well presented and very easy to read compared to when I was looking at the US and UA seat maps several days ago for flights in the USA

I agree the seat map itself is well presented. By clunky, I meant that you have to go all the way through entering pax info etc before you can see the map.

For example, from YOW I can fly NZ to AKL via LAX, SFO or YVR. If I'm bringing family, I have to enter complete information for 5 pax in three separate "dummy" bookings in order to look at available seating. On most other airlines' sites, I can enter the flights and see what's available.

But at least it's better than guessing which route will have the best available seats, which is what I've always had to do, and being thoroughly pissed off when I find myself in 26B on a 744.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
there is strong opinion that offering a seat map when there an't 'good' seats available would deter potential purchasers. Personally I would go with the experts on this

I guess other airlines must have different experts. AC's experience is that most pax are indifferent or will simply select the best that's available. Some, like me, will consider different flights/routings, but I'll ultimately be a happy return pax because I won't find myself stuck in an uncomfortable seat.

Another thing that AC does (well), is to present different available seats depending on FF status. If I'm flying Y, I'm almost always able to select a seat in the first 2 rows.

For me, being able to see the available seats is also useful when I want to use an upgrade credit. I'll choose an AC flight that has the most available J to maximize the likelihood of the upgrade being available. I realize that that's not applicable to NZ, which auctions upgrades.

Which brings me to another reason that I've taken my business (about $50K per year) elsewhere than NZ after 54 years. NZ represents itself as permitting *A points upgrades, but it doesn't in practice. After fruitless correspondence with NZ (stock PR responses which don't address my issue), I've finally written to *A pointing out that this is misrepresentation and suggesting that NZ be removed from the list of carriers on the *A website that offer points upgrades.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ6
Posted 2012-12-02 11:28:49 and read 21165 times.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 21):
I guess other airlines must have different experts. AC's experience is that most pax are indifferent or will simply select the best that's available

AC operates in a completely different environment to NZ and comparing them wouldn't be that accurate, NZ's premium customers by in large get their favourable seating, the 74% leisure market aren't all seat driven entirely.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
if I can't get a satisfactory seat on AC when it matters (e.g. red-eye YVR-YOW), I just look for alternate flights (on AC first). End result

And it's just this reason NZ was wary of including seat maps prior to payment. What if you can't see you're ideal seat or 2 seats together? you book elsewhere and if you're leisure / price sensitive you may book on someone else when NZ probably can still accommodate you request once "other" seats are made available.

It's almost like the saying - you don't know what you're missing till you've lost something.

It pays to remember that half a dozen or so opinions on this forum don't represent the 11.7 million passengers NZ carries each year. We should be discussing what needs to happen to accommodate the majority aside from what personally suits us individually.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 18):
To be fair, NZ's success or otherwise should not be measured by how QF is performing

OneUp, OneSmart, Seats to Suit, Paid Seat, Pre Paid Baggage, Skycouch...

If all of these initiatives generated $10M per year, that would be $60M, add that to an average profit in recent years of $70M - you end up with $130M profit.

Someone remind me what QF has done in recent years?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Kaiarahi
Posted 2012-12-02 16:22:03 and read 21004 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
It pays to remember that half a dozen or so opinions on this forum don't represent the 11.7 million passengers NZ carries each year. We should be discussing what needs to happen to accommodate the majority aside from what personally suits us individually.

That's completely fair. On the other hand, I'll travel on what suits me personally - and NZ is $50K a year poorer.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-02 17:00:25 and read 20974 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
It pays to remember that half a dozen or so opinions on this forum don't represent the 11.7 million passengers NZ carries each year. We should be discussing what needs to happen to accommodate the majority aside from what personally suits us individually.
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 23):
That's completely fair. On the other hand, I'll travel on what suits me personally - and NZ is $50K a year poorer.

And you can add another $80K or so from my family. So Kaiarahi + 4 Korufamily = approx 130 casual short-haul/Tasman passengers.

I don't object to the idea of ancillary revenue, at all. I think its rank bad business to antagonise your HVCs any more than necessary when your long-haul fleet is so reliant upon a 1-2-1 Business cabin and a 2-2-2 Premium Economy one.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-02 17:36:17 and read 21060 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 18):
To be fair, NZ's success or otherwise should not be measured by how QF is performing.

Agreed. Especially when the comparison tends to be pretty superficial. QF's losing big on international now (though isn't NZ as well?), but when the good times return, it generally outperforms on an earnings per share basis.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
Compare QF and NZ - QF is still flying around a fleet of aging 767 and 747's and in my opinion is doing all it can to keep it's in-flight product at a minimal level.

Some would argue this is just maximising your capital investment, squeezing every last dollar out of them. Admittedly, this is affected by diminishing returns, which QF is probably in the throws of now.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
They have had to cut half their 787 order and JQ and QF domestic are all but the only areas of the Qantas Group which is prevents them from being another Pam Am

Isn't it generally the same for NZ? Domestic is the profit maker and international the loss maker? At least it seemed to be for the past 5 or so years and it certainly was post Ansett-collapse.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
NZ on the other hand has positioned itself well

For what, takeover? Merger?

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
It's developing the China market well (to Koruman's horror)

Actually didn't Koruman always argue the airline should put 767s on the Chinese market? Oh look, they're doing that now.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
Koruman will now claim it's low cost tourist that fly that route, well 74% of NZ's market is leisure.

Huh? How is that even an argument? And for what?

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
you've seen the alliance with DJ be a winner for everyone.

Nice spin. I haven't seen DJ expand its trans-Tasman offering lately. Has it expanded its Pacific Island flights? No? Oh. "Winning".

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 21):
I guess other airlines must have different experts.

It would seem so.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
NZ's premium customers by in large get their favourable seating

"By in large"?? What kind of metric is that? 51%? 99%? I'd have thought given their oft-stated importance, they'd get their preference (when expressed).

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
What if you can't see you're ideal seat or 2 seats together? you book elsewhere and if you're leisure / price sensitive you may book on someone else when NZ probably can still accommodate you request once "other" seats are made available.

Wow that's a lot of weight to pile on to seat selection as a consumer's deciding factor. Evidently the feeling is that too much information is dangerous. Odd approach, which things like the internet usually "solve" for consumers.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
We should be discussing what needs to happen to accommodate the majority aside from what personally suits us individually.

But the majority ofor NZ are still back-of-the-bus, cheap arse parasites, right? (Note: I can say that because I relish being one.) It's all about premium, no? Isn't that where the airline makes its money (or loses it)?

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 22):
Someone remind me what QF has done in recent years?

In my experience, their frequent flyer programme is a hell of a lot easier, more beneficial for me and has genuinely influenced my flight selections - easier to earn, never had a problem redeeming. Not to mention, they've turned their loyalty programme into a huge money spinner, while NZ continues to treat it as a liability.

They've also done pretty well on domestic given the competitive push from Virgin. Though they've made mistakes too, QF has been lumbered with a highly unionised workforce that hey've finally started to address.

They've also sorted out (almost) a tie-up with THE name in commercial aviation - Emirates.

The quesiton is - how has NZ readied itself for a leaner, meaner QF backed by the behemoth in commercial aviation? It painted its tails black, tweaked its website and commoditised even more of former ticket-inclusive features. Short-term revenue benefit but will it last? So when a stronger competition emerges that provides for all-inclusive fares, what will be the market repsonse? Because let's face it, NZ's been lucky with QF's relative inactivity in the New Zealand market for the past few years. Are they assuming the future will be likewise? They removed VA as competition - tick. They can't do that with QF. The introduced S2S - tick. But the competition has been increasingly JQ rather than QF. Will that still be the case in the future?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-02 19:01:13 and read 21006 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
It's developing the China market well (to Koruman's horror) even though China is the fastest growing inbound market for New Zealand. Koruman will now claim it's low cost tourist that fly that route, well 74% of NZ's market is leisure.

I don't understand the criticism here.

I don't object to China-New Zealand air services, not at all.

I just think that they require aircraft configured completely differently to LAX, SFO, YVR, HNL and even PER. It's a waste of money having a Premium Economy cabin and it's equally wasteful having Business Premier as opposed to Business Class recliners.

I would have a high-density 2 class 767 or even 747, using cheap recliner seats for Business Class. The model should be what the likes of Thomas Cook and Thomson use to fly from London Gatwick to Cancun, a comparable distance and a comparable package holiday demographic.

And I think we should be realistic. Auckland-Shanghai is actually further than the distance to extend NZ5/6 from Los Angeles to Manchester, and the latter route would be substantially easier to sell premium seating on.

But PR China is several decades behind Hong Kong in the development of air travel, especially high-yielding outward air travel. If HKG-LHR cannot work, there needs to be scrutiny of how best to operate AKL-PVG.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-02 19:14:51 and read 21169 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
well 74% of NZ's market is leisure

I apologise for the sneeringly elitist tone that I am going to reply in.

There is leisure travel, and there is leisure travel.

Air New Zealand failed to show any understanding that, for example, the Bora Bora market is different to the Western Samoa market, and they persisted in sending the same 763 with 90% Economy seating, no Premium Economy and no lie-flat beds.

Similarly, two years ago there were 9 weekly flights from Australia to Hawaii on a mixture of A332 and 763 aircraft. Now there are 28 such flights. Air New Zealand has gone up from 2 763s per week to, erm, 2 763s.

Quite frankly, I don't think that Air New Zealand is very good at managing the inbound leisure market from North America and Asia, or the outbound one to Hawaii and Tahiti or the transiting one from Australia.

They can handle low-yield leisure like Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast, Fiji, Rarotonga and Bali. But high-yielding leisure is something that goes right over their heads. To use an expression from Northern England, they have trouble distinguishing their a**e from their elbow.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-02 19:51:01 and read 21113 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 27):
Similarly, two years ago there were 9 weekly flights from Australia to Hawaii on a mixture of A332 and 763 aircraft. Now there are 28 such flights. Air New Zealand has gone up from 2 763s per week to, erm, 2 763s.

Yeah it's a funny one. The main driver for this seems to be the appreciation of the Aussie dollar against the US, which makes sense - you get more bang for your buck. Well, the New Zealand dollar has appreciated as well yet traffic has been accommodated by 2-3 services per week, briefly bumping up to 777s for part of the year.

A lot of the Australian growth is coming from Hawaiian, of course and the same is due to happen into AKL (cannot WAIT to see those beauties on the tarmac). True, Hawaiian offers onward connections, but why was this not foreseen after their success in the Australian market? Where did NZ think HA was going to put all those Airbuses on order? Did they consider teaming up with Hawaiian, codesharing on the route and arrange onward conenctions to the continental US? Or did they just drop the ball on this one? Perhaps NZ figured it would dilute their LAX and SFO routes.

I suspect we're going to see Hawaiian excel here as it has in Australia, establishing itself as a long-term competitor.

I recognise the counterargument - the demand just wasn't there - but evidently it was, with Hawaiian upping capacity before the route even started. It would seem they stimulated a latent market that NZ has increasingly ignored or just plain overlooked. I wonder if it harks back to a lack of suitable equipment, i.e. too few 767s.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-02 20:25:48 and read 21107 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 28):
Yeah it's a funny one. The main driver for this seems to be the appreciation of the Aussie dollar against the US, which makes sense - you get more bang for your buck. Well, the New Zealand dollar has appreciated as well yet traffic has been accommodated by 2-3 services per week, briefly bumping up to 777s for part of the year.

I suspect we're going to see Hawaiian excel here as it has in Australia, establishing itself as a long-term competitor.

I recognise the counterargument - the demand just wasn't there - but evidently it was, with Hawaiian upping capacity before the route even started. It would seem they stimulated a latent market that NZ has increasingly ignored or just plain overlooked. I wonder if it harks back to a lack of suitable equipment, i.e. too few 767s.

When I was two years out from university - which was 1994-95 - I used to work in Takapuna. My secretary was a spinster who used to go with her girlfriends to Waikiki every winter, and she loved it.

The awful exchange rate between 1996-2004 certainly put a brake on demand for trips to the USA for people paid in Kiwi dollars, but again Air New Zealand's appalling "one island fits all" mentality has shot themselves in the foot. They have been happy to funnel tourists to Fiji and Rarotonga and just haven't cottoned on to the fact that Kiwis love Hawaii not just for the beaches but also the shops and the affordable dining out.

Also, I suspect, they have wanted to keep fares artificially inflated in a monopoly market for as long as they could. It's only a 7000 km flight - fares should be much closer to the $900 Economy and $2600 Business Class return levels that Jetstar has from Sydney. The currency change more or less negates the difference in distance.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-02 20:42:00 and read 21085 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 29):
When I was two years out from university - which was 1994-95 - I used to work in Takapuna. My secretary was a spinster who used to go with her girlfriends to Waikiki every winter, and she loved it.

Yeah, I had family who'd been wanting to go there for years, but found it too pricey on NZ, FJ had stopped offering connections and they weren't comfortable going via JQ, given its record for atrocious reliability and the fact it was quite indirect (though I tried to convince them it was only a few hours more each way, they pointe dout that it added up to about 10 hours of extra travel in total).

They waited three years to save, spending the rest of the time holidaying in Fiji and Samoa. But they got to Hawaii this year (on NZ), loved it and now want to go back every year. If they'd been able to earlier, they would've gone. Now, they're converts, they're taking HA. NZ, you there?

I guess we all have little anecdotes like this, but it's not the first time I've heard it. Presumably NZ has better market research, and it is about putting your resources where you earn the best return, but you do wonder.

Quoting koruman (Reply 29):
Also, I suspect, they have wanted to keep fares artificially inflated in a monopoly market for as long as they could. It's only a 7000 km flight - fares should be much closer to the $900 Economy and $2600 Business Class return levels that Jetstar has from Sydney. The currency change more or less negates the difference in distance.

Yeah and you can understand the thinking. But you can only do that for so long before a competitor notices and moves in to undercut - I just wish it would happen on the Japan routes where NZ used to (do they still?) try and get away with $2,000 return fares, which was a joke, forcing people via Thailand, Tahiti and Australia. Is it similar to Hawaii? Could lower fares/competition stimulate a surge in traffic? Maybe, though the Japanese do have pretty unique travelling behaviour, whereas I suspect Kiwis would jump on the opportunity.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: IndianicWorld
Posted 2012-12-03 00:55:13 and read 20922 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
LAX is back to 14x a week

QF leaving the route has surely helped there too.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
PVG is working towards weekly

Daily you mean  
Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
We can rule out NZ flying to Vietnam or Malaysia in the future then

I think that was quite clear anyway. They are likely too thin to make work.

Overall. NZ has made a few smart moves lately, especially around the CX partnership.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-03 05:02:42 and read 20774 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 28):
I wonder if it harks back to a lack of suitable equipment, i.e. too few 767s.

I would agree. Hind sight is 20:20 but they should have kept the ( was it) three 767's that they returned three or four years ago. They took a gamble on the 789 being on time and lost. If they had stayed with some of their original 788 order they could have been operating these since early 2012. Even at EIS weights, and as ANA showed, they could be operating 12hr sectors with 242 passengers and ~7t of cargo. Better than what they can do with the 767.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: cchan
Posted 2012-12-03 11:13:42 and read 20688 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 32):
They took a gamble on the 789 being on time and lost.

It seems they have gambled on this over a few fleet and upgrade decisions and have lost a few times, and somehow they still think the 789 is the solution to everything in the long haul market. If they have not put all their eggs in the 789, they would have a stronger 763 and 777 fleet, and be able to retire all 744 earlier. It appears NZ does need a 763 size fleet, which they won't have in the future once the 763 retire, and their solution to the problem is to pull out or reduce frequency on routes that don't have the demand for a 789 size aircraft, or get into bed with their competitors like with CX.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 18):
The only long haul route ex AKL which they have direct competition will end up with an alliance with that very competitor (CX).

I suspect that this arrangement will allow NZ to reduce frequency on AKL-HKG in the future, which NZ is going to do. On days NZ doesn't operate on their own metal, they would still be able to put passengers on CX flights and have daily connection to HKG and China. Before NZ started HKG-LHR, their AKL-HKG flights never get full outside peak holiday periods, whether they operate with 763 or 772, especially on the Mon-Wed flights. It is a shame for the customers really, we used to have a choice, now we don't.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-04 15:41:55 and read 20312 times.

NZ have shared NZ107s photo of the All Black 77W landing at AKL on their Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/#!/AirNewZealand

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-05 00:30:11 and read 20127 times.

Quoting cchan (Reply 33):
It is a shame for the customers really, we used to have a choice, now we don't.

You have plenty of options, given that New Zealand is such a small isolated island market with low population density. CX/KE/TG/NZ/QF/MH/SQ/CZ/CI all have competitive fares on the route AND to any of the destinations covered by the agreement. In reality there is still plenty of choice, and even though CX/NZ have an agreement I don't see too much in the way of passenger overlap, just a few more competitive fare options at more times of the day to the less common asian destinations, They cater for different clientele, and all it will do is share the demographic across both carriers more

Besides, if the flights are as empty currently off peak as you suggest then the market is not big enough to sustain 21 direct flights weekly - If the passengers choose not to make use of a service they have to expect that the service will go or at least be reduced. This would be true regardless of any arrangement that NZ/CX may have. On the other hand, the NZ/VA alliance has grown both the trans tasman market size and their own market share , so I don't see this being any different. There's plenty of things to apparently be concerned about with NZ, but I don't think this is one of them

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-05 18:56:51 and read 19844 times.

Wow.. AKL looks like a huge mess right now.. NZ102 has been on the tarmac for well over an hour. Must be a couple of other international flights waiting for gates too.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-06 02:17:45 and read 19586 times.

AKL was closed for a couple of hours today AFAIK. A few flights delayed for departure out of other domestic ports as there was no gate space in AKL. Very chaotic day for the whole NZ network

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: haggis73
Posted 2012-12-06 06:11:15 and read 19504 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 36):
Wow.. AKL looks like a huge mess right now.. NZ102 has been on the tarmac for well over an hour. Must be a couple of other international flights waiting for gates too.
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 37):
AKL was closed for a couple of hours today AFAIK. A few flights delayed for departure out of other domestic ports as there was no gate space in AKL. Very chaotic day for the whole NZ network

AKL Airport refuelling operations shut down from 1200-1730 due to lightning strikes in the vicinity. AIAL Emergency Operations Centre opened at 1630 due to AKL reaching saturation point for aircraft on ground. CZ305 directed to divert to CHC, ignored divert instructions, landed at AKL. NZ102 was close to 2 hours on the ground after arrival before taxiing down to hanger 3 & offloading passengers and bussing them back up to the international terminal along with 3 other NZ aircraft.

In all the years I have worked at AKL, this was the worst I have ever seen it.

24 International refuels in 2.5 hours, just under 1.1 million litres.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Zkpilot
Posted 2012-12-06 08:18:28 and read 19484 times.

Quoting haggis73 (Reply 38):
AIAL Emergency Operations Centre opened at 1630 due to AKL reaching saturation point for aircraft on ground.

I highly doubt a 5.5 hour halt in refueling would cause the airport to reach saturation point! Very busy yes.
There is plenty of space at AKL the mx area is also capable of handling quite a bit of overflow if needed.
Still I bet no-one has seen AKL that busy until today. I say they need to get on with building the 2nd runway, and extending the A380 pier (2 more A380 capable gates).

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-06 11:10:49 and read 19452 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 39):

Well if the outbound Asian wave never leaves, you're stuck with a heck of a lot of other arrivals wanting space at the gates! Doesn't help either when 2 A380s take up those 2 gates - there's 4 narrowbodies. So that's CX, MH, SQ, EK x3, TN, LA, NZ's numerous, QF, JQ, FJ..

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 39):
and extending the A380 pier (2 more A380 capable gates).

Indeed. That should probably be more of a priority than the new runway..

Quoting haggis73 (Reply 38):

Insane! Thanks for that info.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-06 12:43:58 and read 19390 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 39):
I highly doubt a 5.5 hour halt in refueling would cause the airport to reach saturation point!

then you would be wrong. It did reach saturation point as Haggis73 said, NZ136 diverted because of this.

Layovers 17,18,70,71,72,73,75,76,77,78,83,84,17,18,19 plus the taxiway gates all occupied by 'landed' aircraft, Hangar, Gates 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,15,16 all occupied. The Airport Gate allocation sheet was a sea of red "clashes" . This was beyond anything I have personally dealt with, including 70kt winds and the runway closure.

Airport fuel lines from Wiri had to be reset to repressurise the lines. I lost track of all the layover deparures but LA,QF56,QF126,QF44, SB,NZ739 were just the ones that I spotted around the height of the problem. Then there were the airlines that I don't deal with like JQ,CX,SQ,MH VA which were also subject to holding for a gate,towing off gates or bus ops. There were physically not enough steps, they were taking airstairs off one arrival to unload the next arrival, to take off to apply back to the original departure again...

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-06 13:46:39 and read 19334 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 39):
There is plenty of space at AKL the mx area is also capable of handling quite a bit of overflow if needed

They didn't allow check in for our flights due to no gate space, pax kept waiting alot of the time. A/C weren't even cleared to start at other ports due to the lack of space at AKL so it did happen (This from a domestic standpoint)

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 39):
Still I bet no-one has seen AKL that busy until today. I say they need to get on with building the 2nd runway, and extending the A380 pier (2 more A380 capable gates).

Agree, better to be well prepared with more spaces than you need than have this kind of shambles going on. Extend the pier and build the new Domestic terminal already

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-06 13:53:24 and read 19349 times.

Where did NZ136 go, I presume only CHC has a long enough runway for a wide body?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-06 14:09:34 and read 19323 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 43):

Sure did. I'd say it's probably more to do with the fact that CHC has the capability and room to handle a 772 internationally; and the far less risky place to operate into/out of.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkncj
Posted 2012-12-06 14:13:54 and read 19330 times.

Yup, NZ136 went to CHC.


I had a mate that was on NZ934, they waited on the ground for 3hours before being towed to a gate to get off!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-06 14:51:30 and read 19309 times.

Quoting haggis73 (Reply 38):
CZ305 directed to divert to CHC, ignored divert instructions, landed at AKL.

Whoa whoa whoa! Can an aircraft simply ignore an instruction to divert?

Wow sounds like quite the scene at AKL. Anyone manage to grab any snaps in the ensuing chaos?

In slightly other news, I saw a 2 page spread an a recent edition of Airliner World of the Mt Cook black ATR72. Booootiful!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Kaiarahi
Posted 2012-12-06 15:04:20 and read 19287 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 46):
Whoa whoa whoa! Can an aircraft simply ignore an instruction to divert?

Sure, depending on the fuel situation, for example. But in this case, CHC was presumably the alternate for which fuel was calculated.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-06 15:13:49 and read 19274 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 46):
Whoa whoa whoa! Can an aircraft simply ignore an instruction to divert?

Yea man, captains discretion at the end of the day in that case.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-06 15:44:23 and read 19252 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 43):
Where did NZ136 go, I presume only CHC has a long enough runway for a wide body?
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 44):
Sure did. I'd say it's probably more to do with the fact that CHC has the capability and room to handle a 772 internationally; and the far less risky place to operate into/out of.

I'd be curious to know the knock-on effect of this.

In my experience, at this time of year there are lots of Kiwis flying to holiday in Queensland on NZ135 but NZ136 (BNE-AKL) like the rest of the year has around 20% Economy and 40% Business Class passengers connecting on to North America.

Obviously the flights departing to North America would have been impacted too, but what happened to presumably around 50 passengers at Christchurch who were going to miss onward connections?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-06 17:16:58 and read 19190 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 49):

I'm pretty sure NZ136 got back in time for at least a connection to NZ2's departure. I know that AKL-HKG was delayed by an hour to accommodate delayed connections but obviously the chances of that being affected by inbound Aussies are pretty slim.

[Edited 2012-12-06 17:17:20]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-07 00:38:53 and read 18959 times.

I'm hoping someone could help me with the NZs 77W Y+ seating. Whats the difference between seats 24K and 26K (apart from 24K being considered a prefered seat and costing $75)? Does 24K have more leg room and how much does the wing and engine impact on the view out of 26K?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-07 00:46:26 and read 19011 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 48):
Yea man, captains discretion at the end of the day in that case.

But surely (legally?) they took on enough fuel for the diversion airport, which must have been CHC. Why would the Captain refuse? Can they refuse just because it's inconvenient?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-07 03:35:38 and read 18919 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 52):
Why would the Captain refuse? Can they refuse just because it's inconvenient?

Don't know. Hard to say without knowing what actually went on in the flight deck at that time.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-07 03:38:33 and read 18951 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 49):
I'd be curious to know the knock-on effect of this.

It landed 2045 ex CHC. those on NZ6 moved to NZ2, NZ8 was delayed anyway so waited. Not really much of a knock on... especially compared to the rest of the day

Quoting 777ER (Reply 51):
Whats the difference between seats 24K and 26K

Not enough to warrant the charge in that case IMO just closer to front. Engine does impact view. More reason for priority seating in Y only I think

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkncj
Posted 2012-12-07 18:51:06 and read 18714 times.

Does anyone know what the story is with ZK-TLB is it being scrapped?


Also anyone know what the major forcourt changes are at domestic from early Jan13

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-07 19:25:07 and read 18694 times.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 55):
Also anyone know what the major forcourt changes are at domestic from early Jan13

I hope they're getting rid of the 'extra' taxi stand area made for the world cup.. There's absolutely no room for cars picking up and dropping off people.. And taxis don't need as much room as they were given for it.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-07 22:05:14 and read 18608 times.

I have it on good authority that ZK-TLB is confirmed as being scrapped on site. Wings now removed and fuselage to be moved tomorrow to the AKL boneyard.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-08 02:58:40 and read 18491 times.

One of Air Pacific's Boeing 747-400s is having a C-Check and to cover its absence, the airline has wet-leased a EuroAtlantic Boeing 777-200ER. Does anyone know if it is scheduled to visit AKL anytime soon? Also China Southern is sending an A380 here on Monday, I believe. Might be worth heading out to the airport for its arrival.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 57):
I have it on good authority that ZK-TLB is confirmed as being scrapped on site. Wings now removed and fuselage to be moved tomorrow to the AKL boneyard.

Interesting, it was only delivered to Airwork a month or two ago (assuming this is the one that had the Kuban Airlines livery).

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-08 03:27:51 and read 18455 times.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 58):
Does anyone know if it is scheduled to visit AKL anytime soon?

Not scheduled to come to AKL at all, just LAX & HKG. we will be lucky if we get a technical swap...

Quoting zkojq (Reply 58):
Interesting, it was only delivered to Airwork a month or two ago (assuming this is the one that had the Kuban Airlines livery).

Yes, it was purchased as scrap from the desert and flown here for that purpose.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-08 16:06:56 and read 18252 times.

It's kicking off on the Honolulu route.....

AKL-HNL in Business on Air NZ drops from $2500 each way to $2100 long-term as soon as Hawaiian enters the route.

Which pretty much confirms that up to now Air NZ has (sensibly) used its monopoly position to limit supply in order to inflate fares.

But I wonder how S2S works on this route: Hawaiian effectively offers no product inferior to "Works" so Seat+/- Bag will sell only with deep discounting, which of course lowers yields.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-08 17:44:40 and read 18180 times.

Is West Coast US-HNL-AKL a buy in Y with Hawaiian ?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-08 18:07:00 and read 18177 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 61):
Is West Coast US-HNL-AKL a buy in Y with Hawaiian ?

Currently being pushed withn 2/32KG luggage and with HNL as a stopover, rather than a transfer (even though it is possible for some connections.)

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-08 18:30:17 and read 18149 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 62):
Currently being pushed withn 2/32KG luggage and with HNL as a stopover, rather than a transfer (even though it is possible for some connections.)

Rob....How much ?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-08 20:22:41 and read 18094 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 63):
Rob....How much ?

Without looking too deeply into it, There seem to be 4/4 8 day packages with hotels included
LAS $2099
LAX $2699
NYC $2959

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: nz2
Posted 2012-12-08 21:26:56 and read 18046 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 51):
I'm hoping someone could help me with the NZs 77W Y+ seating. Whats the difference between seats 24K and 26K (apart from 24K being considered a prefered seat and costing $75)? Does 24K have more leg room and how much does the wing and engine impact on the view out of 26K?


I dont believe there is any extra leg room between 24 and 26 K, yes the wing/engine starts to impede. My wife and I flew to London in 23A/B earlier this year, those seat would be worth some extra money but not 24 v 26, same result

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-09 00:26:53 and read 17915 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 54):
Quoting nz2 (Reply 65):

Thanks aerorob and NZ2. I've selected 23A returning. 23A/B and 23J/K are certainly seats to pay extra for for several reasons

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-10 02:52:56 and read 17433 times.

Any pixs of CZ's A380 @ AKL today? How did they manage 3 x A380's at once?

[Edited 2012-12-10 02:53:49]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-10 03:23:53 and read 17399 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 67):

Remote stand maybe? I saw an EK 388 on a remote stand a couple of days ago next to the gate 15/16 area, maybe a trail run for using A380 with stairs?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: byronicle6
Posted 2012-12-10 03:28:59 and read 17388 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 67):

I could be wrong but I believe it's departing CAN on the 10th and arriving into AKL today (11th).

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-10 03:43:16 and read 17394 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 67):
How did they manage 3 x A380's at once?

CZ arrived about 1.5-2 hrs after the arrival of the EK A380s.. Plenty of time there to offload one of them and send it to a remote in time for the CZ A380. Then the CZ A380 departs at 11 or so pm, way after the EK A380s depart.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-10 14:14:59 and read 17245 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 70):

CZ arrived about 1.5-2 hrs after the arrival of the EK A380s.. Plenty of time there to offload one of them and send it to a remote in time for the CZ A380. Then the CZ A380 departs at 11 or so pm, way after the EK A380s depart.

Aha ... and EK don't depart until 1840/1850 so there is time for CZ arrival at 1700 at one of those gates as a one off.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-11 04:16:37 and read 16959 times.

Today's BBC News website carries a feature on "The World's Biggest Cities" which should be mandatory reading for Air NZ route planners.

We have seen a number of posters on here, including interested visitors like LAXintl, suggest that Air NZ should focus international operations on East Asia.

When I have commented on the major Chinese cities being a few decades of development behind axed Air NZ destinations like Fukuoka or Nagoya or Taipei or Singapore such comments tend to be ignored or derided, as if some sort of Great Leap Forward allows them to be leapfrogged.

Well this article exposes the faulty logic which over-estimates Chinese demographic growth. "The world's largest city" - supposedly Chungking by its new name - turns out to cover an area the size of Austria, with the majority of the population living in rural poverty more than 24 hours' commute from the actual city.

And Shanghai, far from being a city of twenty-something million people with an economy the size of London turns out actually to have just over half the population of Delhi or Mumbai, with an economy probably around the size of Sydney.

I am all in favour of encouraging inbound tourism from China, although I'd prefer it to be on Chinese carriers at this stage. But there needs to be a sober analysis of what the market's actual size and potential really are. And the fact that over 90% of AKL-PVG passengers are still VFR, students and package tourists does not bode well, as such numbers would make Ryanair exit a market in a flash.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: motorhussy
Posted 2012-12-11 12:47:08 and read 16810 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 72):
And Shanghai, far from being a city of twenty-something million people with an economy the size of London turns out actually to have just over half the population of Delhi or Mumbai, with an economy probably around the size of Sydney.

Just read this article at...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16761784

...and, while it confirms China's financial capital as having closer to 16-million, I couldn't find any reference to Shanghai having an economy closer to that of Sydney. While I agree with your contention that China's economy is a developing one, it is developing at such a rate that if NZ doesn't get in on the ground floor, the lift will be overcrowded at any other.

Regards
MH

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: motorhussy
Posted 2012-12-11 12:51:30 and read 16797 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 67):
How did they manage 3 x A380's at once?

Hope someone got a photo or two of this!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-11 13:19:03 and read 16779 times.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 74):

It could only have been done from someone airside.. http://mrcaviation.blogspot.co.nz/2012/12/some-more-of-b-6139.html

Man, they even gave it a water cannon salute!!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-11 14:09:14 and read 16754 times.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 73):
While I agree with your contention that China's economy is a developing one, it is developing at such a rate that if NZ doesn't get in on the ground floor, the lift will be overcrowded at any other.

  

I think Air NZ would be point blank crazy to ignore this market:

http://www.tourism-review.com/china-...st-market-for-nz-tourism--news3477

"China has become New Zealand's official second largest market for tourism. NZ's Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment reported that the number of Chinese guests increased by 37 percent in the year ending in September.

Tourists from China have outspent for the first time the British tourists by over 10 million NZ dollars. The Chinese had spent 555 million (USD 458.15 million) in that period compared to the U.K.'s tourists spending 545 million."


I don't understand the objections to it and never have.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-11 14:44:25 and read 16783 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 76):
I think Air NZ would be point blank crazy to ignore this market:
Quoting mariner (Reply 76):
I don't understand the objections to it and never have.

Air New Zealand and the Realm of New Zealand have completely different needs and priorities.

The Realm of New Zealand benefits enormously from the spending of Chinese visitors, and as a result as Kiwi citizens we should welcome them and their business, but be blind to how they get there.

But Air New Zealand's only long-haul aircraft are configured with premium classes and seating density to allow them to operate anywhere on the long-haul network. Shanghai therefore is only a reasonable choice of destination for Air New Zealand if either:

a) the market can support 3 class aircraft in the configuration which also works for North America, or
b) the airline can devote high-density configured aircraft which match the current profile of a route whose demographics are roughly 90% VFR / students / package tourists and 10% "other".

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 73):
while it confirms China's financial capital as having closer to 16-million, I couldn't find any reference to Shanghai having an economy closer to that of Sydney

The commonly cited (and incorrect) statistic is that Shanghai has a population of 23 million, with a per capita GDP of US$12,800, implying an economy of $297 billion. Inner London - out as far as Heathrow - has a population of 8.17 million but per capita GDP of 44,400 Euros in 2009 ($57,741), meaning an economy of $472 billion - and that doesn't even include the commuter belt.

Now, the BBC's article shows that Shanghai's population - in terms of commutable distance - is actually only 16 million, which means that its economy can therefore be reduced by 16/23 x $297 billion to $206 billion.

Sydney has a population which can very, very conservatively be put at 4.7 million, which again excludes parts of its own commuter belt. And its last published GDP per capita was $66,984, suggesting an economy of $314 billion.

Even Southeast Queensland has a population of 3.05 million, which at the average Australian GDP of $40,847 gives it an economy of $125 billion.

In other words, combining the corrected Chinese city populations with very conservative and low estimates of the populations of London and Sydney gives relative economies of:

London: $472 billion
Sydney: $314 billion
Shanghai: $206 billion.
SE Queensland: $125 billion

Those are sobering figures for those who seek to exaggerate the potential of Shanghai as a long-haul destination for Air New Zealand. Particularly when fewer than 1 million residents of Shanghai are believed to have income exceeding $40,000 per year, which means that even potential market volume (as opposed to yield) is limited.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-11 15:02:13 and read 16759 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 77):
Air New Zealand and the Realm of New Zealand have completely different needs and priorities.

There is an unbridgeable gulf between us - you're all about classes and aircraft types and I'm all about bums on seats, because the Chinese still have to get here.

China/NZ is a burgeoning market which seems - to me - to be following a classic pattern of development between non-traditional markets. It allies - to me - to the changes I have seen in NZ since since I first arrived here by ship in 1965, when the immigration officer spotted me at the end of a queue of Europeans and called: "Come here, young man, and let me out a stamp on a British passport."

So as I said:

Quoting mariner (Reply 76):
I think Air NZ would be point blank crazy to ignore this market:

Because the times they are a'changing and those who don't change with them will be left behind.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-11 15:30:29 and read 16748 times.

For the sake of comparison with my earlier Shanghai comments, here are some current and terminated Air NZ Pacific Rim destinations:

Honolulu: Population 953,000, GDP per capita = $52,465 , Economy = $50 billion.
Auckland: Population 1.2 million, GDP per capita = $47,730, Economy = $57 billion. (2010 figures)
Greater Nagoya: Population 8.74 million, GDP per capita = $52,517, Economy = $459 billion (2004 figures!)
Taipei Metro Area: Population 3.55 million , GDP per capita = $48,400, Economy = $173 billion

Compared with:

Quoting koruman (Reply 77):
London: $472 billion
Sydney: $314 billion
Shanghai: $206 billion.
SE Queensland: $125 billion

Maybe I'm blind, but for Air NZ as opposed to the Realm of New Zealand I'm struggling to see why Shanghai and not Nagoya, Taipei and a lot more Honolulu services.

In fact, Shanghai is only 1600 miles closer to Auckland than Sao Paulo, and has a population equally unfamiliar with New Zealand. But at least Sao Paulo's population really is 20 million, and it really does have an economy of $437 billion, which makes it more than twice as big as Shanghai's.

In actual fact, the total city GDPs of Phoenix, Seattle and San Diego are each roughly the same as Shanghai's, but with many more residents earning high-enough incomes for international travel, and Portland is at around 50% of Shanghai's total GDP but with a lot more people in the international travel demographic.

You could mount an argument that Air NZ would do better to fly 787-8s to any of those cities, where they would at least sell some high-yielding tickets, rather than chase volume and suicide yields to China.

[Edited 2012-12-11 15:45:04]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-11 15:38:09 and read 16748 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 78):
There is an unbridgeable gulf between us - you're all about classes and aircraft types and I'm all about bums on seats, because the Chinese still have to get here.

Yes, they do.

But their combination of VFR, student and package holiday demographics does not justify any of Air NZ's current fleet. It justifies EITHER

a) an all-economy 350 seat 767-300ER, configured 2-4-2, OR
b) a two class 660 seat 747-400, with an all-economy lower deck and a mixed upper deck with 12 Business Class recliner seats plus Economy seating.

If Air NZ is willing to dedicate its remaining 747 fleet to China in high-density configuration, fine.

If Air NZ is willing to reconfigure some of its 767 or 777 aircraft for China in high-density configuration, then fine.

But they are currently planning on configuring the 789 fleet for China, which is utterly insane.

Even Ryanair are far too smart to operate long-haul flights for a VFR/student/package holiday demographic. But Air NZ is going to put its most efficient and modern aircraft on those routes.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-11 16:01:22 and read 16718 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 80):
But their combination of VFR, student and package holiday demographics does not justify any of Air NZ's current fleet. It justifies EITHER

I don't know why you're trying to persuade me - there is that unbridgeable gulf between us.

As I said, I'm about bums on seats and the rest is housekeeping, which really doesn't interest me.

And whether Air NZ should serve Nagoya or Taipei - or Fu King - may be an interesting question but is irrelevant to my basic point, which I've made twice before:

Quoting mariner (Reply 78):
Quoting mariner (Reply 76):
I think Air NZ would be point blank crazy to ignore this market:


People want to discuss aircraft types and seating lay-outs, fine go for it, it's why many are here - but always, I would hope, rationally, with a positive view of the service, not just a bash.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKOJH
Posted 2012-12-11 18:08:11 and read 16671 times.

NZ gave up on TPE the same time EVA AIR were on it, All I see is them going backwards,

They want to expand to other markets, but don't have any free aircraft in the right config, hence they have put all there eggs on the 787 and 2014. How the market will look in another 18 months is anyone's idea. !

They should have taken options on the 2 77W's they had going and had them in 2013 which would have given them some breathing space, used them for SFO/LAX/Vancover ETC, all they have done is axed routes to free up a/c.

But to now be highly considering sending a 300 seat 787-9 to China! what is going on. ??

A few years ago I read that one of the first 787 routes would be to Japan and they wanted to increase Tokyo to Double Daily. Clearly that has all changed.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-11 19:14:04 and read 16617 times.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 82):
But to now be highly considering sending a 300 seat 787-9 to China! what is going on. ??

They have no other aircraft with a CASK as low as the 789 which I assume they need to make money from the clientele they are serving.
A 789 will haul about 45t on a 12hr 30m sector such as AKL-PVG whereas the 767 they are presently using is limited to max passenger load of ~23t. Fuel burn is very similar for both aircraft. I'm with K'man on this one.Sure bums in seats is fine but at what cost?
Probably they could use the 789 on other routes and make more money off it. MEL-AKL-IAH would be such a route in my view. About 37t payload westbound , in fact probably better than what QF are doing with the 744ER on DFW-BNE-SYD.
Will wait and see what the new CEO has in mind.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-11 19:36:30 and read 16594 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 83):
Sure bums in seats is fine but at what cost?

From what you're saying, at a lesser cost than the 767.   

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-11 19:40:21 and read 16609 times.

I wonder if NZ took a look at the SQ stake in VS . There is the possibility of course that based on history SQ wouldn't return any phone calls.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-11 20:41:27 and read 16546 times.

I'm sorry, but giving up a whole market to a predatory carrier like CZ is not the answer. Give a cashed up carrier of 400+ aircraft and capable of such huge growth an inch and pretty soon they've taken a mile and a pound of flesh to boot - regardless of perceived customer type - that's a recipe for disaster. They have already showed interest in 2x daily and to flights beyond AKL. If CZ really do decide to head to South America via AKL and that's proper profit being lost. Screw the supposed low yields claimed. The fact is the new ancilliary revenue boost makes it very viable for NZ to operate to PVG. The 763 on the route says more about lack of spare aircraft than it does on NZs ability to operate to PVG.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 73):
t is developing at such a rate that if NZ doesn't get in on the ground floor, the lift will be overcrowded at any other.

Precisely, and crowded with cashed up, profitable competition...

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 85):
I wonder if NZ took a look at the SQ stake in VS . There is the possibility of course that based on history SQ wouldn't return any phone calls.

The same shares that DL just bought...

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Zkpilot
Posted 2012-12-11 21:43:14 and read 16501 times.

Any thoughts on NZ potentially leaving *A now that DL is buying 49% of VS and has a close relationship with VA (which NZ of course owns 19.99% of)? NZ hasn't being playing well with the others in *A of late. Although ST doesn't really have the prestige or size of *A yet.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-11 22:25:04 and read 16464 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
Any thoughts on NZ potentially leaving *A now that DL is buying 49% of VS

I don't see it myself - A few individual partnerships that are out of Star does not mean much in the current aviation climate - no more than the QF/EK agreement means that EK is joining oneworld. If NZ did leave Star it would not shack up with an Alliance again, but tailor-make it's own assorted strategic partners.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-11 22:36:17 and read 16439 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 86):
The 763 on the route says more about lack of spare aircraft than it does on NZs ability to operate to PVG.

I'm actually all for the China routes and am surprised at Koruman's hostility to it given they did exactly what he wanted and shifted down a gear to the 767s, which I agree are far more suited to the market.

If it really is just an aircraft availability issue, then that's some pretty poor management on NZ's part. The 787 delays have been recognised for long enough now that, if needed, the airline could have firmed up (or god forbid, leased!!!) 777 options. Or they could've brought back a few 767s, which (yes in hindsight, but I think I'm on record at the time) probably should've been kept on in some fashion rather than being cut from 10 to, what, 5?

Do you have a credible source for it being an availability issue? If not, I'd lean toward it simply being a more suitable aircraft.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 86):
. If CZ really do decide to head to South America via AKL and that's proper profit being lost.

I'm not sure you can count revenue forgone on a route you've totally ignored for, well, ever (Latin America) as an actual loss. I mean, it's a loss of potential revenue, yes, but NZ has never even tried on the route, which is their own damn fault. If CZ sees an opportunity in this vacancy and shuffles in, then all the best to it and tough titties NZ.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: WSTAKL
Posted 2012-12-11 22:56:59 and read 16447 times.

Can someone tell me why QF134 AKL-MEL, according to flightradar24 and flightaware was over the eastern Bay of Plenty region. Surely some kind of error?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-11 23:06:57 and read 16422 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
Any thoughts on NZ potentially leaving *A now that DL is buying 49% of VS and has a close relationship with VA (which NZ of course owns 19.99% of)? NZ hasn't being playing well with the others in *A of late. Although ST doesn't really have the prestige or size of *A yet.

I believe there is a cost relating to leaving *A which I don't think NZ would want to fork out, not to a degree where they have to leave the alliance anyway. NZ is also leading the management of the new LAX *A lounge which I don't think NZ would commit to if they were thinking about leaving.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZK-NBT
Posted 2012-12-12 00:15:48 and read 16387 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 89):
Do you have a credible source for it being an availability issue? If not, I'd lean toward it simply being a more suitable aircraft.

It is certainly partly avaliability with additional flights to North America being added and PER going 772, PVG was to be 5 weekly 772s from July again now reduced to 3 since YVR is increasing. I agree though that the 763 is probably better suited to PVG in its current configuration.

Do we yet know the configuration of the 772s when they are refitted? Maybe NZ will keep some of them instead in a less Premium configuration rather than the brand new 789s? Speaking of the 789s wasn't the layout meant to have been announced afew months back?!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-12 00:28:32 and read 16364 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 89):
Do you have a credible source for it being an availability issue? If not, I'd lean toward it simply being a more suitable aircraft.

you mean besides personally working in a very relevant operations department? In truth it is a combination of several factors, and yes I believe, and have stated on a number of previous occasions the 787 delay could have been better managed - I have put my own fleet suggestions forward on a number of occasions during these NZL threads. The use of the 763 3x a week and a 772 4x a week is more due to increasing PVG to daily and making use of the available gaps in the overall weekly fleet plan than anything - It was a matter of either operating a less than daily schedule (which isn't ideal given demand) or splitting the schedule over 2 fleets. A 12h45min flight into a slot restricted airport like PVG is not just a matter of saying "make it so" - it is a juggling act to best fit the overall operation. A daily 77E to PVG would have been to the detriment of the overall fleet rotation as it would have meant more parked time and less flexibility.
The 772 which goes to PER allows for better fleet utilisation (short aircraft TOD of 14h25 vs a PVG aircraft TOD of 36h) and keeping the aircraft airborne for more hours in the day to generate more money. It is NOT as many will tell you because the PER market necessarily warrants it year round. Same for HNL.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 89):
If CZ sees an opportunity in this vacancy and shuffles in, then all the best to it and tough titties NZ.

I agree - NZs loss, but the fact is that is the kind of thing which happens when you let a major world airline muscle in unabated on your home market as K'man suggests NZ should do if they were to dump the Chinese market and let CZ do what they like.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-12 05:38:51 and read 16232 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 86):
The 763 on the route says more about lack of spare aircraft than it does on NZs ability to operate to PVG.

Are NZ getting max passenger payload with the 763 to PVG ? PIANO-X suggests that they are not.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 89):
I'm not sure you can count revenue forgone on a route you've totally ignored for, well, ever (Latin America) as an actual loss. I mean, it's a loss of potential revenue, yes, but NZ has never even tried on the route, which is their own damn fault. If CZ sees an opportunity in this vacancy and shuffles in, then all the best to it and tough titties NZ.

What has never been clear to me is whether NZ is considering EZE or GRU as its South American destination or whether it is content to fly to SCL and use feeds from other carriers to/from other major cities. GRU presents a challenge that puts it right at the edge of the 77E capability. A stop at EZE would help but the extra costs involved probably would nix that. I believe that until the RR powered 77E gets an EDTO > 180m there is not much NZ can do about serving the eastern seaboard of South America. Now the 789 is good for 31t assuming a westbound sector time of ~ 15h 30m from GRU which is what a hypothetical flight plan that I have a copy of , showed. But the 789 will not have the necessary EDTO until at least 2-years after EIS with NZ.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-12 20:00:41 and read 15979 times.

http://auckland.scoop.co.nz/2012/12/...ew-initiatives-for-tourism-growth/

China Southern has even said that they would bring B787 to AKL as one of the first few destinations for their dreamliners. They have made daily AKL flights in no time and now they will beat NZ to have the dreamliner in AKL as well.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 94):
Are NZ getting max passenger payload with the 763 to PVG ? PIANO-X suggests that they are not.

I have read that NZ's 767's were payload restricted even when they were used on AKL-HKG. PVG is even further than HKG so I believe they can't get max payload. Looks like the only reason B767's are being used on PVG is to make daily.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-12 21:01:27 and read 15941 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 95):
they will beat NZ to have the dreamliner in AKL as well.

CZ was already supposed to have started here with 787s, but they decided at the last minute to upgrade/standardize the product into SYD and other places which have had a major mix of equipment. It was always going to happen this way.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-12-13 04:27:31 and read 15688 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 79):
Maybe I'm blind, but for Air NZ as opposed to the Realm of New Zealand I'm struggling to see why Shanghai and not Nagoya, Taipei and a lot more Honolulu services.

Maybe because there are 370,000 dollar millionaires living in Shanghai, to put this into perspective there are only 132,000 dollar millionaires in Australia, 411,000 in the UK, 1,6 million in Japan, and NZ fly to Canada where there are only 185,000 of them. Most tourists to NZ are either people with money or backpackers, Tourism NZ has always marketed NZ as a destination for top income earners, mid to lower income earners (backpackers exempted) are not the people we attract or even want to attract.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06...h-most-millionaires_n_1590824.html

http://shanghaiist.com/2012/06/01/sh...hai_home_to_90_billionaires_an.php

This would be another reason why NZ likes the Chinese.

Quote:
In the year-ending June 2012, New Zealand's primary sources for visitor arrivals were

Australia (1,175,296 arrivals);
the UK (214,448 arrivals);
the US (182,816 arrivals);
China (175,488 arrivals),
Japan (67,075 arrivals),
Germany (62,992 arrivals),
South Korea (53,840 arrivals)
and Canada (49,296 arrivals).
http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/dev.../the-facts-tourism-in-new-zealand/

Those 175k Chinese spent 5 billion NZD whilst they were here. The average spend for tourists in NZ is 2800 NZD per person. I'm sure it won't be long before the Chinese overtake US.

[Edited 2012-12-13 04:39:50]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-13 14:57:23 and read 15543 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 97):
Maybe because there are 370,000 dollar millionaires living in Shanghai, to put this into perspective there are only 132,000 dollar millionaires in Australia, 411,000 in the UK, 1,6 million in Japan, and NZ fly to Canada where there are only 185,000 of them. Most tourists to NZ are either people with money or backpackers,

Tourism NZ has always marketed NZ as a destination for top income earners, mid to lower income earners (backpackers exempted) are not the people we attract or even want to attract.

But that's the problem, isn't it?

The Chinese passengers who are coming on Air NZ to New Zealand are not the dollar millionaires. They are by our standards "mid-to-low income earners" and the only reason their daily spend is relatively high is because they are subject to very uncommunist short annual leave entitlements.

They don't stay at Huka and the other luxury lodges. They fly in on wholesale Discount Economy packaged fares, and they stay in a small number of hotels marketed by their travel agency, before being whisked around a small number of Chinese-owned shops.

I repeat, their custom is very, very welcome in New Zealand. But we are basically talking about a demographic comparable to South or West Auckland, not Remuera or Takapuna.

There are complex reasons for this, and I know that Mariner will call me a sneering snob, and that Xiaotung will be offended, but here goes nothing, based upon my previously-disclosed links to Hong Kong.

With PR China's affluent, we are very much talking about a nouveau riche demographic, and good luck to them. A nouveau riche demographic which has had a Communist Party-planned education, and is almost completely ignorant of New Zealand.

Their tastes and leisure interests are completely different not just to the traditional moneyed elites of Commonwealth countries but also to the American nouveau riche.

Very, very few will independently book a trip to Huka Lodge with Business Premier flights for a week of fishing, gourmet dining and fine wine. (I can't blame them, neither would I).

The dollar millionaires KiwiRob describes are far, far more likely to head for Macau for a long weekend of gambling and other pastimes that I cannot mention in a family-friendly forum. There is nothing unique about that, and anyone thinking this is unique to the Chinese should look up the death of the Emir of Dubai at the Gold Coast's Versace hotel seven years ago next month. What wouldn't I give for an exit like his!

I get the impression that Air New Zealand is looking at the number of dollar millionaires in Shanghai and assuming that they know something about NZ, or share the same interests and leisure preferences and booking profiles as western millionaires. Well I'm sorry, they don't.

I am not belittling those people - it's not their fault that they mostly don't even know that New Zealand exists and I've made quite clear that I'd rather behave like the late Emir of Dubai than go on a fishing holiday at a luxury lodge.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-13 17:28:00 and read 15440 times.

Tourism NZ activly markets to 'Active Considerers'. In China, 'Active Considerers' usually spend 10000 yuan or more on a trip here. Interestingly, 60% of them will travel to Australia on the same trip.

http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/mar...earch/active-considerers-research/

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 59):
Not scheduled to come to AKL at all, just LAX & HKG. we will be lucky if we get a technical swap...

That's a pity, always nice for there to be a wider variety of aircraft/liveries at Auckland Airport.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 59):
Yes, it was purchased as scrap from the desert and flown here for that purpose.

Oh, well that makes sense then. Cheers for clearing that up. Does anyone have photos, by any chance?

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
Any thoughts on NZ potentially leaving *A now that DL is buying 49% of VS and has a close relationship with VA (which NZ of course owns 19.99% of)? NZ hasn't being playing well with the others in *A of late.

IMO, Star still has far more to offer Air New Zealand than Skyteam (or oneworld, for that matter), even if relations with Singapore Airlines aren't the best. I hope they choose to stay.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-12-13 23:23:14 and read 15291 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 98):
They don't stay at Huka and the other luxury lodges.

And you know the cliental of all the luxury lodges in NZ how? I have a friend who works at a luxury lodge as a greenkeeper for there golf course, lots of rich Chinese come here on golfing holidays, our casinos are also full of wealthy Chinese.

Quoting koruman (Reply 98):
I am not belittling those people

I think you are

Quoting koruman (Reply 98):
it's not their fault that they mostly don't even know that New Zealand exists

This is simply not true either, from my experience (mostly Chinese shipbuilders) I don't think I've met a Chinese person who doesn't know of NZ, in fact I think I'm far more likely to find someone from the US (sorry guys) who doesn't know that NZ exists.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-15 23:48:42 and read 14737 times.

NZs next ATR 72-600 ZK-MVB is flying in France

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © T.Laurent



Not sure what to think about the black and white livery honestly

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ1
Posted 2012-12-15 23:53:41 and read 14782 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 101):

I think it looks OK on the smaller aircraft such as the ATR above, but think it will look rather bland on a 777-300ER due to the amount of fuselage that will just be white.

NZ1

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-15 23:55:53 and read 14766 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 101):

Bring back the blue and teal. If anyone asks me what I think the blandest livery is, I'll be saying air nz.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: WSTAKL
Posted 2012-12-16 00:19:54 and read 14730 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 103):
It's efffing horrible.

Well said that man. Everyone 'takes the michael' out of AY and JL's revised bland liveries, but this is just as bad.

And as has been said in various posts and threads in the past, the belief that the colour black represents New Zealand due to the fact 15 guys are good at chucking and kicking a ball around a field, really irritates me.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: cchan
Posted 2012-12-16 00:53:11 and read 14700 times.

Quoting WSTAKL (Reply 105):
the belief that the colour black represents New Zealand due to the fact 15 guys are good at chucking and kicking a ball around a field

Perhaps black paint is just cheaper? They removed meals, in flight magazines, and everything else they think unnecessary, now they have run out of things to remove, and they look at saving on the paint?

On another note, is the CX and NZ codeshare still going ahead? They said tickets go on sale from 12 Dec 2012, but neither CX nor NZ are selling codeshare flights on AKL-HKG. Did an availability search on amadeus.net on 12 Dec for flights in May 2013, NZ did put up the codeshare flights (on CX107/108), CX didn't. Checked again on 13 Dec, and these codeshares have disappeared. Airpoints show some information about earning on CX, but NZ is not listed as a partner in Asiamiles (yet?), nor is there any information about earning on NZ for Asiamiles members. It is very obvious which party is more keen on the alliance there.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-16 01:02:38 and read 14682 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 104):
Bring back the blue and teal
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 103):
It's efffing horrible

Agree with everyone on here. It's a shame the black is being brought in

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-16 03:40:39 and read 14606 times.

Does anyone know why an Atlas Air 747-400F with an Air Pacific call sign flew over yesterday? Air Pacific doesn't occur to me as an airline that would need enough extra freight capacity to justify chartering a 747F.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 101):
Not sure what to think about the black and white livery honestly

Yuck...at least Finnair's livery is bold. This one is horrid...the black of the tail looks really heavy and has the effect of drawing one's eye towards it, away from everything else......the black tail worked on ZK-OKP's livery where it was balanced out by the big Hobbit sticker, but on this one it doesn't due to all the excess blank white fuselage. Oh and the new font sucks..... because it is so subtle it looks like an afterthought, just like it does on ZK-OKP. The old one looked much more sophisticated. Two good bits: the Mount Cook Flower (hadn't noticed this before) and how it says 'ATR72-600' on the top of the vertical stabilizer (probably not visible from the ground though).

I really like Air New Zealand, and for someone my age I'm quite a loyal customer, but often it feels like they are trying to scare me away. I really hope they get their livery sorted before the first the first 'new (except for ZK-OAB, ZK-OJQ, ZK-OJR, and ZK-OJS)' A320 gets delivered or the first 777-200ER gets a refit (and probably a repaint).

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 102):
It's efffing horrible.

  

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 104):
Bring back the blue and teal.

      and the Pacific Wave.

Quoting WSTAKL (Reply 105):
And as has been said in various posts and threads in the past, the belief that the colour black represents New Zealand due to the fact 15 guys are good at chucking and kicking a ball around a field, really irritates me.

   Sporting success =/= national identity.

Quoting cchan (Reply 106):
Perhaps black paint is just cheaper? They removed meals, in flight magazines, and everything else they think unnecessary, now they have run out of things to remove, and they look at saving on the paint?

  

[Edited 2012-12-16 04:22:34]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Kaiarahi
Posted 2012-12-16 05:11:27 and read 14557 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 101):
Not sure what to think about the black and white livery honestly

Looks like a cheap and nasty afterthought - like the signage on a dollarama store or an appliance parts warehouse. Classless.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-16 05:57:32 and read 14545 times.

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 102):
I think it looks OK on the smaller aircraft such as the ATR above, but think it will look rather bland on a 777-300ER due to the amount of fuselage that will just be white.

Are you allowed to show us what the proposed livery a few years back was? I remember you dropping hints at the time. Or maybe even just describe it?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-16 06:45:25 and read 14526 times.

Quoting cchan (Reply 106):
but neither CX nor NZ are selling codeshare flights on AKL-HKG.

Why would NZ permit its AKL-HKG flight to be "sabotaged" by allowing code sharing on CX for this sector. It seems to me that the CX 343 and NZ 77E products may not be comparable. Just one example when the 77E goes 10 wide in Y the seat width will be a full inch narrower than the CX 343.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-16 11:15:52 and read 14458 times.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 108):
Does anyone know why an Atlas Air 747-400F with an Air Pacific call sign flew over yesterday? Air Pacific doesn't occur to me as an airline that would need enough extra freight capacity to justify chartering a 747F.

It wasn't a 744F but a 744 Pax version. Replaced the EuroAtlantic 772 on wet lease while FJ's 744 is in maintenance.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-16 11:24:29 and read 14460 times.

Quoting cchan (Reply 106):
Perhaps black paint is just cheaper?

By itself, no, not really. But when did a couple of thousand dollars come into the question? If they were on the budget side, they would have picked a livery like:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Schaefer

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 111):

And apparently HK's Govt has not approved of this 'strategic partnership'..

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ1
Posted 2012-12-16 18:04:50 and read 14270 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 110):

No I can't sorry. NDA's and all that jazz to contend with now.

NZ1

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-16 18:07:09 and read 14272 times.

Back to the Honolulu discussion.......

People might be interested to read this article:

http://www.news.com.au/travel/holida...awaii/story-e6frfqd9-1226537188700

It translates into the following changes in the number of weekly flights to Honolulu from Australian ports, compared to six years ago:

Sydney: 18 in 2012, 8 in 2006.
Brisbane: 3 in 2012, 0 in 2006.
Melbourne: 3 in 2012, 0 in 2006.

That's an increase from 8 to 24 weekly flights.

It's great that Hawaiian will now compete from Auckland, but it's crucial that Air NZ not be allowed to enter an anti-competitive codeshare arrangement with them. There's plenty of room for them both.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-16 18:40:10 and read 14215 times.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10854497

China Southern wants to partner with NZ. I don't think NZ would be interested though having CX as a partner already.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-16 18:41:42 and read 14226 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 113):

At least with that scheme, the font looks classy lol. It's a shame, I haven't met one person yet (Staff and public) who thinks the black tail looks good.

Maybe they will do like what JAL did with the Crane and change it back to the teal within a year or two

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-16 18:50:48 and read 14221 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 117):
At least with that scheme, the font looks classy lol. It's a shame, I haven't met one person yet (Staff and public) who thinks the black tail looks good.

Maybe they will do like what JAL did with the Crane and change it back to the teal within a year or two

Haha it only looks good on a 762. Anything longer and that title starts to become less significant.

Yeah and if they do revert back to the previous livery, what a waste of money spent on changing the font back. I have a feeling it's another case of typical New Zealand short sightedness.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkncj
Posted 2012-12-16 22:32:25 and read 14051 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 113):
By itself, no, not really. But when did a couple of thousand dollars come into the question? If they were on the budget side, they would have picked a livery like:

Ah the days of NBJ only flying AKL-SYD-AKL and AKL-CHC-AKL

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-17 00:34:49 and read 13924 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 112):
It wasn't a 744F but a 744 Pax version. Replaced the EuroAtlantic 772 on wet lease while FJ's 744 is in maintenance.

That explains it, thanks. I didn't know Atlas Air had Pax 747-400s.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-12-17 01:30:23 and read 13868 times.

It would have been pretty easy making the black look good on a plane yet they woosed out, I like this guys ideas.

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00015306.jpg

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKOKQ
Posted 2012-12-17 02:04:28 and read 13841 times.

The Hobbit was in Brisbane today, was great to see her in the flesh and she sure draws a crowd.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb...95087693257&type=1&theater

[Edited 2012-12-17 02:05:27]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-17 02:17:55 and read 13824 times.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 119):

Indeed, fond memories of domestic widebody travel!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: TN486
Posted 2012-12-17 02:29:59 and read 13819 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 15):
It will be interesting to see the annual results mid next year when QF announces another massive loss and NZ reports a profit again. I wonder then if some will still continue to pick apart NZ's performance and changes.

Would like to revisit this line of thought in 3 years time.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-17 17:18:36 and read 13530 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 121):
It would have been pretty easy making the black look good on a plane yet they woosed out, I like this guys ideas.

So do I! And imagine how good that would be in the blue/teal colours.

One can only hope that a change of CEOs brings with it a change in taste.

Quoting TN486 (Reply 124):
Would like to revisit this line of thought in 3 years time.

Indeed. Frankly, I doubt NZ will be standalone by then and will have been swalloed up by an Etihad move on VA and NZ. At least, I hope so. Equally, we could see Etihad just gun for VA and ignore NZ altogether. In terms of long-term strategic importance, NZ really doesn't have much to offer anyone.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-19 18:21:55 and read 12944 times.

I haven't had the patience to check if someone already asked this, but why doesn't NZ route its AKL-LHR westbound flight via SIN (maybe finally sending the Koru there) instead of HKG with CX? Out-of-alliance partnerships seem strange when there is a viable partner within the same alliance, for the same reason that I couldn't wrap my head around QF sleeping with the enemy (EK) rather than QR...

ON a completely different note, how long will SFO see the 747?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: cchan
Posted 2012-12-19 19:29:31 and read 12944 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 113):
And apparently HK's Govt has not approved of this 'strategic partnership'..

any source to this, would be interesting to know. thanks.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-19 20:41:49 and read 12908 times.

Meanwhile, it appears we're on the verge of a return to duopoly days on the Tasman with the ACCC approving the QF/EK tie-up, but for 5 years instead of 10 and a limit on capcity reducitons on the Tasman - I'm thinknig this equates to approval on similar terms to the NZ/DJ tie-up.

Slippery slope, huh?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-20 04:25:14 and read 12693 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 126):
ON a completely different note, how long will SFO see the 747?

Until the 744 is retired from the fleet...

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 128):
Slippery slope, huh?


If monopolies and duopolies are not your bag then New Zealand is probably not the right country to reside in. That is just part of everyday life here.

And if EY puts their boot in like you want, then you'll have it more so because for sure they will eventually want to tie the two up together as one entity, even if they maintain the separate brands like AF/KL.

The global airline market is consolidating, and airlines are pulling out of thin/marginal routes the world over in order to add frequency/use their fleet for effectively on the routes they still do well on . New Zealand as a market is both thin and marginal in just about every respect. If airlines cannot make money then they arrange partnerships that best suit their own needs for their own niche. Air New Zealand makes money by holding high market share in a small market, and most airlines can not be bothered fighting for the meagre leftovers of what is already a small and insignificant market - There are easier and more cost effective routes to make money on. The fact that we even have so many airlines still flying their own metal to AKL is remarkable given how low yielding and cost prohibitive it is to fly here. The transtasman still has CI/LA in addition to QF/JQ/EK & NZ/VA.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-20 14:18:20 and read 12522 times.

Will CZ be sending the A380 to AKL on a permanent basis?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-20 14:57:58 and read 12479 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 129):
If monopolies and duopolies are not your bag then New Zealand is probably not the right country to reside in. That is just part of everyday life here.

I like this roll over and accept it mentality, very New Zealand. But I suppose it conforms to the company line (how NZ can oppose this when it mirrors the Virgin deal, I dunno).

As you state, there aren't a whole lot of other competitors lining up to dive in. Which is exactly why regulators should do everything possible to maintain existing competition. Neither QF (group) nor EK were going to pull off the Tasman. Nor likely was DJ, if only for the need to maintain the more lucrative routes to the Pacific Islands.

But you know, ho hum, whatevs. Right?

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 129):
The fact that we even have so many airlines still flying their own metal to AKL is remarkable given how low yielding and cost prohibitive it is to fly here

Are you basing this on your experience with NZ? I suspect a lot of the airlines flying to AKL have a lower cost base than NZ. And how do we know their yields are crummy? They can't be that bad if airlines like CX and SQ still send their metal here.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-20 15:07:41 and read 12463 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 131):
But you know, ho hum, whatevs. Right?

I'd rather the market work it out.

For many (leisure and VFR) flying is discretionary and they can elect not to go if the fares are perceived to be out of whack.

Airlines are extraordinarily price sensitive. If traffic drops off, they (usually) quickly adjust. Market share is a compelling imperative (rightly or wrongly) and no one is deliberately trying to fly half-empty planes.

Or if there is a perceived unfulfilled demand, it would be an open invitation to someone - Tiger, say - to come in and restore the market balance.

The idea that the Qantas/Emirates tie-up is being held hostage (five years instead of ten) because of the Tasman routes is silly, I think. If the regulator wants to flex his muscles, carve those routes out.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-20 16:53:48 and read 12400 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 132):
I'd rather the market work it out.

Same here. deregulation and a free market is the only way to go. regulators in this part of the world are far too powerful and involved for their own good. They should let the market regulate itself. A deregulated market is healthy and not artificially propped up by regulator/government interference.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 130):
Will CZ be sending the A380 to AKL on a permanent basis?

not unless they did decide to go to South America...

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 131):
Are you basing this on your experience with NZ? I suspect a lot of the airlines flying to AKL have a lower cost base than NZ. And how do we know their yields are crummy? They can't be that bad if airlines like CX and SQ still send their metal here.

I know most of the airline reps and Station Managers personally, having handled many of their services for many years. I am aware of many of their cost bases, and yes many are lower than NZs, but that doesn't necessarily make things inherently more profitable for them. Most carriers no longer have year round yields like they used to when I started in the industry. I think you would be surprised at how closeto the wind many of these airlines operate

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-20 19:12:11 and read 12304 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 133):
Same here. deregulation and a free market is the only way to go. regulators in this part of the world are far too powerful and involved for their own good. They should let the market regulate itself. A deregulated market is healthy and not artificially propped up by regulator/government interference.
Quoting mariner (Reply 132):
I'd rather the market work it out.

Generally, I would agree. Except aerorobnz pointed out explicitly how, from the customer perspective, the market has failed. New Zealand's market characteristics makes it highly unlikely that another airline would bother entering the market in the event of mono/duopolistic pricing. The propspects for a home-grown solution are even lower, given past experience (predatory proicing from major players, bung business plans) and a dearth of investment capital. Hence why I would argue we have to do everything possilbe to maintain the existing competition.

And what's the last resort when a market fails/is failing? Regulators. And I'm glad we've got them.

Quoting mariner (Reply 132):
Airlines are extraordinarily price sensitive.

As are customers. But NZ is increasingly less interested in price-sensitive passengers. At least, that's what they tell shareholders.

Quoting mariner (Reply 132):
Or if there is a perceived unfulfilled demand, it would be an open invitation to someone - Tiger, say - to come in and restore the market balance.

Tiger would have been an option, had it not just been bought by Virgin.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 133):
I think you would be surprised at how closeto the wind many of these airlines operate

Not at all. It's razor thin margins are notorious. But clearly the marginal benefit of flying to AKL outweighs that of serving other major world cities. Or perhaps these carriers take a more sophisticated view of their operations, seeing how serving a destination enhances the overall performance of their network. Regardless, the underlying cost base does count, particularly if you're looking at a route through a narrow mindset of a standalone operation.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-20 19:46:19 and read 12285 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 134):
And what's the last resort when a market fails/is failing? Regulators. And I'm glad we've got them.

I don't see that the market is "failing."

I might the concept of regulators as a safety net, but not as a nanny. I'm a big boy, I don't need one.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 134):
Tiger would have been an option, had it not just been bought by Virgin.

It doesn't matter who owns Tiger, the business model is based on lower fares. If Mr. Borghetti wants to change that, he's bought a pig in a poke.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-12-20 21:37:58 and read 12201 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 135):
It doesn't matter who owns Tiger, the business model is based on lower fares. If Mr. Borghetti wants to change that, he's bought a pig in a poke.

Of course ownership matters. Ownership equals control. Control over where what was a competitor may now deploy resources, its rate of growth, its overall strategy. Contrast that with an independent Tiger.

I'm in Australia for work at the moment and much of the analyst/government reaction to the Tiger deal that I've been privvy to was of the suspicion that it was really just a move to rid Virgin of a competitor (along with Skywest, which could have grown on the back of the west's resource boom).

Quoting mariner (Reply 135):
I'm a big boy, I don't need one.

I suggest then that you're overestimating your ability to influence things. Remind me again how you managed to convince Telecom to lower termination rates and split the company in two. In an environment where the population is small and the distance is great, I think New Zealand has pretty robust regulatory environment. And if you're bemused as to why it exists as it does, then there's your answer.

Anyway, moaning aside, I'll be writing to Brownlee, given the alliance still needs New Zealand regulatory approval (and Singaporean, for some reason). It's not much, and yeah it probably wont make a jot of difference, but better than going round in circles on here.

[Edited 2012-12-20 21:43:34]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-20 22:09:38 and read 12191 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 136):
Of course ownership matters.

Jetstar provides (generally) lower fares than Qantas. It is it's reason for being.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 136):
I suggest then that you're overestimating your ability to influence things. Remind me again how you managed to convince Telecom to lower termination rates and split the company in two.

On my own? I don't claim to be able to influence anything much - or even at all. Even my vote in New Zealand is corrupted by MMP. Regulators, again?

And my war with Telecom is ongoing. They have never been able to explain to me how I get "free" local calls when I can only make any calls with an expensive plan. It's bull dust, but I guess it has regulatory approval.

I have just been quite strenuously quizzed on the phone by someone at Air NZ as to why I put the airline as my 2nd choice for TT travel but I don't expect it to achieve anything. I can only hope they'll do something about the catering on my last flight, several pax complained about it, as did I. The power of more than one, perhaps?

Mostly, I vote with my wallet. What else can "one" do?

Write letters? Sure, I'm all for that and I write a few. Go for it.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-20 22:10:43 and read 12207 times.

Would LAX-AKL be a good route for the AA 788? NZ has a monopoly on direct services between the two countries so there's probably space to undercut their prices.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-21 02:26:26 and read 12038 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 138):

IMHO I'm not expecting AA to land in AKL any time soon as AA have connections to New Zealand via Australia obviously with QF. DL maybe, but then again DL already operate to Australia and DL and Virgin have a code-share deal on New Zealand flights. Could DL decide to operate LAX-AKL-SYD? UA were going to be operating IAH-AKL flights by now with the B788 but obviously UA used the Southwest being granted International rights as the excuse for cancelling those flights.

In terms of AC, no, especially not with NZ operating YVR flights

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-21 16:01:49 and read 11830 times.

Going from LAX to AKL involves a significant backtrack, and QF flew the route until recently. Maybe AA could time it to connect with LAX-LHR.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-21 18:20:16 and read 11753 times.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...0747/Push-for-magnificent-Mainland

Could we see the return of NZ's CHC-LAX service with the new CEO?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: gemuser
Posted 2012-12-21 19:20:13 and read 11699 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 138):
Would LAX-AKL be a good route for the AA 788? NZ has a monopoly on direct services between the two countries so there's probably space to undercut their prices.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 139):

IMHO I'm not expecting AA to land in AKL any time soon as AA have connections to New Zealand via Australia obviously with QF
Quoting 777ER (Reply 139):
Going from LAX to AKL involves a significant backtrack, and QF flew the route until recently. Maybe AA could time it to connect with LAX-LHR.

IMHO the problem with this suggestion is that AA has plenty of other routes that probably would make more money than LAX-AKL. I don't expect AA to serve ANYWHERE in the SW Pacific, with their own metal/plastic in the near future. With their JBA with QF they probably gather almost as much or more profit as they would with any combination of routes they served themselves with NO capital outlay on their part. It'd have to be a VERY profitable route to attract AA own metal, and I really doubt there is such a route in the SW Pacific.

Gemuser

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-21 21:26:47 and read 11600 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 141):
Could we see the return of NZ's CHC-LAX service with the new CEO?

The article suggests they think ti will happen, as well as a China service. I think China - PVG? - would be interesting.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-tim...8/Chinese-visitors-good-for-Wanaka

"China overtook the UK to become New Zealand's second-biggest tourism market in the year to November 2012.

Australia remained the biggest source of visitors, accounting for 45 percent of all visitors compared with 8 percent for China.

Population statistics manager Andrea Blackburn said arrivals from China reached 194,800 in November, up 38 percent on the previous year.

In contrast, visitor numbers from the UK have been declining for the last five years, with a 17 percent decrease in the last 12 months bring the number down to 191,400.

Visitors from China were mostly holidaymakers (71 percent) with a median age of 47.

Lake Wanaka tourism chief executive James Helmore said between 20 and 25 percent of Chinese visitors ended up coming to the Southern Lakes region.

The Chinese New Year was going to be ''massive'' for Queenstown and Wanaka in 2013 with four star accommodation almost booked out, he said."


I guess it wouldn't be high frequency.  

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Mr AirNZ
Posted 2012-12-22 00:10:08 and read 11495 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 141):
Could we see the return of NZ's CHC-LAX service with the new CEO?

The problem being last time it was tried it didn't lead to any growth in the overall New Zealand to L.A. market, it simply cannibalised some of the Auckland to L.A. market. Especially post Earthquake in Chch, what has really changed?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKOJH
Posted 2012-12-22 00:27:30 and read 11490 times.

Apart from HA coming to AKL think it was raised in another thread, that no other US airline is going to start an AKL service so NZ have got it to themselves until JQ think about it.

have notice that the 787's are running into some teething problems, most recently LOT's first 2 787's went tech! within a few hours with a few problems, will this run into the 787-9 program?? and can NZ afford any more delays!!??

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-22 01:34:21 and read 11446 times.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 145):
Apart from HA coming to AKL think it was raised in another thread, that no other US airline is going to start an AKL service so NZ have got it to themselves until JQ think about it.

I wonder if EK would push QF to reopen AKL-LAX and then offer some RTW options. It has been a known fact that EK wanted to start the route themselves but I wonder if they could muster enough capacity to get QF to reinstate such a route as QF and not JQ.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Zkpilot
Posted 2012-12-22 01:41:46 and read 11440 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 146):
I wonder if EK would push QF to reopen AKL-LAX and then offer some RTW options. It has been a known fact that EK wanted to start the route themselves but I wonder if they could muster enough capacity to get QF to reinstate such a route as QF and not JQ.

There has been talk of late of this... it would be a QF flight as EK would not be able to operate it. If EK were to pick up half the tab then it might become viable again for QF.
Along similar lines is that QF is apparently now considering SYD-DFW-AKL-SYD with A380s.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-22 03:36:36 and read 11377 times.

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 144):
The problem being last time it was tried it didn't lead to any growth in the overall New Zealand to L.A. market, it simply cannibalised some of the Auckland to L.A. market. Especially post Earthquake in Chch, what has really changed?

I understand NZ's reluctance to fly long haul anywhere other than AKL, but it will not stop foreign airlines operating into CHC as they don't have this problem. Once that happens the Auckland long haul market is cannibalised anyway. Perhaps what has changed is the pressure from other current and potential foreign carriers.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-22 12:15:36 and read 11229 times.

Could someone tell me please what aircraft is operating NZ6 tonight please?

[Edited 2012-12-22 12:18:57]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-22 15:33:48 and read 11133 times.

Anyone know the delivery flight details for ZK-MVB? It's showing as delivered to NZ 22/12/12!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZK-NBT
Posted 2012-12-22 18:08:15 and read 11066 times.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 147):
Along similar lines is that QF is apparently now considering SYD-DFW-AKL-SYD with A380s.

Hmm, and where would they get the A380s from? Reduce LHR further? Or LAX, which I can't see them doing. I think they just added a new F lounge at HKG and the A380 is will soon be the only aircraft with F so I don't see them removing those.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 145):
Apart from HA coming to AKL think it was raised in another thread, that no other US airline is going to start an AKL service so NZ have got it to themselves until JQ think about it.

I still think maybe DL could seriously consider AKL. Other than that last I heard AIAL were still talking with UA, though UA in star with NZ means likely not from LAX or SFO and IAH isn't happening.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 141):
Could we see the return of NZ's CHC-LAX service with the new CEO?

I wouldn't think so myself, maybe JQ from CHC rather than potentially AKL? I think CZ will do CAN-CHC sometime though.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: BonzoLab
Posted 2012-12-22 20:05:51 and read 10989 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 150):

Sometime during the afternoon of the 27th.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-22 21:07:00 and read 11038 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 138):
Would LAX-AKL be a good route for the AA 788? NZ has a monopoly on direct services between the two countries so there's probably space to undercut their prices.

I'm pretty sure AA's cost base is quite a bit higher than that of Air New Zealand.

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 151):
I wouldn't think so myself, maybe JQ from CHC rather than potentially AKL? I think CZ will do CAN-CHC sometime though.

Qantas' AKL-LAX flights were already the longest route operated by an A330, so I think that flying CHC-LAX with an A330 would be a bit too far.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-22 22:09:11 and read 10993 times.

All flights from WLG are delayed or cancelled this afternoon due to fog. My flight to AKL was cancelled. Now re-booked on tomorrows LAX flight.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel...-sees-Wellington-flights-cancelled

Anyone know the rego operating NZ2?

[Edited 2012-12-22 22:12:02]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-23 00:07:34 and read 10907 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 154):

It's gonna be chaos tomorrow. Especially if the fog doesn't lift

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: haggis73
Posted 2012-12-23 01:02:46 and read 10871 times.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 154):
Anyone know the rego operating NZ2?

Looking at tomorrows sheet when I left work tonight, it was OKP.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-23 03:55:01 and read 10763 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 155):

Sounded like chaos. I arrived back in AKL at 7pm and they were saying that there was no space for rebookings until the 15:30 flight. And I don't suppose they have spare widebody capacity as that'll all be on the Islands/Aussie?


A side note - I took the first Air NZ/Mt Cook Airline flight back to MON yesterday... What an awesome experience it was. Even those oblivious to it were certainly happy with the stopover.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: 777ER
Posted 2012-12-23 04:00:14 and read 10766 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 155):

Wellington's expecting low cloud with light winds. Guess PPQ and PMR are always an option if the weather looks touch and go. Tried to change to a PPQ flight at WLG yesterday but the time was pushing it. When I left WLG yesterday to come home around 4.30pm the lines of passengers wanting to speak to check-in staff was stretching over to the VA and JQ counters.

Quoting haggis73 (Reply 156):

SWEET! Thanks for some good news   Now I've just got to make that flight!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-23 13:06:03 and read 10612 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 156):

That's pretty cool, I remember flying into there a few years ago, that was a good experience, I can only imagine it would be alot more so in an ATR.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 157):

Probably best to set yourself a cut off time where by after that you start trekking up to PMR or PPQ. Read the stuff article this morning and it said there is still a good chance of fog rolling in again this afternoon. Either way, hope you make your flight

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Zkpilot
Posted 2012-12-23 14:42:57 and read 10575 times.

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 150):
Hmm, and where would they get the A380s from? Reduce LHR further? Or LAX, which I can't see them doing. I think they just added a new F lounge at HKG and the A380 is will soon be the only aircraft with F so I don't see them removing those.

QF currently has a spare A380 since Nancy Bird came back (when not refitting other A380s). The aircraft also currently spend about 15 hours each day on the ground at LHR. With the EK deal they could probably change one of those back to leaving in the morning gaining an extra 12 hours worth of aircraft. Some minor tweaks to other flights and you'd have it.
Of course I would have though frequency (daily) would be more important than capacity especially since capacity isn't an issue on this flight.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-24 01:28:18 and read 10287 times.

I just got in from an afternoon trip down to Wellington. Lots of people in the terminal but seemed to be ok, flights just 100% LF. The weather was very pleasant in WLG, certainly much better than AKL on arrival...

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkojq
Posted 2012-12-24 04:06:14 and read 10226 times.

Has Wellington's Night Curfew been lifted? It is 1AM yet ZK-PBA just landed and ZK-OJI is lining up for final approach.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkncj
Posted 2012-12-24 12:08:17 and read 10102 times.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 161):
Has Wellington's Night Curfew been lifted? It is 1AM yet ZK-PBA just landed and ZK-OJI is lining up for final approach.

I know there is something in the rules that in some cases will allow delayed Internationals services arrive up to a certain time past curfew.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-24 17:41:03 and read 9989 times.

Quoting deconz (Reply 149):
Anyone know the delivery flight details for ZK-MVB? It's showing as delivered to NZ 22/12/12!
Quoting BonzoLab (Reply 151):
Sometime during the afternoon of the 27th.

ZK-MVB overnighted PEN and is on www.flightradar24.com as 'SXI1288', presently between KUL and SIN with an a A340 icon as it's been misidentifying all the way as A340-313X F-WJKP. It arrived PEN from somewhere in India.

ZK-MVB showed up on www.flightradar24.com on 22 Dec as 'ZKMVB' at 0842UTC heading east near Marseille until out of reception range about 1142UTC over the Ionian Sea heading towards Egypt. Later that day it changed to 'SXI1288' and from 1812UTC was heading east from north of Riyadh then over Qatar to AAN (Al Ain UAE) arriving about 1942UTC.

This delivery flight has been contracted out to the company Yorden (SXI899) works for. Was ZK-MVA delivered by Mount Cook pilots or contracted out as well?

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aotearoa
Posted 2012-12-24 22:58:27 and read 9833 times.

Merry Christmas to you all!

May 2013 be a happy, healthy (aren't these the essential foundations?) and 'airliner' filled year for each of you.

Thank you to all who continually support this New Zealand centric thread.

Regards and best wishes from the 'Land of the long White Cloud' (which happens to make it a most interestingly little country to operate airliners in!).

Aotearoa

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: HLZCPH
Posted 2012-12-24 23:46:38 and read 9799 times.

Thanks Aotearoa, may there be blue skys ahead for you and yours.

While we have our differences, some stated more than others! It certainly keeps things interesting, but that is the industry.

Looking forward to more air travel in 2013!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-25 00:54:23 and read 9771 times.

It's the differences which make it fun!

I have some ding-dong arguments with Mariner, but I'm actually rather fond of him. It's rather sad that I'm posting here on Christmas Day, and there are several people whom I've never met who post on these threads for whom I feel greater affection than the guests I'm currently avoiding.......

Merry Christmas everyone.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-25 01:38:01 and read 9735 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 166):
there are several people whom I've never met who post on these threads for whom I feel greater affection than the guests I'm currently avoiding.......

This comment brought a smile to my face... 

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-25 03:32:42 and read 9675 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 166):
It's rather sad that I'm posting here on Christmas Day, and there are several people whom I've never met who post on these threads for whom I feel greater affection than the guests I'm currently avoiding.......

Very funny! Hppy holidays from one of the rare posters not from Middle-earth!

On another note, while SYD-DFW-AKL-SYD could be a good routing if the 788 cannot do DFW-SYD westbound, LAX is still a better place to route flights from the Southwest Pacific to the U.S.—LAX is by far the largest O&D market to SYD, AKL, etc., and most of the other large markets like NYC can be connected via LAX. IAH-AKL seemed doomed to fail.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-25 03:39:12 and read 9680 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 168):

The thing is they already have so many flights direct to LAX. The DFW was supposed to be for those who aren't part of the O&D traffic to the West Coast but more targeted to the Midwest/East Coast, where more connections could become possible without an extra stop. The 788 might have been a nice plane for AKL-IAH and I believe it could have survived. The 788 was made for such routes- just like if QF had any sense, they'd keep the 788s for themselves and operate a route like SYD-SFO if possible.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-25 22:55:37 and read 9426 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 166):
I have some ding-dong arguments with Mariner, but I'm actually rather fond of him.

Right back at you.  

I think we really only have two areas of major disagreement - China and Qantas. You don't like a lot of the things Air NZ does but you're not alone there and I don't like everything it does.

And no, I still don't like the Trellise Cooper uniforms - wrong colours and too cluttered for my taste, too much going on.

On one matter, we're in complete agreement - that Air NZ should make more use of its beyond Australia rights. I hoped that SYD-RAR would be the start of more of that, but it turns out it was an outlier, not a trend.

I'm not sure we'd agree on how they should use those rights, though. I favour more eccentric routes than you.

Anyhoo, compliments of the season to all.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-26 23:05:15 and read 9060 times.

Quoting NZ6 (Reply 20):
It's developing the China market well (to Koruman's horror) even though China is the fastest growing inbound market for New Zealand. Koruman will now claim it's low cost tourist that fly that route, well 74% of NZ's market is leisure.

Ah, Koruman. You'll love this. City Mission to tourists: Pay up Would these be CZ or NZ pax? And it says JQ donated $25,000 to the AKL City Mission Xmas Dinner!

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: Unclekoru
Posted 2012-12-26 23:22:22 and read 9041 times.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 162):
I know there is something in the rules that in some cases will allow delayed Internationals services arrive up to a certain time past curfew.

International arrivals are allowed until 01:00, with an extension until 01:30 under certain circumstances. I've been flying for close to ten years and I have never seen anything quite so chaotic as last weeks events in Wellington (although the day of the J32 hijacking in CHC comes close).

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-26 23:38:43 and read 9041 times.

Yes, I did love it!

I don't think people should be too harsh on the poor Chinese visitors though. The whole point of my caution about Air NZ (as opposed to other carriers) being a major carrier to PRC is that the visitors it brings are generally not the affluent and educated high-rollers but rather mass-market package tourists with very little knowledge of NZ, little or no English and no capacity for independent travel. On the one hand, I can't see how Air NZ can ever hope to make a profit out of these routes. On the other hand, we should accept just how vulnerable these people are when they arrive in a country where they can't communicate or even read road signs.

Bear in mind though that my views are eternally jaundiced by having spent much of my childhood with close links to Manchester's Hong Kong Chinese population, and then having a HK flatmate at university in the 1980s. This is why on my way home from work this afternoon I stopped off at my local Cantonese butchers to buy the dinner I'm about to reheat!

But because of my own experiences I therefore bring to the table a pretty toxic cocktail of prejudices combining aspects of both the snobbery and condescension of the Hong Kong Chinese with the Guilt Complex of someone educated in English private schools about having dispatched the people of Hong Kong to the Communist Party of China. My wife and kids cringe when I indiscriminately apologise to all and sundry whom I meet in Hong Kong, only for most of them to tell me that they are from the mainland anyway and that life is much better now.

Remember, I'm the person who objected to Mandarin announcements on Hong Kong flights. Maybe my New Year's Resolution should be to try to move on and accept that 1997 has happened and there's nothing I can do about it!

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: BonzoLab
Posted 2012-12-27 00:56:46 and read 8977 times.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 163):
This delivery flight has been contracted out to the company Yorden (SXI899) works for. Was ZK-MVA delivered by Mount Cook pilots or contracted out as well?

MVA delivered by MC crew. MVC delivery also contracted out. Lack of available manpower to send to France to bring the machines back is why.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-27 10:11:54 and read 8840 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 173):
Maybe my New Year's Resolution should be to try to move on and accept that 1997 has happened and there's nothing I can do about it!

I take my hat off to you, Koruman. That's an acute piece of self-analysis.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-27 13:48:51 and read 8775 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 173):
I don't think people should be too harsh on the poor Chinese visitors though.

I'm Chinese (though I'm far more kiwi than anything else) and I hate the mainland Chinese tourists wherever in the world I am.. They have no manners or anything. Hong Kong is overridden with them now and a lot of the attractions (like The Peak Tram) are just packed with these people. Can't do anything about it but they really need to learn how to be orderly and stuff like that..

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: alangirvan
Posted 2012-12-27 14:02:28 and read 8794 times.

This is a little bit old but I have read about it in the Press while visiting CHC,a JQ arrived in CHC from SYD with about 60 bags not carried because space was required by the Defence Forces - this seems very strange a couple of days before Christmas when Defence Forces are normally on Stand Down. All kinds of stories of vital things in those bags that were going to be delivered at least a day late.

The reason may well be true, but - it is Jetstar again. The plane arrived about an hour late into CHC, so nearly 0300. Willl people just forget about the bad experiences the next time they are booking, and see a low air fare. Or are we just seeing a few glitches, and there really are many satisfied Jetstar customers out there?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-27 15:19:08 and read 8737 times.

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 177):

No doubt there are many satisfied JQ customers out there and the horror stories we hear are just a small sample of people. However, cheap fares will get people to go back to a company even though they know it might not end well. They will sooner or later 'forget' or play down in their minds the impact delays and things have had on them in the past and go get a ticket which is slightly cheaper than a more reliable carrier. For many the price of a cheaper fare will make their minds sugarcoat any delays/inconveniences from the past. That's my theory anyway.

Was in AKL the other week and found a JQ boarding pass on the ground in the foodcourt, flight was still yet to board. Anyway I went over to the JQ check in counter and returned it. The agent looked at me weird, took the boarding pass and walked away. Not a word was said, no smile etc... a bit rude IMO. (Maybe because I work for a rival company and was wearing my ID at the time?, who knows) But I hope this lady is the exception rather than the norm at JQ

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-27 16:44:42 and read 8698 times.

Now is probably the moment to bid farewell to Rob Fyfe.

He is an affable and decent man, who has tried his best.

I don't like many of the directions he has taken - I think he delegates too much, spends too much time on Facebook and allows his staff to use their customers as guinea-pigs for half-baked experiments. I think he missed an open goal in terms of long-haul from and through Australia at a time when his other markets were in recession, and I think that that has compromised the stand-alone future of the airline.

But he did an honourable job after the Airbus disaster at Perpignan.

I wish him well for the future.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-27 17:29:18 and read 8657 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 173):
Maybe my New Year's Resolution should be to try to move on and accept that 1997 has happened and there's nothing I can do about it!

I think even it's a little too late for that, I do think this is the proper course of action. Having said that, I don't like some of the stuff Mainland China has done to Hong Kong and not all Hong Kong residents are fond of Mainland visitors but we cannot deny Mainland visitors have boosted the Hong Kong economy and have created many many jobs. I hope at the end of the day the positives will offset all the negatives.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 176):
I'm Chinese (though I'm far more kiwi than anything else) and I hate the mainland Chinese tourists wherever in the world I am.. They have no manners or anything. Hong Kong is overridden with them now and a lot of the attractions (like The Peak Tram) are just packed with these people. Can't do anything about it but they really need to learn how to be orderly and stuff like that..

You can probably say the same to Singapore now. I don't like that anymore than you do but I think we need to be patient and give them time and do more to educate them.

I have one example of this Chinese behaviour. Ever since the sport of tennis was introduced in China in 1990's, there has been tremendous changes with the way people watch tennis. The first few years have seen some of the worst spectators ever with people talking and walking during games. But now if you look at the crowd of the Shanghai Masters you can find them among the best fans in the world. Even the players have voted the Shanghai event the best Masters event of the year for years.

So I think it's doable. Like tennis where tons of millions of dollars are poured, airlines likewise should love Chinese because they CAN spend. It would be foolish for airline managers to ignore this market.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-27 17:30:41 and read 8656 times.

Quoting BonzoLab (Reply 151):
Sometime during the afternoon of the 27th.
Quoting PA515 (Reply 163):
ZK-MVB overnighted PEN and is on www.flightradar24.com as 'SXI1288', presently between KUL and SIN with an a A340 icon as it's been misidentifying all the way as A340-313X F-WJKP. It arrived PEN from somewhere in India.

Did she arrive OK? I'm guessing into CHC as ZK-MVA did last month? I've been watching FR24 but didn't see anything BNE/CHC which I was expecting would be the final delivery leg.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: azzazzazza
Posted 2012-12-28 00:40:29 and read 8475 times.

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 177):
Willl people just forget about the bad experiences the next time they are booking, and see a low air fare. Or are we just seeing a few glitches, and there really are many satisfied Jetstar customers out there?

I think JQ receives far too much criticism. Delays can happen to any airline, yet when it happens to budget airlines people automatically assume it is the airline's fault! For example, I was in the CHC domestic departure lounge a few weeks back, and a delay was announced on a JQ flight to AKL. The woman next to me immediately starts complaining to her companion about JQ and how they're ALWAYS delayed and so unreliable, conveniently missing the fact that an NZ delay was announced just before to the very same destination! It's ridiculous. My mother, no matter how much I convince her, will NEVER fly with JQ because she is so convinced she wouldn't get off the ground, and she will never listen when I tell her delays happen to airlines all over the world, regardless of price. I flew CHC-OOL-CHC on JQ in June this year, not a single delay to speak of, staff were extremely pleasant to deal with from check in to the flight attendants, providing everything with a smile, something that cannot be said for some NZ flights I have been on (but then, you have good and bad staff for airlines, again). Honestly, it really annoys me when JQ gets criticism for delays. It's so unfair, it happens to everyone, and it is not just because they are being "cheap", they are simply keeping us safe!!

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 178):
No doubt there are many satisfied JQ customers out there and the horror stories we hear are just a small sample of people.

Pretty much sums it up. You don't hear about the 99% of those who have had good trips with JQ, do you? Only the less than 1% who haven't. If the service of an airline is defined by the experiences of the minority, than CX should be the worst airline in the world, as I had a 6 hour delay on a flight I had with them once, four years ago. That'd be stupid!

Rant over   

Oh, by the way, hi there. I'm new to this thread and the forums in general  

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-28 01:15:22 and read 8436 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 182):

I think the trick is how the delays are dealt with. JQ just does not have the machinery and equipment to deal with a delay. NZ on the other hand have so many flights etc that the effects of a delay can be minimalized. NZ is virtually a LCC domestically but when pax book they know that should a flight canceled for whatever reason or if a plane goes tech there is a large safety net to fall back on. JQ doesn't have that luxury.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-28 01:31:40 and read 8428 times.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 169):
The thing is they already have so many flights direct to LAX. The DFW was supposed to be for those who aren't part of the O&D traffic to the West Coast but more targeted to the Midwest/East Coast, where more connections could become possible without an extra stop. The 788 might have been a nice plane for AKL-IAH and I believe it could have survived. The 788 was made for such routes- just like if QF had any sense, they'd keep the 788s for themselves and operate a route like SYD-SFO if possible.

For someone with as many daily flights into LAX as QF or NZ, it makes sense to add an extra flight further east. However, the fact still remains that 1W lacks an eastbound flight from AKL to North America and should route this flight (possibly breaking into NZ's monopolistic pricing) via LAX rather than DFW since it would be their only flight.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-28 02:00:47 and read 8397 times.

Quoting BonzoLab (Reply 174):
MVA delivered by MC crew. MVC delivery also contracted out. Lack of available manpower to send to France to bring the machines back is why.

Thanks for the info.

Quoting deconz (Reply 181):
Quoting BonzoLab (Reply 151):
Sometime during the afternoon of the 27th.
Quoting PA515 (Reply 163):
ZK-MVB overnighted PEN and is on www.flightradar24.com as 'SXI1288', presently between KUL and SIN with an a A340 icon as it's been misidentifying all the way as A340-313X F-WJKP. It arrived PEN from somewhere in India.

Did she arrive OK? I'm guessing into CHC as ZK-MVA did last month? I've been watching FR24 but didn't see anything BNE/CHC which I was expecting would be the final delivery leg.

I don't know if MVB has arrived. They either switched off the ADS-B in Indonesia or it's delayed somewhere in Indonesia.

On Wednesday 26th it was on the Christchurch Airport International Arrivals as SX1288 at 5.30 p.m. Gate 31, and repeated on Thursday 27th, but there was no 'Landed' time. I also checked flightradar24 from about 1630 and nothing. Forgot to check today.

Southern Cross International (SXI) ferried Virgin Australia (Skywest) ATR72-600 VH-FVN to PER in September. That was SXI1261 TLS-HBE-AAN-NAG-PEN-HLP-PER. They also did VH-FVQ in December. ZK-MVB folowed the same routing to PEN and was heading in the direction of HLP near SIN on the 25th when it went out of reception range. Since then nothing. I wondered if the pilots had a dodgy en route meal and are still recovering.

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-28 06:36:23 and read 8299 times.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 185):
PA515

to change the subject. Did you take a note of the flight time from EZE-AKL for the 77W All Black charter?

Thanks..

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-28 08:36:15 and read 8272 times.

Has NZ expressed interest in flying to Sotuh America, particularly GRU which doesn't have any South Pacific flights yet and is probably doable from AKL but not SYD? NZ could connect pax from GRU to NRT, PVG, HKG (the three largest markets to GRU in Asia) via AKL, which would allow many pax on those routes to avoid the hassle of U.S. visas.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZCH
Posted 2012-12-28 12:46:34 and read 8173 times.

MVB went tech in Singapore I believe around the 24th of December, I can not ellaborate any further than that. Unsure of its current status.


NZCH

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-28 13:19:56 and read 8151 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 186):
to change the subject. Did you take a note of the flight time from EZE-AKL for the 77W All Black charter?

From the flightradar24.com replays it was 13 hrs 44 min.

NZ1935 departed EZE at 2010 UTC and arrived AKL 0944 UTC (2244 NZDT). After it departed EZE it was on the Auckland Airport Arrivals for 2225 NZDT but was 19 min later. NZ2 had already been cancelled and replaced with an NZ1002 at 0030 NZDT. It left EZE later than originally scheduled.

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-28 14:32:10 and read 8089 times.

Quoting NZCH (Reply 188):
MVB went tech in Singapore I believe around the 24th of December, I can not ellaborate any further than that. Unsure of its current status.

Thanks. It was between PEN and KUL about 0030 UTC (1330 NZDT) on the 25th December with an A340 icon as SXI1288 / A340 F-WJKP. Will keep checking the search function on www.flightradar24.com until it gets underway again.

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-28 16:38:11 and read 8016 times.

A few minutes ago ZK-MVB as SXI1288 was about 200 kms southwest of DRW at 23,000 ft, 228 kts, track 124. It didn't stop in DRW and could be heading for TSV. A340 icon again on www.flightradar24.com

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: QF175
Posted 2012-12-28 17:11:58 and read 7997 times.

ZK-MVB is due in BNE at 1555L today and appears to depart early tomorrow morning (0410L), bound for CHC.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aotearoa
Posted 2012-12-28 17:59:13 and read 7969 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 182):
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 183):

Having been in this industry many years and observed the gradually (but continual) 'race to the bottom' by some airlines, here's my take on JQ.

I have friends in the UK that continue to travel on Ryan Air, despite having some dreadful 'holiday shortening' experiences. I have finally worked out the Ryan Air game plan. They set the bar soooo low, that when a flight is canceled or delayed considerably (or any other issues arise), the customers shrug their shoulders and move on, in some cases (as my UK friends have) not even bothering to attempt to get a refund or answer from the almost non existent customer service people.

Why? The fare was so cheap, and more importantly, their expectation was so low, they just shrug their shoulders and comment "we'll it was Ryan Air, so what do you expect?".

My neighbours (family of four) were booked to travel JQ AKL CHC last holidays. They had a tech delay on the last flight of the day, and JQ could only offer seats to CHC 2 days later! They had no capacity to throw extra 'metal' at the problem. This backs up SUJ's comments around capability and the (relatively) huge gap between NZ and JQ in terms of capacity. Needless to say the neighbours never made the event in CHC and refuse to ever give JQ a look in, especially on time sensitive travel.

Am I being too hard on JQ? Possibly......they work the assets very hard here in NZ, so the inevitable outcome is a bad experience for the customers when their network comes under pressure.

I too haven't had the best of experiences when dealing with their staff at airports. Maybe they are just inexperienced?

One of Rob Fyfe's legacies will be the sense of empowerment he delivered to front line staff in NZ. I get a real sense of can-do amongst fellow Air New Zealand staff. In my mind this is a key difference, despite delivering very similar products.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: PA515
Posted 2012-12-28 18:20:49 and read 7956 times.

Quoting QF175 (Reply 192):
ZK-MVB is due in BNE at 1555L today and appears to depart early tomorrow morning (0410L), bound for CHC.

Thanks. Found it on http://flightaware.com/live/flight/SXI1288 KOE (Kupang) to BNE -- 7 hrs 57 min. Due CHC 1205 NZDT tomorrow 30th Dec.

PA515

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: azzazzazza
Posted 2012-12-28 20:02:38 and read 7898 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 183):
I think the trick is how the delays are dealt with. JQ just does not have the machinery and equipment to deal with a delay. NZ on the other hand have so many flights etc that the effects of a delay can be minimalized.
Quoting aotearoa (Reply 193):
They had no capacity to throw extra 'metal' at the problem. This backs up SUJ's comments around capability and the (relatively) huge gap between NZ and JQ in terms of capacity

Have to agree with you there, JQ's problem is the lack of aircraft they have in NZ to make up for delays. It just irks me when people refuse to fly with JQ at all because they're so convinced the flight will be delayed. All I'm saying is that most of their flights depart and arrive on time and they are not more likely to have delays than NZ, they just handle them worse.. To me, the slight risk of having these delays is worth the greater reward of getting flights for half the price.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aotearoa
Posted 2012-12-28 21:41:15 and read 7859 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 195):

I'm not sure that 'half the price' is a reflection of the current fare structures. My sense is that for a good part of the day, NZ will have a huge number of seats that are at or below JQ. I guess the 'premium' that an NZ customer may well pay is justified (at least in my neighbours minds anyway).

I agree that the JQ perception may well be skewed, however perception is reality in many people's minds! The airlines role is to manage this through either performance outcomes or spin......I know which way I prefer to manage these....

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-28 22:56:03 and read 7804 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 195):
It just irks me when people refuse to fly with JQ at all because they're so convinced the flight will be delayed.

Well if you need to be somewhere on time or on the right day you will have a better chance with NZ just purely based on the fact that they are able to cover any slack to a better degree. I know people personally that have nearly missed weddings etc due to cancellations and have had to book on NZ last minute. JQ did not offer anything. Like it or not, these things spread and word of mouth is the biggest and best form of marketing be it positive or negative

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 195):
they are not more likely to have delays than NZ, they just handle them worse..

Last time I actually looked at OTP figures, JQ actually fared worse than NZ. (I can;t remember the exact figures). But judging by that, yes they are more likely to have a delay.

I agree though, JQ has had a bad rep, probably far more than it deserves but for many people (Particularly business travelers) reliability and frequency is key

[Edited 2012-12-28 23:02:55]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: CHCalfonzo
Posted 2012-12-29 09:41:27 and read 7593 times.

JQ vs NZ OTP Stats for their domestic networks 2012
Oct: JQ 79% NZ 82%
Sep: JQ 73% NZ 83%
Aug: JQ 79% NZ 84%
Jul: JQ 65% NZ 79%
Jun: JQ 76% NZ 84%
May: JQ 84% NZ 87%
Apr: JQ 85% NZ 87%

Interesting to see how JQ has a marked reduction in OTP in winter. I'd suggest this is because every day, around half their fleet at some stage operates to ZQN where weather delays in winter are common. This will have a knock on effect across their entire domestic network.

One thing to note, NZ applies a 10 minute cut-off for a flight to be considered "on-time" while JQ uses 15 minutes.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: deconz
Posted 2012-12-29 10:50:53 and read 7562 times.

Quoting QF175 (Reply 192):
ZK-MVB is due in BNE at 1555L today and appears to depart early tomorrow morning (0410L), bound for CHC.

and she's on her way across the ditch ... http://flightaware.com/live/flight/S...8/history/20121229/1800Z/YBBN/NZCH

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-29 11:12:01 and read 7549 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 197):
I agree though, JQ has had a bad rep, probably far more than it deserves but for many people (Particularly business travelers) reliability and frequency is key

I must be missing something, I have very few negative impressions of Jetstar.

I don't like the livery, but I don't like Air NZ's new livery either. I've found the Jetstar staff - ground and air - to be pleasant enough and reasonable, if a bit bland, but that's been true of many airlines, including Air NZ.

Delays don't bother me, I've had 'em on every airline. I think they're part of the of the flying experience - I am seldom bored at an airport. But then, I'm not an impatient traveller, I haven't worn a watch in a very long time and if there is a delay, somehow we all cope.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-29 13:08:12 and read 7485 times.

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 198):

Cheers for the figures. In winter CHC poses a bit of a problem too at times with Fog and Snow etc etc... I totally forgot about the 10 vs 15 minute cutoff.

Quoting mariner (Reply 200):

It's good you haven't had bad experiences. I wouldn't have a problem travelling them as well, but fact remains be it due to misinformed perspectives or not, if you need to be somewhere for something important, many people (I know of) book with NZ due to increased reliability.
This guy long ago by the name of Murphy came up with a law. Something along the lines of 'Just when things can't get worse, they do anyway'. Don't know about you but for me personally (and by the sounds of it I'm not alone), the day I need to be somewhere is the day the delays will roll in. You see where this is going...

I'd imagine staff service etc on all carriers with Y class would be on par with each other be in NZ, JQ, SQ, EK or anyone else

[Edited 2012-12-29 13:10:29]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-29 13:16:45 and read 7529 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 201):
Don't know about you but for me personally (and by the sounds of it I'm not alone), the day I need to be somewhere is the day the delays will roll in. You see where this is going...

Oh, sure. And I accept that I may not be a conventional traveller.

But as with Ryanair, which has arguably the worst reputation for stranding people of any airline in the developed world, it doesn't stop folk flying 'em.

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: eaglefarm4
Posted 2012-12-29 13:23:03 and read 7531 times.

ZK-MVB ATR72 departed BNE today at 0340 local or 0640 your time to CHC.

5.5 HRS Flying time.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: ZKSUJ
Posted 2012-12-29 14:12:06 and read 7491 times.

Quoting mariner (Reply 202):
But as with Ryanair, which has arguably the worst reputation for stranding people of any airline in the developed world, it doesn't stop folk flying 'em.

Definately so. I don't see pax avoiding JQ, I think alot of it is all talk/false threats for those travelling for leisure. I just know that if something goes wrong, we will hear all about it in the media and their rep which isn't good at the moment will go down even more. All due to the individual in the end.

I suppose the difference between FR and this situation is that FR offers some very cheap seats. Where as JQ and NZ are usualy in the same ball park in many cases in terms of price

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-29 14:15:21 and read 7489 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 204):
Definately so. I don't see pax avoiding JQ, I think alot of it is all talk/false threats for those travelling for leisure.

It's an odd paradox - those who pay the least for their fares are often the biggest complainers.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 204):
I suppose the difference between FR and this situation is that FR offers some very cheap seats. Where as JQ and NZ are usualy in the same ball park in many cases in terms of price

  

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: BonzoLab
Posted 2012-12-29 14:29:31 and read 7488 times.

Just watched MVB on finals for RW29 from the backyard. Looks great. Some healthy groundspeed in the Tasman from the flightaware data.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: alangirvan
Posted 2012-12-29 15:51:05 and read 7451 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 182):
I think JQ receives far too much criticism. Delays can happen to any airline, yet when it happens to budget airlines people automatically assume it is the airline's fault!

When I started this comment, it was not about on time performance or cancelled flights - it was about the delayed bags which was a new one for me - bags for 60 passengers. This is not just a grumble on a.net - it was on front page of the Press, so sorry, but Jetstar does know how to attract maximum bad publicity. I am a bit surprised the Press had trouble finding a Defence Force PR person to double check the JQ claim that the space on board the plane was required by the ADF - there would have been people who could have answered questions from the Press.

But, whether is this one, or cancelling a flight just before Christmas (reinstated after protest). That was also widely covered by the media in NZ. So, you would think twice about booking Jetstar if you were travelling to a concert.

A difference between Jetstar and Ryanair is that the EU has very strict consumer protection laws. If the airline cancels a flight at the last moment it can cost the airline big time.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-29 16:09:27 and read 7426 times.

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 207):
A difference between Jetstar and Ryanair is that the EU has very strict consumer protection laws. If the airline cancels a flight at the last moment it can cost the airline big time.

Part of which, at least, Ryanair passes on to the consumer by way of a special levy, especially because of the ash cloud disruptions:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...air-payout-stranded-ash-passengers

"That is a policy which has already been put into effect by Ryanair, which introduced a special levy in April 2011 in order to cover the costs incurred in providing care to passengers whose flights had been cancelled owing to the eruption of the Icelandic volcano.""

And whatever the reality, the perception of Ryanair remains:

http://www.thelocal.se/43272/20120917/

"A Swedish family is outraged after being told to find their own way home from Croatia when their Ryanair flight was cancelled, despite the fact that it still flew back to Sweden without any passengers."

Few airlines receive as much consistently bad press as Ryanair - the blog is called "the world's most hatred airline."

http://www.ihateryanair.org/nasty-ry...r-leave-passengers-stranded-again/

"Nasty Ryanair leave passengers stranded again

Forty-two Ryanair passengers were left stranded after an airport “mix-up” over their departure gate made them miss their flight from Liverpool to Belfast."


http://www.ihateryanair.org

"Ryanair flight infested with ticks – passengers charged ‘bite fee’

mariner

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-29 17:27:40 and read 7383 times.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 204):
Where as JQ and NZ are usualy in the same ball park in many cases in terms of price

Every time I have searched for JQ domestically (I'm not interested internationally) their availability is not good for the time of day/date I want to travel, or the price is just stupid for a supposed LCC with no checked baggage included and so I just book an NZ flexi fare that entitles me to have at least 1 piece if not 2 pieces of luggage, priority seat selection on the fare (not including +1 extra for gold or lounge access).

Also, every time there is any weather or other airport delay crisis JQ gets stuffed for the whole day, whereas NZ copes better with the "unexpected" and minimizes delays better so I prefer to fly them. In this case, regardless of my employer I will always stick with NZ domestically.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: nz2
Posted 2012-12-29 21:30:21 and read 7250 times.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 209):
Also, every time there is any weather or other airport delay crisis JQ gets stuffed for the whole day, whereas NZ copes better with the "unexpected" and minimizes delays better so I prefer to fly them. In this case, regardless of my employer I will always stick with NZ domestically.



Agree, you have to have some certainty about getting to where you need to be, I just cant afford to waste time at an airport (as much as I enjoy it) and unfortunately JetStar cant match the network that NZ has. While I never fly JQ I hope they find enough pax wanting to use their cheap fares and somewhat intermittent service so it provides long term competition to NZ

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-30 14:10:26 and read 6995 times.

On a different note, could WLG-LAX possibly work, with the film industry (Peter Jackson?) filling some seats in the front?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-30 14:22:09 and read 6991 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 211):
On a different note, could WLG-LAX possibly work,

I think you have overlooked WLG's 6350 ft runway length  

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerorobnz
Posted 2012-12-30 15:05:18 and read 6956 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 211):
with the film industry (Peter Jackson?) filling some seats in the front?

Peter Jackson has a Gulfstream 550 for that, and I daresay shortly he will have a 650 to replace it. Far better for the job.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-30 15:32:35 and read 6938 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 179):
Now is probably the moment to bid farewell to Rob Fyfe.

He is an affable and decent man, who has tried his best.

Who would have thought that I'd be the only person on this thread to acknowledge him?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-30 17:13:10 and read 6873 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 214):
Who would have thought that I'd be the only person on this thread to acknowledge him?

There is none on Flyertalk either. It reminds me when Ralph Norris left and his wife commented that it had only been a few weeks and the NZ call centre had already forgotten who she was.

Rob Fyfe is the only one of two CEO's who has the most videos on YouTube I think. The other is Jeff Smisek. Rob had been all about people and he was highly regarded by his employees. Can we please have a CEO who will be about the airline and will attract and retain customer loyalty?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-30 18:13:39 and read 6825 times.

[quote=koruman,reply=214]Who would have thought that I'd be the only person on this thread to acknowledge him?



So true ! Probably one of the best moves he made was to do the arrangement with CX to connect NZ passengers between HKG and LHR. Provides a premium airline experience when it could have been something less. We have some relies coming up next summer from AKL., we are meeting them in Europe, they will take advantage of CX's HKG-CDG -HKG service.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: xiaotung
Posted 2012-12-30 18:26:06 and read 6816 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 216):
So true ! Probably one of the best moves he made was to do the arrangement with CX to connect NZ passengers between HKG and LHR.

I have a feeling that it was Christopher Luxon's move just as it was Luxon who abandoned JL and inked the NH deal.

Rob Fyfe had all those years but did nothing other than social media, Rico, safety videos and stuff.

[Edited 2012-12-30 18:27:41]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-31 02:27:49 and read 6665 times.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 212):
I think you have overlooked WLG's 6350 ft runway length

Strange, looking at the pictures of the All Blacks 77W landing at WLG for a photo tour I assumed the runway was long enough...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/edlaw01/7146965039/

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aotearoa
Posted 2012-12-31 03:36:51 and read 6626 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 218):

Maybe because it came from AKL. Longhaul departures from WLG are a very different (read impossible with a decent payload) proposition.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: sunrisevalley
Posted 2012-12-31 03:49:57 and read 6612 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 217):
I have a feeling that it was Christopher Luxon's move just as it was Luxon who abandoned JL and inked the NH deal.

You may well be right! On reflection it was quite a reversal from the norm. Perhaps credit can be given to Fyfe for standing out of the way on this one.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: zkncj
Posted 2012-12-31 12:18:07 and read 6530 times.

Quoting aotearoa (Reply 219):
Maybe because it came from AKL. Longhaul departures from WLG are a very different (read impossible with a decent payload) proposition.


Correct it came from AKL, with only 20 people on board with no bags.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: DolphinAir747
Posted 2012-12-31 13:25:18 and read 6483 times.

Quoting aotearoa (Reply 219):
Maybe because it came from AKL. Longhaul departures from WLG are a very different (read impossible with a decent payload) proposition.

How about a triangle route LAX-WLG-CHC-LAX, if WLG is a place like UIO (with IB and KL's MAD/AMS-UIO-GYE-MAD/AMS flights) that can only accomodate longhaul arrivals but not departures?

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: alangirvan
Posted 2012-12-31 13:39:01 and read 6480 times.

I think CHC-LAX might be a possibility when 787s are fully operational. Long range flights out of WLG? Well there are the Wellington Airport claims that they have been told by Boeing that a version of the 787 can fly a very long distance out of WLG - are those claims still being made? The 787 is not the same aircraft that airlines thought they were buying a few years ago, so I do not know if we are talking about 787-8s or 9s

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-31 14:28:56 and read 6442 times.

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 222):

Too much of a hassle. You may have more passengers transiting to Australia than you do; at least enough to warrant sticking to the way it is currently so that they get widebodies across the ditch instead of an A320 (especially for high yielding passengers) out of somewhere like WLG, which also may lack capacity. Also there are only 2 destinations that are served direct from WLG over AKL - WSZ and TIU.. Doesn't work that way either.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: CHCalfonzo
Posted 2012-12-31 15:35:12 and read 6424 times.

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 223):

I think CHC-LAX might be a possibility when 787s are fully operational.

This was mentioned in an article in The Press recently as a route CIAL are targeting, most likely through Air NZ.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: NZ107
Posted 2012-12-31 18:04:20 and read 6340 times.

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 225):

I bet they'll target JQ too, seeing as though they're more likely to have 787s to actually use on new routes such as CHC-LAX..

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2013-01-01 00:56:16 and read 6125 times.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 182):
I think JQ receives far too much criticism.

I think it deserves more. Here are a few tips - never book the last flight of the day, never book when you have to be somewhere at a specific time, never book if you expect reasonable information or instruction in the event of a delay... never book.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 182):
My mother, no matter how much I convince her, will NEVER fly with JQ because she is so convinced she wouldn't get off the ground, and she will never listen when I tell her delays happen to airlines all over the world, regardless of price.

I think your mother is on to something. In 2011 I booked just one return flight on JQ to fly domestically, but ended up flying 9 times on them. Why? Because after the first cancelled flight, I received a voucher for another. when that one was cancelled, another. When the next was substantially delayed, another voucher. 9 return flights. Only four left the ground. Seriously. FOUR. And only two were ontime, which is being generous as by "ontime" I mean they left within an hour of the scheduled time.

Quoting azzazzazza (Reply 195):
It just irks me when people refuse to fly with JQ at all because they're so convinced the flight will be delayed.

Really? It irks me and then some when almost without fail there is either a substantial delay or a cancellation.

Don't forget, this is the airline that is incompetent enough to forget to adjust its schedules for the change in New Zealand's daylight savings time.

Quoting mariner (Reply 200):
Delays don't bother me, I've had 'em on every airline. I think they're part of the of the flying experience - I am seldom bored at an airport. But then, I'm not an impatient traveller, I haven't worn a watch in a very long time and if there is a delay, somehow we all cope.

Other people value their time differently. Don't assume everyone's thrilled to be twiddling their thumbs in a crowded departure lounge with too few seats and zero information.

And it's often how an airline copes with the delay that determines how a passenger perceives the service. JQ just doesn't cope.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 201):
I wouldn't have a problem travelling them as well, but fact remains be it due to misinformed perspectives or not, if you need to be somewhere for something important, many people (I know of) book with NZ due to increased reliability.

Agreed.

Quoting mariner (Reply 202):
But as with Ryanair, which has arguably the worst reputation for stranding people of any airline in the developed world, it doesn't stop folk flying 'em.

Notice how JQ tried to raise its fares to match NZ's last year? Notice how they have backtracked since? People wont fly them on higher fares. and they've ditched CHC-ZQN.

Quoting mariner (Reply 205):
It's an odd paradox - those who pay the least for their fares are often the biggest complainers.

That's a big assumption and a massive oversimplification. JQ has royally mucked up multiple times and deserves the attention. And a lot of the pax are flying Oneowrld internationally and connecting to JQ. Though I think (correct me if wrong) some are now interlining with NZ to avoid hoisting their premium pax onto a lousy JQ service.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 209):
Also, every time there is any weather or other airport delay crisis JQ gets stuffed for the whole day, whereas NZ copes better with the "unexpected" and minimizes delays better so I prefer to fly them. In this case, regardless of my employer I will always stick with NZ domestically.

The right move.

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: mariner
Posted 2013-01-01 01:48:30 and read 6076 times.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 217):
Rob Fyfe had all those years but did nothing other than social media, Rico, safety videos and stuff.

And kept the airline profitable?

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 227):
Other people value their time differently. Don't assume everyone's thrilled to be twiddling their thumbs in a crowded departure lounge with too few seats and zero information.

I don't assume anything, as here:

Quoting mariner (Reply 202):
And I accept that I may not be a conventional traveller.

I never claim to speak for anyone other than myself.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 227):
Notice how JQ tried to raise its fares to match NZ's last year? Notice how they have backtracked since? People wont fly them on higher fares. and they've ditched CHC-ZQN.

I don't know what that has to do with what I said and to which you replied. My point is only that a thoroughly disliked airline - and by a lot of airline folk - is extremely profitable and carries more passengers than most other European airlines.

Now, if Ryanair breaks any laws affecting the consumer, especially in the area of safety, of course, it must be held to account.

And so must Jetstar. Absent that, if Jetstar is as bad as you say, then you and the travelling public have the easy option to vote with your wallet - don't fly 'em. My own experiences have not brought me anywhere near that.

But then I've flown Ryanair several times and would do so again.

mariner

[Edited 2013-01-01 01:53:21]

Topic: RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 122
Username: SA7700
Posted 2013-01-01 02:10:33 and read 6066 times.

This thread has become quite long and will be locked for further posts. Please feel free to continue your discussion in part 123 which can be found here: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 123


Regards,

SA7700


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/