777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10965 times:
Welcome to the #59th edition of the New Zealand Aviation Thread. In thread #58 New Zealand Aviation Thread #58 (by 777ER Jun 16 2009 in Civil Aviation) we learnt and discussed:
- NZs passenger loads down 10%
- JQ's poor attitudes and changing schedules by between 5mins - 2hours
- NZ operating B733s on AKL-OOL routes recently
- Some nice routes for a B733 to operate
- Pacific Blue issues on-time challange to NZ and JQ
- JQ and ZQN
- Wellington's Airport Flyer bus service
- PacBlues new AKL-DUD service
- NZ hands JQs screwed pax a life line
- NZs wide body fleet
- A memorial web-site for TE901 Erebus
- Are NZ ripping off regional destinations?
- NZs new B733 safety video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-Mq9HAE62Y
- NZ increases Tasman flights from ZQN and launches summer ZQN-BNE flights
- Is the 1900D the best aircraft for our smallest regional markets?
- ZQN sees increse in number of direct ZQN-Australia passengers on NZ and QF flights
Thats #58's round up, so lets get #59 rolling down the runway
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
PA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 194 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10908 times:
Responding to VirginFlyer in the previous thread.
The February 1997 Ansett New Zealand Timetable had the following;
AKL-WLG, WLG-AKL (146) x 16
AKL-CHC, CHC-AKL (146) x 8
WLG-CHC, CHC-WLG (146) x 8, (DH8) x 1
WLG-DUD, DUD-WLG (146) x 1
CHC-DUD, DUD-CHC (146) x 3
CHC-ZQN, ZQN-CHC (146) x 3
CHC-IVC (DH8) x 3, IVC-CHC (DH8) x 2, IVC-DUD-CHC (DH8) x 1
AKL-ROT, ROT-AKL (146) x 1
ROT-CHC, CHC-ROT (146) x 1
ROT-WLG, WLG-ROT (DH8) x 3
AKL-PMR, PMR-AKL (DH8) x 3
PMR-CHC, CHC-PMR (DH8) x 1
HLZ-WLG, WLG-HLZ (DH8) x 3
WLG-PMR, PMR-WLG (EMB) x 4
WLG-NSN, NSN-WLG (DH8) x 1, (EMB) 10/11
WLG-BHE, BHE-WLG (EMB) x 6/7
The 146-300 had 90/92 seats, the DHC8-100 40 seats and the Bandeirante 15 seats.
PA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 194 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10900 times:
Regarding the 'outrageous' $900 GIS-CHC-GIS fare.
The April 1997 Air NZ Timetable has the oneway GIS-CHC 'Adult Economy' at $355 (or $710 return). Adding 2% a year compounded comes to $900. No change.
Wow, thats a very excellent route network. I had totally forgotten that AN operated EMBs. Hopfully DJ will operate some extensive network like that with the Ejets that are hopefully getting
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 7, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10816 times:
Quoting PA515 (Reply 3): The February 1997 Ansett New Zealand Timetable had the following;
AKL-WLG, WLG-AKL (146) x 16
AKL-CHC, CHC-AKL (146) x 8
WLG-CHC, CHC-WLG (146) x 8, (DH8) x 1
WLG-DUD, DUD-WLG (146) x 1
CHC-DUD, DUD-CHC (146) x 3
CHC-ZQN, ZQN-CHC (146) x 3
CHC-IVC (DH8) x 3, IVC-CHC (DH8) x 2, IVC-DUD-CHC (DH8) x 1
AKL-ROT, ROT-AKL (146) x 1
ROT-CHC, CHC-ROT (146) x 1
ROT-WLG, WLG-ROT (DH8) x 3
AKL-PMR, PMR-AKL (DH8) x 3
PMR-CHC, CHC-PMR (DH8) x 1
HLZ-WLG, WLG-HLZ (DH8) x 3
WLG-PMR, PMR-WLG (EMB) x 4
WLG-NSN, NSN-WLG (DH8) x 1, (EMB) 10/11
WLG-BHE, BHE-WLG (EMB) x 6/7
That's an amazingly comprehensive schedule. i think ansett only made a profit in two of its years of operation, though. Still, man if only! Even if you only take the main trunk routes with DUD and ZQN thrown in, current secondary operators (PacBlue and JQ) haven't got a chance of ever matching that! I guess that's the age of 180-pax jets for you.
There are some interesting comments in there made by the public, and some funny ones. I think it has been mentioned in the New Zealand forums before but these people are paying next to nothing for these fares and are expecting the world. Definatly a case of "You get what you pay for".
Quote: Jetstar responded to its early difficulties. Media reports say the airline is now offering compensation vouchers to inconvenienced travellers
For my friend, this included a Sumo Salad voucher in AKL worth $10 for an 8 hour delay. He's not flying Jetstar anymore. I didn't know that they were bringing non-RNP planes to serve. I reckon my $10 flight to ZQN in December could be fun if I had the same weather as last year! It might just include a nice bus trip to Christchurch. They still have massive problems. "Technical glitch" in ZQN meant that my flight to WLG was delayed by over 1.5 hours. Then the jetbridge in Wellington failed on us, adding another 15 or so minutes onto sitting on the rather shabby A320. That's one first experience people shouldn't have to have if JQ want them to fly on them again.
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10370 times:
Thing about all these bad Jetstar experiences, is that they are not teething problems. Jetstar did the hard ball act on passengers to late for the check in deadline when they started their Australian operations. They have not learned from their start in Australia. Maybe they need to say in big letters on the Booking Confirmation - "we are serious about the check in deadline"
If they use Web check in, that will save one bit of queuing at the airport. If passengers do use the Cabin Baggage discount, that is another bit of queuing saved (to drop your bag) and of course, no waiting around to collect the bag when you arrive.
I don't want Jetstar to pack up and leave - we do want the lower air fares. They have given themselves a hard task. Schedule reliability is hard with only three planes available. That should not be the passengers' problem. A $10 Sumo Salad voucher is better than the $7 voucher I got from Freedom at Sydney Airport when we had a four hour delay.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 16, posted (5 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10334 times:
I had my own "JetStar Experience" over the weekend - very similar to others'. Five and a half hour delay heading AKL-WLG on Saturday (partly fog, partly because JQ didn't have the wherewithal to change a tyre promptly), and nearly two hours delay back from WLG last night.
What got me was the appalling lack of information - or contradictory information - provided. If JQ were prepared to update the public displays with more accurate information, they wouldn't have to have so many people on the ground answering the same enquiry about "what time will my plane really leave". But my "5.10pm" AKL-WLG flight still showed an ETD of 5.10pm several hours AFTER that time.
A little bit of amusement, though: I asked a JQ rep dealing with enquiries on the check-in level what the situation with my flight was, and she told me that the aircraft about to depart would have to do a return trip to WLG before it would be available to do my flight. Oh, I said, so that means about three hours from now? No, I was assured, only two hours. But surely, I replied, an hour each way, plus half an hour turnaround each time, made three hours minimum? Oh no, I was assured, we can turn the plane in five minutes if we're pushed! Yeah, right!
The other "difference" was when we arrived in WLG, and several pax started getting luggage out of the overhead lockers before the plane had completely stopped. Most carriers I've been on will have the FA do a polite announcement on the PA system requesting pax to remain seated until the plane has stopped. Not JQ. The male FA aggressively bellowed down the plane telling pax to sit down, not once but several times. I thought there was some kind of dire emergency until I realised what was being said! I thought that could have been handled a bit more professionally.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
It's not that thin a route though.. And we hope they have RNP too. It'd be a complete disaster if they didn't.
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 16): and nearly two hours delay back from WLG last night.
In that case I think you got the same aircraft as me! VH-VQS.
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 16): What got me was the appalling lack of information - or contradictory information - provided. If JQ were prepared to update the public displays with more accurate information, they wouldn't have to have so many people on the ground answering the same enquiry about "what time will my plane really leave". But my "5.10pm" AKL-WLG flight still showed an ETD of 5.10pm several hours AFTER that time.
Same problem here. Funny thing - they closed check in 30 mins prior to the scheduled departure time which seems uncalled for as the plane was so delayed. I went up to the carpark for some spotting and heard over the PA system about how the check in was now closed but the flight was going to depart at 2:30. We didn't board till 2:50. The ETA of the arriving aircraft also stayed still at 1400. You'd think that things could be communicated a bit better to keep people informed.
I've experienced the opposite with PacBlue here. I've had many flights with PacBlue since 2007 and I've seen them keep their check-in open longer if a flights delayed
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
ANstar From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3365 posts, RR: 6 Reply 22, posted (5 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 10196 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 21): I've experienced the opposite with PacBlue here. I've had many flights with PacBlue since 2007 and I've seen them keep their check-in open longer if a flights delayed
Must be a New Zealand thing as that is certainly not the policy here in Aus with Pac Blue.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 24, posted (5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 10084 times:
Looks like airfares to/from and in New Zealand will increase thanks to the CAA as they are moving into a brand new building shortly with massive rents (over 1.9million per year) on the corner of Featherston and Bunny Street in Wellington (directly opposite the Wellington Railway Station). The CAAs CEO's reason is because its a stone throws from the Beehive and other important people and he believes the New Zealand public will support paying more for its new building because of the important work the CAA does in keeping us safe.
SOURCE: One News
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Knid From New Zealand, joined Aug 2005, 201 posts, RR: 0 Reply 26, posted (5 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10279 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 24): Looks like airfares to/from and in New Zealand will increase thanks to the CAA as they are moving into a brand new building shortly with massive rents (over 1.9million per year)
Where were they before this, and how much rent was paid previously? Were the previous accommodations unfit or not renewable?
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 25):
Im stumped. How would the CAA moving increase airfares? They aint an airline :-S
They impose levies and fees, on airlines, which do pass costs on to consumers.
ZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 6455 posts, RR: 14 Reply 27, posted (5 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10242 times:
Oh ok. Still stumps me but I guess weirder things have happened...
Was just reading the opinions page thing on Stuff that 777ER shared the link to regarding jetstar.
I can't help but think how ironic it is that Jetstar entering the NZ market has actually been a very big favor for NZ given all the mishaps. But reading some of the comments, JQ customers are now thinking NZ is flawless.... NZ managment must be pleasently suprised at the whole matter
Quoting Knid (Reply 26): Quoting 777ER (Reply 24):
Looks like airfares to/from and in New Zealand will increase thanks to the CAA as they are moving into a brand new building shortly with massive rents (over 1.9million per year)
Where were they before this, and how much rent was paid previously? Were the previous accommodations unfit or not renewable?
They are currently in Petone (15mins drive north of the beehive) and they own the building. Apparantly the new building is very posh and it better meets their needs.
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 29, posted (5 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10220 times:
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 16): The male FA aggressively bellowed down the plane telling pax to sit down, not once but several times. I thought there was some kind of dire emergency until I realised what was being said! I thought that could have been handled a bit more professionally.
Pretty standard on most airlines for several reasons. The main one being that the plane can stop suddenly anytime injuring not only the idiot standing up but also the people sitting around him/her.
For the CSM/Purser/IFM to make the additional PA would either need to be able to see that person or have to get a call from the FA in that area first... this takes time during which the plane could either stop suddenly (or as is often the case the plane stops engines shutdown mid PA). Best just to have the FA in the zone "bellow" at the pax. The polite softly softly approach only really works if the pax is sitting close by...otherwise they just ignore it.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 30, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 10070 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 29): Pretty standard on most airlines for several reasons. The main one being that the plane can stop suddenly anytime injuring not only the idiot standing up but also the people sitting around him/her.
For the CSM/Purser/IFM to make the additional PA would either need to be able to see that person or have to get a call from the FA in that area first... this takes time during which the plane could either stop suddenly (or as is often the case the plane stops engines shutdown mid PA). Best just to have the FA in the zone "bellow" at the pax. The polite softly softly approach only really works if the pax is sitting close by...otherwise they just ignore it.
Interesting - never experienced it before.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
VirginFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4287 posts, RR: 54 Reply 31, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 10065 times:
Quoting Alangirvan (Reply 13): Thing about all these bad Jetstar experiences, is that they are not teething problems. Jetstar did the hard ball act on passengers to late for the check in deadline when they started their Australian operations. They have not learned from their start in Australia. Maybe they need to say in big letters on the Booking Confirmation - "we are serious about the check in deadline"
You know, you could always look at the converse of that - passengers in Australia have become a lot more accepting of Jetstar's practices and know how to 'play the game' compared to when they started. Granted there are still complaints about what happens when flights get cancelled and passengers are left more or less on their own, but the 30 minute check in issue seems to have more or less dropped off the radar here.
I've had an experience in Australia with a Jetstar flight being cancelled a week beforehand. I got an email informing me the flight I booked no longer existed, and that I had been moved to another flight (later on the same evening) at no expense. Only problem was half the reason I had chosen the flight I did was to be where I wanted to be by a certain time in the evening. I called their customer service line, expecting to get into an argument, and instead spoke to a pleasant young lady who had me booked on the earlier flight, again at no extra charge, within a couple of minutes. Say what you will, there is at least one person involved with their operation somewhere who knows how to keep a customer (even one who paid very little for a fare) happy.
That being said, the reported on time problems are unfortunate to say the least. I don't suppose they've been running long enough to have any average delay figures published yet have they?
To be honest, I don't know what to make of this. No one likes a government department moving into new premises, yet at the same time we're very quick to complain when they can't do their job effectively, and you don't have to be genius to work out that substandard working conditions cause both a physical and a psychological impediment to good work. The real question is how much of an improvement will the new premises be, and does the cost justify that...
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 25): How would the CAA moving increase airfares? They aint an airline :-S
Now there's a question - how much public outrage was there when Air NZ moved into their new office down at the Viaduct area?
V/F
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large. Then make the dream real. - Donald Douglas Snr
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 32, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9961 times:
Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 31): That being said, the reported on time problems are unfortunate to say the least. I don't suppose they've been running long enough to have any average delay figures published yet have they?
But IMO they'll be severely hampered by their non-RNP A320s.
JQ sent their 13th and 14th A320s to serve in New Zealand - unsurprisingly tatty I must say. I probably felt I was more like in a kindergarten with all the crayon marks around me. And it did seem that the interiors were in a worse condition than the interiors of the Jetconnect fleet, considering the age of the planes. I don't know how a tray table can get a crack in it..
QF45 From New Zealand, joined Feb 2009, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 33, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9936 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 32): JQ sent their 13th and 14th A320s to serve in New Zealand - unsurprisingly tatty I must say
That makes sense. The comments I have heard about the interiors of their aircraft I must say I was surprised. I have flown Jetstar dozens of time across the tasman and their aircraft are always in good order. I guess they have placed their newer ones on the tasman?. It's a shame Jetstar haven't had a successful start expanding here in New Zealand. They have always been a popular choice ex CHC across the tasman (based on people I know, work with etc) cheap and RELIABLE are two words that come to mind. Domestically, they have the cheap part right but not the reliable part. I just say watch this space, I beleive they will turn themselves around (hopefully on time) and be a success here in New Zealand.
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 1 Reply 35, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9880 times:
I think AKL-DUD in a 738 will be a bit harder for Pacific Blue to bring off than the one stop through CHC.
The non stop works for AirNZ because it gives DUD a connection onto the AirNZ longhaul network, and the evening non stop is great because just about every passenger will be connecting onto an international flight. Pacific Blue does not have those connections, and it does not have a partner. We have lost the newly arranged connecting flights onto Emirates at CHC.
Now we have no competition out of Dunedin to CHC or WLG. We still do have good Grab A Seat fares from AirNZ - they would rather fill an empty seat than not.
I think Dunedin people have just got used to driving to Christchurch. If Jetstar get their act together and start serving Dunedin, perhaps a service to Wellington would be the highest priority. Jetstar does some connecting and through flights in Australia, so if the WLG flights carries on through to AKL, that would be OK. That would let Dunedin people get up to the Rock Concerts.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 36, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9832 times:
People on this board seem to be so pre-occupied by Jetstar domestic that they haven't noticed that Jetstar International has put off its massive 787 order (and cancelled a heap of them too) and has abandoned plans to operate to North America and Europe. It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
The new Qantas CEO came from Jetstar, and is making the tough decisions about this unviable carrier which his predecessor could not make.
It is now all but certain that Jetstar International will be folded into Qantas as a lower-cost "Zeal320"-like operation, and that it will stick to its existing routes and some of the more marginal Qantas ones.
And in my opinion it is now a matter of time - and not very much of it - before Jetstar Australia and Jetstar NZ are re-integrated into Qantas just like Song and Ted. Their industrial awards will endure, but their fare model and all-economy seating are basically finished.
MillwallSean From Brunei, joined Apr 2008, 552 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 9806 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): And in my opinion it is now a matter of time - and not very much of it - before Jetstar Australia and Jetstar NZ are re-integrated into Qantas just like Song and Ted. Their industrial awards will endure, but their fare model and all-economy seating are basically finished.
I can partially agree with statement one. However I never saw a businesscase for flights to ethnic destinations in Europe. Europe is to far away, the immigrants from these areas are old and have lived in Australia for too long and most important it would cost to much money.
My guess for Jetstar international would have been VFR to less competitive places like India and service to touristrelated destinations.
I can still see the businesscase for such airline.
However statement two?
I dont agree at all with it.
Jetstar Australia carries a lower costbase. Why would Qantas abandon it?
And integrating means increasing costs and getting into a very interesting conflict with unions and stakeholders.
Cant see that happening.
To the contrary I see more Jetstar Australia products and less Qantas product coming for Australia.
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care. Millwall against the world!
ANstar From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3365 posts, RR: 6 Reply 38, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 9804 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): People on this board seem to be so pre-occupied by Jetstar domestic that they haven't noticed that Jetstar International has put off its massive 787 order
Jetstar will STILL be receiving the QF groups first 787's in 2013. I wouldnt be calling JQ international a failure - more over that the QF group needs to hold their capital spending.
JQ are still getting 2 more 330's this year for further INT expansion.
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 39, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 9791 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): People on this board seem to be so pre-occupied by Jetstar domestic that they haven't noticed that Jetstar International has put off its massive 787 order (and cancelled a heap of them too) and has abandoned plans to operate to North America and Europe.
I pointed that out in reply 155 of the last thread...
"Meanwhile... Qantas's deferment and cancellation of a chunk of its 787s bodes well for NZ, in my opinion. Perhaps Jetstar isn't the competitive threat we all expected it to be. Given the long-term nature of these orders (delivery 2014/15), perhaps Qantas is in a little more financial strife than we all thought?"
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
I don't think this is a fair call at all. You're attributing the 787 cancellation/deferment to Jetstar's long-haul business model - bit of a stretch, with little supporting evidence.
With their reputation so dented, it'll take a lot to turn it around IMO. They should have started on a high note as they were replacing an already unreliable service and they could have put themselves in a much better situation than they did put themselves into.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 41, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9698 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): And in my opinion it is now a matter of time - and not very much of it - before Jetstar Australia and Jetstar NZ are re-integrated into Qantas just like Song and Ted. Their industrial awards will endure, but their fare model and all-economy seating are basically finished.
Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 37): However statement two?
I dont agree at all with it.
Jetstar Australia carries a lower costbase. Why would Qantas abandon it?
And integrating means increasing costs and getting into a very interesting conflict with unions and stakeholders
I think that Qantas will retain the cost-base, but they'll brand it as Qantas. For exactly the same reasons that Song and Ted and Freedom are now Delta, United and Air NZ.
Qantas is really going to have the unions in Australia over a barrel. British Airways' workers are working for free, V Australia is tanking, Virgin Blue's share price has tumbled and there is a global recession. I can't see Qantas trying to make QF staff work for JQ wages but I can see no more QF staff being taken on, and everyone being employed by JQ for QF.
Jetstar International has reinforced what we had already seen with Oasis Hong Kong - long-haul LCCs don't work.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 42, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9647 times:
The other issue that doesn't seem to be getting much attention on this thread is that Koruhub at Hong Kong is now proceeding!
Unfortunately, it's not Air New Zealand which is going to use Hong Kong as a hub for services to London, but rather it's the Virgin group, with V Australia flying BNE-HKG and, almost certainly MEL-HKG, to connect to Virgin Atlantic's SYD-HKG-LHR and HKG-LHR services.
It's another example, unfortunately, of our "nimble" national carrier blinking at the moment when an opportunity arose, and instead watching someone else step in. Worse still, it's the same V Australia which is/will be flying the BNE-LAX, MEL-LAX and MEL-JNB flights which Air NZ could and should have operated, and Air NZ's 777-200ER is actually a much more viable size for those routes than V Australia's over-sized 777-300ER.
It looks like Air NZ's destiny is to wither away as a small niche airline to and from NZ, and that it will fail to use its much-coveted rights beyond Australia to the UK and North America. I know that at the moment that seems like a "small target" strategy, but the problem is that ultimately it can only end up in acquisition by a larger foreign carrier.
Koruhub would have been better for everyone in NZ - people in Auckland would have got one-stop services to multiple European destinations instead of NZ's current LHR focus, while residents of Christchurch would have got the same thing. And higher-earning Australians would have underwritten the whole expansion.
Unfortunately, we're just going to get more of the same instead.
I think that the responses of world airlines to the current global financial crisis really define the future of aviation. Singapore Airlines has lost the plot, and daren't bring in Premium Economy for fear of crippling its overpriced First and Business Class offerings. Meanwhile Emirates' very future looks highly dubious, as Dubai's economy has been wrecked by the crisis and the emirate has no oil reserves to fall back on.
Air NZ could have earned itself a nice future by doing what it does best: having a class-leading Economy product, competitive Premium Economy cabin and excellent Business Premier product linking all major Australian and NZ centres with multiple UK and Europe cities via a hub. It worked for years at LAX, with NZ dominating traffic to the South Pacific.
Unfortunately, it's not going to happen, and someone else will step in between multiple Australian cities and the UK with a good economy and premium economy product, and get that market share that EK and SQ can't meet, especially in Premium Economy.
TG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2863 posts, RR: 16 Reply 43, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9629 times:
Regular Air NZ frequent fliers and ex-employees may wish to know that Steve I., who I believe was the #3 seniority flight attendant at Air NZ, passed away suddenly and unexpectedly at home on Sunday.
If the name sounds familiar, he was a BIG guy, in his mid-60s, with white/grey hair, tanned skin, and very white teeth (usually smiling!). He had 42 years service with Air NZ and started as a steward on the Lockheed Electra aircraft. He served for many years in our FA1 position (Inflight Service Director) and most recently had stepped back to serve as the Inflight Service Coordinator (who runs the economy class service).
Steve was also visible on occasion on the 'Piha Rescue' TV series, as he had been a volunteer lifesaver for many years and was, I believe, still doing 2 days a week there at the time of his death. He also was involved in many other community groups.
I flew with Steve a lot and will dearly miss his good nature and smiling face. He is the fourth flight attendant we've lost before their time in the last 6 months
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 44, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9550 times:
I remember reading in the last thread about a Tui sign highlighting JQs stuff ups on the Auckland motorway. Could someone get a picture of the Tui sign and post it here please.
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 1 Reply 45, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9544 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): People on this board seem to be so pre-occupied by Jetstar domestic that they haven't noticed that Jetstar International has put off its massive 787 order (and cancelled a heap of them too) and has abandoned plans to operate to North America and Europe. It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
One of the reasons people in this thread are pre occupied by NZ domestic operations by Jetstar is that this is the NZ thread. The cancellation of 787s by the Qantas group has had a thread to itself. There maybe quite a lot of reasons for changes - change of priority by Alan Joyce, questions as to whether the 787 will give Qantas and Jetstar the performance that they thought they were going to get in 2005, and a fair question as to whether long haul Jetstar International services are working for Qantas.
For Australian domestic ops, the A320 was deliberately chosen so that it would be hard to integrate into Qantas mainline operations. The test, as AJ said was whether Qantas could sell Business Class seats in the market. This is one reason why Canberra did not get Jetstar services. Sorry for the high value individuals who live near Gold Coast Airport or on Hamilton Island. Even if Qantas does decide to call the operation Qantas-Lite and put Kangaroos on the tail. If Qantas continues to think you are at a low -yield port you are not going to get CityFlyer service.
Qantas has decided that NZ domestic is all low yield stuff. People will learn to live with the conditions.
If the 787s had already been delivered and had the long range, Jetstar might already have tried flying to Southern Europe. Now, Qantas is friendly with Etihad, and if they build the relationship, perhaps they will put passengers for Rome onto Etihad services. Or perhaps with the 787 some way off, the interesting idea of having some A330-200s flying via Darwin might not be too far fetched. Would I fly from SYD in an A320, change to an A330 at DRW and go on to Rome like that? It would have to be a very good fare to fly that way in preference to using any number of other carriers, but some people might.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 46, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9535 times:
Sorry but this question may have already been asked before. I read an article in the NZ Herald that the PM john Keys was delayed in Queenstown after opening the "Winter festival".
The article stated the he was flying JQ and there planes are not fitted with the the required equiptment to fly into or out off ZQN in bad weather. That may well be the case but my question is, shouldn't ALL NZ government ministers be requierd to fly and support Air NZ, after all the Government is a major shareholder of the airline so wouldn't it make sense to favour them over other operators ??
Sceondly, why would JQ operate a sector that is renowned for delays/cancelled flights due to weather by not using aircraft that have the required nav etc for this airport, seems really silly to me and very costly for the airline ??
TheCommodore
I've been on a lot of things that fly - British, European, US and Russian built.
Kiwiandrew From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 47, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9523 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): ...shouldn't ALL NZ government ministers be requierd to fly and support Air NZ, after all the Government is a major shareholder of the airline so wouldn't it make sense to favour them over other operators ??
no , IMHO , they are spending taxpayers money so they should go with whichever option is most cost-effective*
* please note that I did not say 'cheapest' as this is not always the most cost-effective - eg a 'cheap' fare which requires an MP to stay 12 hours in a town where they had a 2 hour meeting scheduled is not what I would consider cost-effective
edited to add :
of course , flying on a carrier which cannot offer a reliable schedule is not necessarily cost-effective either
[Edited 2009-07-01 01:18:33]
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 48, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9518 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 42): Meanwhile Emirates' very future looks highly dubious, as Dubai's economy has been wrecked by the crisis and the emirate has no oil reserves to fall back on.
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 49, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9509 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): my question is, shouldn't ALL NZ government ministers be requierd to fly and support Air NZ, after all the Government is a major shareholder of the airline so wouldn't it make sense to favour them over other operators ??
I think it's more of a case of not paying too much to make the taxpayer get angry about his spending. In another article today, it told how $90,000 was spent for him to fly First Class from here to APEC and South America over 7 days or something - all booked courtesy of Labour (who tried to bring that up in parliament). And possibly to see if their criticism is all what it lives up to be.
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): Sceondly, why would JQ operate a sector that is renowned for delays/cancelled flights due to weather by not using aircraft that have the required nav etc for this airport, seems really silly to me and very costly for the airline ??
We were thinking the exact same question. These planners seem like they didn't know what to do. Maybe with some advice from Jetconnect's managers (or QF short haul international ones) they could have realised that RNP is basically a necessity for ZQN ops. It's pathetic and appalling to all who have come to think that JQ will be better than what Jetconnect provided.
TG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2863 posts, RR: 16 Reply 50, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9505 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 49):
I think it's more of a case of not paying too much to make the taxpayer get angry about his spending. In another article today, it told how $90,000 was spent for him to fly First Class from here to APEC and South America over 7 days or something - all booked courtesy of Labour (who tried to bring that up in parliament). And possibly to see if their criticism is all what it lives up to be.
I dunno.. despite those who decry politicians at every opportunity and the tall poppy syndrome that seeks to remind them at every shrill opportunity that they 'ain't no better than the rest of us', they are representing New Zealand's interests overseas on most of the occasions they travel, and PERSONALLY I have no problem with them travelling in F when available, or at the very least the highest class available on the route (for example, NZ's BP). To add to that, most of them earn far less than they would in the private sector.
I'm a Labour supporter, but I feel it would be a bit embarassing to have the Premier minister of NZ (ie Key) to be travelling in any class less than the highest available.
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 51, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9523 times:
Quoting TG992 (Reply 50): PERSONALLY I have no problem with them travelling in F when available, or at the very least the highest class available on the route (for example, NZ's BP). To add to that, most of them earn far less than they would in the private sector.
Fair enough. But needless to say that there are plenty in this country who would strongly oppose this sort of behaviour! I would think that F tickets would come slightly cheaper than that too considering that a SQ Suite is A$22,000 return SYD-LHR. But what I don't like about this debacle is the opposition trying to redicule him for something that they made us pay for. He said that he'll fly Business on other occasions. Sensitivity leads to these things and the media do blow it out of proportion too. I think he/she deserves the highest class too because it'd be much more expensive for him to be flying around in the 757 to every single destination he plans on visiting, let alone flying it rather empty.
In addition to this as an aside: flying a SIN-LHR sector on SQ not in Suites (ie 77W/744) costs $4000 more.. I think that's weird
ZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 4551 posts, RR: 12 Reply 52, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9455 times:
Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 6): How are long haul carriers like MH and TG performing on their AKL sectors in the current environment?
I to would like to know how these 2 are going. I'd say TG are probably harder hit, but for them they used to use an A346 daily which while the wrong aircraft (very comfortable) they had the frequency.
MH were 4pw last winter for a while aswell, they operated 5 over summer though.
No idea really. Probably varies depending on the day.
Even UTA
I thought they only flew the DC-10 into Auckland?
Hmm, you may be right come to think of it, AF briefly replaced them around 1993 with the then new 744. I remember seeing an AF 744 parked while in the old observation deck you were talking about, which I to was sad when it closed.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 53, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9431 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 49): I think it's more of a case of not paying too much to make the taxpayer get angry about his spending.
The government is already supporting Air NZ by being the major shareholder. It makes little sense to bail out an airline, only to support another one - unless, of course, schedules make it impossible to support Air NZ.
That's before you consider the reliability advantage Air NZ hold as they are able to get in and out of ZQN in a wider range of conditions.
I've been on a lot of things that fly - British, European, US and Russian built.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 54, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9421 times:
In terms of earlier opposition to the Prime Minister travelling First Class, I see no problem.
If we all accept that First Class affords a greater level of comfort and that passengers arrive at their destination in better condition, why wouldn't you want your nation's elected representatives to be in top form when representing your interests?
That's before you even consider matters like national pride. Despite the perks, public office, at that level, is far from a walk in the park!
I've been on a lot of things that fly - British, European, US and Russian built.
Knid From New Zealand, joined Aug 2005, 201 posts, RR: 0 Reply 55, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 9364 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
To accuse the Jetstar model of been a failure is difficult, it is clear that the economy is been driven by fear, and this puts many businesses at risk, if it were a failure (the fat lady has far from sung), is it the model or the economy or any other number of factors - to discern between these is problematic to my mind.
Quoting Koruman (Reply 42): Meanwhile Emirates' very future looks highly dubious, as Dubai's economy has been wrecked by the crisis and the emirate has no oil reserves to fall back on.
As I said in the last thread if things get tight within the Investment Corporation of Dubai from property development issues, then Emirates as a cash earner will be essential and as such its future is anything but dubious.
You are also assuming that the Emirate of Dubai would be allowed to fail (if it ever got that far), but the UAE as a whole could never allow that to occur, and Abu Dhabi has the $$ to bail them out. So really Emirates is secure, and Dubai will not fail.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 56, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 9344 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): Sceondly, why would JQ operate a sector that is renowned for delays/cancelled flights due to weather by not using aircraft that have the required nav etc for this airport, seems really silly to me and very costly for the airline ??
I flew AKL-ZQN a few months ago on an NZ A320, and we were in cloud almost all the way from AKL. Arriving at ZQN, we came out of the cloud as we turned over the lake, and landed without any difficulty. On the ground, it seemed like a medium overcast, plenty of sky visible (can't estimate height of cloud base, sorry). But even then, QF had already diverted to wherever, IVC, I suppose. I could imagine that there must be a great many days like that, and I can only agree that the wisdom of JQ starting without RNP is highly questionable.
Quoting TG992 (Reply 50): I'm a Labour supporter, but I feel it would be a bit embarassing to have the Premier minister of NZ (ie Key) to be travelling in any class less than the highest available.
Personally, I have no aspirations to travel J, let alone F (though I have experienced both), but for the life of me I can't see who would deserve to travel F if a Head of Government didn't? It's not as if it's a private jet.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 57, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9211 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): shouldn't ALL NZ government ministers be requierd to fly and support Air NZ, after all the Government is a major shareholder of the airline so wouldn't it make sense to favour them over other operators ??
Wasn't this a private trip? As in, NOT on government business.
While I think the Dubai economy is a lot weaker than acknowledged, I don't believe Koruman's hyperbolic claims either that Emirates' future is doubtful.
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 51): In addition to this as an aside: flying a SIN-LHR sector on SQ not in Suites (ie 77W/744) costs $4000 more.. I think that's weird
That is weird. Perhaps the excess supply on the A380 has lowered F-class yields? Or perhaps they're trying to shove people onto the A380 flights so they can turn around and say it's introduction is a raging success? Man, conspiracy theories are fun.
Back to Jetstar - does anyone remember the Ferrit website collapse a few months back? The Telecom subsidiary had this awful marketing campaign featuring a dunce of a guy that seemed to turn an awful lot of people off Ferrit. My point is, does anyone now find the ads with the snarky Jetstar guy walking around the streets/beaches of Auckland just a little bit grating right now? The regular staff (obviously Australian) are fine, but man that guy with the microphone really gets my goat!
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 59, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 9108 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 48): Quoting Koruman (Reply 42):
Meanwhile Emirates' very future looks highly dubious, as Dubai's economy has been wrecked by the crisis and the emirate has no oil reserves to fall back on.
DUBAI: Morgan Stanley expects the UAE economy to contract two per cent in 2009. But it projects a "mild recovery" next year."
I'll take a mild recovery next year.
Quoting Knid (Reply 55): As I said in the last thread if things get tight within the Investment Corporation of Dubai from property development issues, then Emirates as a cash earner will be essential and as such its future is anything but dubious.
You are also assuming that the Emirate of Dubai would be allowed to fail (if it ever got that far), but the UAE as a whole could never allow that to occur, and Abu Dhabi has the $$ to bail them out. So really Emirates is secure, and Dubai will not fail.
I don't think that Mariner's article is at odds with my assertion.
The UAE might do OK because the other Emirates have oil, but at the moment Dubai is starting to look a lot like a gigantic Nauru, and Emirates is beginning to like like a gigantic Air Nauru.
Yes, Abu Dhabi will never allow Dubai to completely fall over. But Emirates is the number one competitor to its own Etihad, and I think it's fanciful to imagine that Abu Dhabi would rescue Emirates.
Quoting Alangirvan (Reply 45): One of the reasons people in this thread are pre occupied by NZ domestic operations by Jetstar is that this is the NZ thread. The cancellation of 787s by the Qantas group has had a thread to itself.
Quoting Alangirvan (Reply 45): If the 787s had already been delivered and had the long range, Jetstar might already have tried flying to Southern Europe
The high-volume low-yield long-haul LCC business model is basically a train wreck: I can't see any redeeming features for it. The only saving grace is that the low salary base could be rolled into Qantas mainline, just as Australian Airlines was.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 60, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9088 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 59): The UAE might do OK because the other Emirates have oil, but at the moment Dubai is starting to look a lot like a gigantic Nauru, and Emirates is beginning to like like a gigantic Air Nauru.
I wasn't referring to the short-term fortunes of Emirates the airline. I was referring to the article's assertion that those parts of the UAE with oil would experience growth, while those without (i.e. Dubai) wouldn't.
The problem is that Dubai has positioned itself as a discretionary luxury market for the nouveaux riche (OK, no jibes about Tahiti please) and has found that its real estate / vacations are the first thing that customers from its target markets have chosen to forego.
Emirates' remarkable growth has been based around
1) Dubai's growth and support and
2) the fact that DXB could be a hub both for long-haul traffic and
3) servicing people from the Indian subcontinent a) working in the Middle East, and b) people of subcontinental origin living in the UK raturning for VFR vacations.
(It's easy to forget just how fundamental to Emirates' network the subcontinent is: at the risk of damaging my Koruhub argument I'm well aware that flights from Dubai to Glasgow, Manchester, Newcastle and Birmingham largely exist to get Poms of Indian / Pakistani / Bangladeshi origin back to visit the whanau in Karachi / Mumbai / Kolkata / Dhaka, and that they are a useful bonus for people who just want to fly one-stop to Australia or NZ.)
Anyway, elements 1 and 3a are now history, and I struggle to see how Emirates can survive long-term without them.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 63, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8963 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 62): You think Emirates is starting to look like "a gigantic Air Nauru." I don't see that, so I shrug.
I vividly remember times in the past when Gulf Air and Aeroflot carried much of the through traffic which Emirates does now. Just as no-one wanted to go to Moscow or Bahrain, no-one really wants to go to Dubai either, and even the aspirational Beckham nouveau riche market has dried up, which leaves you with a transit point situated bang in the middle of the most volatile area of the world, splendidly strategically positioned midway between Gaza and Afghanistan and midway between Somalia and Iran.
The car park at DXB is now famously filled with abandoned (financed) vehicles belonging to ex-pats who skipped the country when they lost their jobs.
There is a definite role for midway hubs between Europe and Australia/New Zealand, but I don't see why it needs to be DXB (in the frightening and sweltering Middle East) or SIN (less than a third of the way to Europe, and with a revolting sauna-like climate) when Air New Zealand (or the Virgin group) could do it at least as well via Hong Kong, which at least has a rich population of 7 million.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 64, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8945 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 63): There is a definite role for midway hubs between Europe and Australia/New Zealand, but I don't see why it needs to be DXB (in the frightening and sweltering Middle East) or SIN (less than a third of the way to Europe, and with a revolting sauna-like climate) when Air New Zealand (or the Virgin group) could do it at least as well via Hong Kong, which at least has a rich population of 7 million.
I like Dubai, I like going there. With some obvious exceptions, the Middle East is not all "frightening" to me and although yes, it can be hot, it goes with the territory. Some of the great times of my life have been in the Middle East, where I have encountered extraordinary hospitality.
I like Singapore. I don't find it any more of a sauna bath then Hong Kong and I don't much like Hong Kong. I prefer Shanghai.
And just to keep it with airlines, I see that Virgin Atlantic is reducing their flights LHR-HKG.
I prefer Bangkok to both of them, but hey, I take what I can get and it doesn't take much to persuade me to jump on a plane to Jakarta - or Darwin.
So I guess the old rule applies. Each to their own. Always.
FlyPacificBlue From New Zealand, joined Apr 2009, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (5 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8937 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 21): I've experienced the opposite with PacBlue here. I've had many flights with PacBlue since 2007 and I've seen them keep their check-in open longer if a flights delayed
Correct. If the flight is delayed, check-in can remain open and we may accept LMC's at the supervisors/Load controllers discression. Generally it can remain open up untill boarding commences.
Quoting ANstar (Reply 22): Must be a New Zealand thing as that is certainly not the policy here in Aus with Pac Blue.
You are referring to International flights. Yes Pacific Blue closes strictly at -30 to STD. Unoficially we close at -40 in AKL but will accept LMC's if them being checked in will not affect OTP. This is because of Customs processing, LAGS and the great long walk to Pier B at AKL International Airport
Quoting 777ER (Reply 23):
Well II suppose international flights are different due to Customs and secuirty.
TG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2863 posts, RR: 16 Reply 66, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 8713 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 15): Would WLG be on the cards sometime? I'm very surprised NZ is still the only airline flying WLG-ZQN
WLG - ZQN is designed largely to pick up central North Island traffic for example NPE, ROT, HLZ, TRG – ZQN Traffic, taking them over WLG in place of CHC. I'm not sure how much WLG - ZQN traffic there is on it's own so could JQ do this stand alone?
Quoting ANstar (Reply 18): That is pretty standard with delayed ops. Check in will close at the scheduled time.
Not with NZ. Well not on International anyway.
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 30): Interesting - never experienced it before.
I have but it was during take off, wasn't in the most disgusting manner but any idiot who wants to stand up during take off should be yelled out. If you see what happens during a take off engine failure then you will understand the danger your are putting everyone else in not just yourself. If you're taxing in after landing their is a polite way of doing this.
Quoting Koruman (Reply 36): People on this board seem to be so pre-occupied by Jetstar domestic that they haven't noticed that Jetstar International has put off its massive 787 order (and cancelled a heap of them too) and has abandoned plans to operate to North America and Europe. It's fair to make the call now - Jetstar International has failed.
The new Qantas CEO came from Jetstar, and is making the tough decisions about this unviable carrier which his predecessor could not make.
It is now all but certain that Jetstar International will be folded into Qantas as a lower-cost "Zeal320"-like operation, and that it will stick to its existing routes and some of the more marginal Qantas ones.
And in my opinion it is now a matter of time - and not very much of it - before Jetstar Australia and Jetstar NZ are re-integrated into Qantas just like Song and Ted. Their industrial awards will endure, but their fare model and all-economy seating are basically finished.
I tend to agree with Koruman for once world wide airlines have done the full circle, they split off a built LCC's with a different brand, Freedom, Jet Star, Song, Ted are just a few examples. They are all slowerly coming back under one name, airlines have learnt how to operate with lower operating costs yet maintain a level of service. The Virgin group are the same, DJ and VX were LCC's but are slowly moving away from this image, long term they will be service airlines just like VS.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 44): I remember reading in the last thread about a Tui sign highlighting JQs stuff ups on the Auckland motorway. Could someone get a picture of the Tui sign and post it here please.
Here is it, I will not be able to leave this up for long due to bandwith issues
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 46): That may well be the case but my question is, shouldn't ALL NZ government ministers be requierd to fly and support Air NZ
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 67, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 8611 times:
Quoting FlyPacificBlue (Reply 65): You are referring to International flights. Yes Pacific Blue closes strictly at -30 to STD. Unoficially we close at -40 in AKL but will accept LMC's if them being checked in will not affect OTP. This is because of Customs processing, LAGS and the great long walk to Pier B at AKL International Airport
What does "LMC" stand for? I flew standby a few weeks back and was confirmed 30 mins before departure. Didn't realise the new Pier B gates were so very VERY far away and had to actually run after customs to make the flight.
Seriously, Pier B at Auckland International is a bit of a nightmare. Not only is it an enormous distance from the main terminal, but it actually goes uphill for half the distance, with pokey little travelators that aren't all that much faster. The extension is notciably colder than the original pier and, frankly, it looks cheap and tinny both inside and out.
AIAL really went the budget route on this one, which is a real shame. It is cool seeing 4 PacBlue 738s all bunched up like that though.
Still, I think this is Auckland's version of the Polderbaan, Amsterdam's newsest but also very distant runway (you can barely make out the central airport when you arrive in AMS). I wonder what the local equivalent would be - what's Maori for "freakin miles away"?
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 68, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 8540 times:
Quoting TG992 (Reply 66): so could JQ do this stand alone?
Definitely without RNP first of all, and they'd have to get their frequencies right on other flights before attempting WLG-ZQN. IMO it's just not worth it. Utilise the planes to service good peak hour flights and more people would obviously be tempted to fly you!
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 67): AIAL really went the budget route on this one, which is a real shame. It is cool seeing 4 PacBlue 738s all bunched up like that though.
It is, however, going to be massively overhauled for when AIA get around to building the entire pier B - both the other side of it and possibly more landside stuff. It sure seems like a long way off, as with the 2nd runway.. But one day I reckon it'll all be different.
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 67): what's Maori for "freakin miles away"?
Last Minute Change - in this context, a manual ammendment to a load sheet, eg. if a traveller no-shows and they must be removed from the aircraft and in turn, the load sheet. Of course, this works the other way too, should an extra traveller be allowed to board at the eleventh hour.
With all this talk about RNP operations into ZQN, it is of interest that PacificBlue will not be using RNP technology for their ZQN ops, they will instead be utilising GPS. This is the DJ Group's preferred option for low-vis approaches (so I'm told).
When PacificBlue commence ZQN, they'll be cleared by CAA to approach to a certain height using their GPS technology, and after they've been flying the route for some time without incident (six -12 months?) that limitation will be removed, or lowered even further.
So, in the initial stages of becoming "GPS Certified", expect even PacificBlue to have to divert / cancel ZQN services on the days when the weather there is SO bad, that they still can't see once below that inital height limit imposed by CAA.
I would assume the certification process is similar for an operator wanting to use RNP.
Qantas in New Zealand have never taken the ZQN market seriously, and in all their years flying to ZQN never made any attempt to adopt either of these technologies to ensure regularity of their flying into ZQN.
Does anyone know if JQ is in fact going through this proving stage for RNP operations? Or are they still not bothering?
Haha, good call. but the online Maori dictionary suggests "tawhiti", so I hereby christen Pier B at Auckland International Airport, "Tawhiti" - Polderbaan of the South Pacific.
Quoting DJ738 (Reply 69): Last Minute Change - in this context, a manual ammendment to a load sheet, eg. if a traveller no-shows and they must be removed from the aircraft and in turn, the load sheet. Of course, this works the other way too, should an extra traveller be allowed to board at the eleventh hour.
Thanks, guess that applies to me then.
A question about Wellington's approach/takeoff routings - when taking off to the north, why do flights headed for the south island turn west over the city? I ask because last night several 733s and 738s heading for CHC or DUD took the left hand route and, possibly because of the weather conditions, were incredibly loud - the noise really lingered around the central city. Why don't they hang a right and turn to the east, avoiding the noise issue?
VirginFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4287 posts, RR: 54 Reply 71, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8418 times:
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 67): what's Maori for "freakin miles away"?
I always thought it was "Invercargill"
Last time I was in Auckland, I thought I'd have plenty of time before my flight was due to board to have a wander around the terminal and have a look at Pier B. I got half way down, and decided to give up...
V/F
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large. Then make the dream real. - Donald Douglas Snr
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 72, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8360 times:
Quoting DJ738 (Reply 69): With all this talk about RNP operations into ZQN, it is of interest that PacificBlue will not be using RNP technology for their ZQN ops, they will instead be utilising GPS. This is the DJ Group's preferred option for low-vis approaches (so I'm told).
Is this also going to use the technology of the locator beacons so that the control tower knows where the plane is? Interesting use of technology - I'd like to see a comparison with RNP.
Quoting DJ738 (Reply 69): Does anyone know if JQ is in fact going through this proving stage for RNP operations? Or are they still not bothering?
Mid next year is when they get it, so we're told.. I guess it'll keep the coaches happy for a little while shipping those pax to CHC.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 73, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8280 times:
Quoting TG992 (Reply 66): Quoting ANstar (Reply 18):
That is pretty standard with delayed ops. Check in will close at the scheduled time.
Not with NZ. Well not on International anyway.
Whats NZ cut off time for both domestic and international?. Thanks for the Jetstar pic.
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 70): A question about Wellington's approach/takeoff routings - when taking off to the north, why do flights headed for the south island turn west over the city? I ask because last night several 733s and 738s heading for CHC or DUD took the left hand route and, possibly because of the weather conditions, were incredibly loud - the noise really lingered around the central city. Why don't they hang a right and turn to the east, avoiding the noise issue?
I find this interesting also because the ATRs, Q300s and 1900Ds turn to the right and head over Seatoun when heading south. The turbo-props when coming into WLG from the north also pass over Seatoun
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
VirginFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4287 posts, RR: 54 Reply 74, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8273 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 72): Is this also going to use the technology of the locator beacons so that the control tower knows where the plane is? Interesting use of technology - I'd like to see a comparison with RNP.
I *think* you might be thinking of ADS-B, in which case, no I don't think that is what is being referred to. From DJ738's description, they're talking about using a GNSS RNAV arrival procedure. Broadly speaking, this is similar to the RNP arrival procedure in that it makes use of a series of GNSS waypoints, but unlike RNP does not have the same degree of navigational precision monitoring, and as such the minima are higher (which to the passengers means greater likelihood of ending up in Dunedin. Or Invercargill. ).
On a completely different topic,
Quote: Air New Zealand (ANZ) will replace Qantas Airways as its maintenance provider in the Australian cities of Sydney and Melbourne.
An ANZ spokesman in Auckland says Cathay Pacific Airways will replace Qantas in Sydney and John Holland Aviation Services will replace Qantas in Melbourne.
FlyPacificBlue From New Zealand, joined Apr 2009, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 77, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8327 times:
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 67): What does "LMC" stand for? I flew standby a few weeks back and was confirmed 30 mins before departure. Didn't realise the new Pier B gates were so very VERY far away and had to actually run after customs to make the flight.
Last Minute Change. As DJ738 mentioned it is when changes are required to be made to the load sheet as a result of accepting guests after close out. We are usually very accomadationg and can accept all the way up to 15mins prior to STD, however it will depend on baggage, security screening queues etc.
Yep if you check-in right on close out at AKL international, do have your running shoes handy as it is just ridiculously far and will definately require you a fast walk or run. Passengers often complain to us about the distance, but I quietly reply saying "try doing this walk EVERY day?" That often works
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 67): AIAL really went the budget route on this one, which is a real shame. It is cool seeing 4 PacBlue 738s all bunched up like that though.
Sunday morning is even better as there are 5 DJ 738's all parked at Pier B. The 5th A/C is parked at stand 17 whcih is a remote parking stand next to gate 16L
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 79, posted (5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8166 times:
Quoting TG992 (Reply 66):
Here is it, I will not be able to leave this up for long due to bandwith issues
hahahaha LMAO thats classic
They haven't handled their launch properly in terms of informing people how they operate... that said for a LCC they HAVE done the right thing in sticking to their guns. People just need to stop being lazy and get themselves to the airport on time!
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 80, posted (5 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 7818 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 79): They haven't handled their launch properly in terms of informing people how they operate...
I guess people have just expected it to be like any other carrier serving this country domestically. And I also wonder how this will affect other flights like QF's mainstream such as connecting to and from QF25/26. On the JQ flights they say "welcome onboard JQxxx as codeshare with QF2xxx". I'm sure there would be some people who refuse to fly QF because of their JQ experience.
Cchan From South Africa, joined May 2003, 979 posts, RR: 2 Reply 81, posted (5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7663 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 79): People just need to stop being lazy and get themselves to the airport on time!
People can also be late because of circumstances beyond their control, or unexpected delays on the way to the airport.
From reading the discussion here it seems to me that it would be rather unwise to choose JQ domestic flights if there are activities planned in the few hours before or after the flight, or if connecting to/from an international flight. Say, if the MAF search takes unexpectedly long, and the connecting passenger gets to the check-in desk 25 min before the flight, JQ won't have much sympathy for the poor fellow. Is JQ positively avoiding business and international transfer passengers? These are the people who are often a bit late for check-in.
I have little doubt that Air NZ is watching Jetstar closely - and, properly, taking every advantage they can get - but if there is some coordinated "dirty tricks" campaign, then Mr. Buchanan has recourse for this, as Virgin Atlantic did with British Airways.
Most of Jetstar's problems seem to be of their own making and it seems petty to try and blame a rival.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 85, posted (5 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7421 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 81): Is JQ positively avoiding business and international transfer passengers? These are the people who are often a bit late for check-in.
JQ's schedule and frequency does not make it at all attractive to business customers, and with so aircraft in the fleet it can't hope to attract them by flying the right services at the right times. So I doubt if it's trying for them at all.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 83): Police called to JQs CHC check-in desks
Yes, when I checked in for JQ at AKL on Sat afternoon 27 June there was a police presence that stayed most of the day (we were there nearly six hours longer than anticipated . . . ). All very low-key, but nevertheless a presence. I wondered at the time if it was "just in case".
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
JQ has got no one else but itself to blame for all their problems and JQs CEO comments sounds like words from a desperate man who is keen on impressing his boss. When JQ's CEO decides to grow up and stop making up excuses and lies to cover his backside then he will see the problems going away.
The comments I got back today from some friends who flew to AKL this weekend with JQ for a conference wasn't good and they weren't impressed with the delays they experienced both ways
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 87, posted (5 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7154 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 81): Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 79):
People just need to stop being lazy and get themselves to the airport on time!
People can also be late because of circumstances beyond their control, or unexpected delays on the way to the airport.
So they need to be organised and allow themselves enough time for such circumstances.
I have flown from and worked from/at AKL airport for many years and in that time the latest I have ever been is about 15 minutes for a shift and that was because I hadn't allowed my self any extra time over the 20minute drive (at the time and there was an accident holding traffic up). If you live within 15 minutes of the airport allow yourself 25 minutes. If you live 30 mins from the airport allow 45-50 mins, if you live 45 mins (which is most of Auckland) then allow yourself about 70 mins. These times are for travel to the airport. You should plan on arriving at least 10 minutes before checkin closes. So for most Aucklanders who love within 45 mins drive they should leave 1h20m before checkin closes (or 2 hours from departure time). This would mean at most they will have to wait in the airport 1h 30m but in reality less time than this and also after you takeout the actual checkin time and security and boarding then the amount of wasted time is really only about 20mins.... not hard.
Cchan From South Africa, joined May 2003, 979 posts, RR: 2 Reply 88, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7095 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87): So they need to be organised and allow themselves enough time for such circumstances.
Theoretically yes, but a lot of times people are held up in unforeseen circumstances, and say, if you have a meeting before you fly and the meeting ran for longer than scheduled, you can't say to the boss "I am going to allow more time for check-in" then get up and leave, or the boss will make sure there is no next time!
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 89, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7020 times:
The JQ check-in issue is just a sideshow - people will get used to that and will accept that these are the rules that a LCC runs by - I have no doubt.
What they won't get used to is being treated badly by a company that seems impervious to the human aspects of travel and, especially, the human cost of delays. Any airline, even a LCC, needs good press, a good image, to thrive in this kind of market place. No one will persuade me that image doesn't matter, and if the airline truly thinks that, then I'm afraid it will learn that it does the hard way.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 91, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7001 times:
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 89): The JQ check-in issue is just a sideshow - people will get used to that and will accept that these are the rules that a LCC runs by - I have no doubt.
What about Pacific Blue then? They run on a more better check-in time and still managed to get their flights out of time 87% of the time for June
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 93, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6944 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 86): JQ has got no one else but itself to blame for all their problems and JQs CEO comments sounds like words from a desperate man who is keen on impressing his boss.
I have a similar impression.
The Jetstar hoo-haa has mostly washed over me - they don't fly to WRE - but it has become almost impossible to avoid.
To be fair to Mr. Buchanan, he hasn't been in the job long - six months? - and this may be the first time he has been exposed to a media onslaught.
I guess he may grow into the job, but whatever his other qualifications are, I think we can safely say that he doesn't do good pr.r.
Quoting ANstar (Reply 90): What about Ryanai - they aren;t exactly known for being a caring airline.... nor Tiger here in Australia...
Ryanair makes no secret of what they are. Their attitude is that if you don't like 'em, you can fly another airline.
I doubt Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary would ever ask the traveling public to "give us another go" as Mr. Buchanan has done.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 94, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6943 times:
Quoting ANstar (Reply 90): Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 89):
Any airline, even a LCC, needs good press, a good image, to thrive in this kind of market place
What about Ryanai - they aren;t exactly known for being a caring airline.... nor Tiger here in Australia...
Let me pose the question this way, acknowledging that airlines like Ryanair and Tiger don't have a "caring" image: Will any airline do better or worse if it basically insults its passengers and accuses them of bare-faced lies? Is it better for any airline to have a positive public image, or a negative public image? To me, it's a no-brainer. You'll attract more customers if you treat them like human beings than you will by treating them like cargo. You'll attract more custoemrs if you can give them something positive to latch onto in terms of public image than you will if the image is entirely negative. I think of all the money that must have been spent by JQ's PR people addressing the current shambles, and I have to wonder whether they are doing an effective job.
And as for Bruce Buchanan - I frankly wonder how long he can stay in denial before his bosses decide to pull the plug on his contract. From the point of view of an outside observer and recent frustrated passenger, he personally seems to be a big part of the problem. And, frankly, the buck does stop there.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 95, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6783 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 88):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
So they need to be organised and allow themselves enough time for such circumstances.
Theoretically yes, but a lot of times people are held up in unforeseen circumstances, and say, if you have a meeting before you fly and the meeting ran for longer than scheduled, you can't say to the boss "I am going to allow more time for check-in" then get up and leave, or the boss will make sure there is no next time!
Well if you are a businessman JQ really isn't the airline for you... JQ is a LCC designed primarily for people just wanting to get from A-B in the cheapest way possible no frills. On the other hand NZ and DJ provide the frills meaning you often have flexibility with your flights and improved frequency of flights.
As for your example, perhaps shouldn't be booking a flight right after a meeting?
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 97, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6555 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87): So for most Aucklanders who love within 45 mins drive they should leave 1h20m before checkin closes (or 2 hours from departure time).
Before I moved to Wellington, I passionately LOVED in Auckland about 30 mins from the airport Well, I tried, at least.
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87): So they need to be organised and allow themselves enough time for such circumstances.
Except none of this is happening in a vacuum. It's happening in an environment where both Air NZ, JQ's predecessor (Qantas) and to a lesser extent Pacific Blue are fairly lenient and reasonable on checkin times. Again, Air NZ have let me on after checking in ten mins beforehand - people grow accustomed to that. JQ simply didn't understand the local context.
Quoting ANstar (Reply 90): What about Ryanai - they aren;t exactly known for being a caring airline.... nor Tiger here in Australia...
Ryanair also offer considerably lower fares (well, they used to before their "ancillary revenue" strategy went ballistic). Jetstar fares are so-so and nothing spectacular (aside from the startup promo $1 things and whatnot).
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 99, posted (5 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6472 times:
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 97): Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
So for most Aucklanders who love within 45 mins drive they should leave 1h20m before checkin closes (or 2 hours from departure time).
Before I moved to Wellington, I passionately LOVED in Auckland about 30 mins from the airport Silly Well, I tried, at least.
hahaha oops "live"
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 97): Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 87):
So they need to be organised and allow themselves enough time for such circumstances.
Except none of this is happening in a vacuum. It's happening in an environment where both Air NZ, JQ's predecessor (Qantas) and to a lesser extent Pacific Blue are fairly lenient and reasonable on checkin times. Again, Air NZ have let me on after checking in ten mins beforehand - people grow accustomed to that. JQ simply didn't understand the local context.
Yes but NZ and DJ are advertising as being full service. JQ is advertising and positioning as a LCC. Thats how LCC operate all around the world... that is why full service carriers can charge a premium because they offer more service.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 101, posted (5 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6501 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 100): This is just rude, and this attitude won't take one very far.
They are one of the most continuously profitable airlines in the world and their CEO, the colourful and loud mouth Michael O'Leary, is one of the most controversial men in the airline industry.
They are quite ruthless in the way they stick to their rules and just when you think they couldn't possibly find another passenger charge to make - they do.
Want to check in? It will cost you £5 to do it online and £40 if you do it at the airport:
"The airline is also introducing a £40 "boarding card re-issue fee" for passengers who arrive at the airport without a pre-printed check-in boarding card."
Want to check some luggage? Fly a different airline:
"Ryanair plans to stop passengers checking in baggage next year but will allow two or more pieces of carry-on luggage, as it steps up its drive to reduce airport handling costs."
"In an interview on BBC television this morning, Mr O’Leary said that the low-cost airline was looking at the possibility of installing a coin slot on the lavatory door so that “people might actually have to spend a pound to spend a penny.”
The latest idea is "standing room" on the aircraft:
"Ryanair Holdings may offer free flights to passengers willing to stand up during flights of less than 90 minutes, Sky News reported, citing chief executive Michael O'Leary."
There are countless horror stories about Ryanair but passengers flock to 'em. Their June traffic numbers are amazing in this economic downturn:
"Ryanair Holdings (RYAAY 28.55, +0.94, +3.41%) , Europe's largest low-cost airline, on Friday said it carried a record 5.8 million passengers in June, up 13% from the same month last year. The airline said the June figured smashed its previous traffic record of 5.7 million passengers last August. Load factor, a measure of how full an airplane is, improved to 85% from 84%."
This makes Michael O'Leary quite a very powerful man in the industry:
"BERLIN: Irish low-cost airline Ryanair is to order or take firm options on up to 300 new aircraft from Boeing or Airbus by the end of the year, its boss Michael O'Leary said in an interview to be published Monday."
When I saw that odd photo of Jetstar's CEO Buchanan jumping in the air to celebrate their start of service, I thought maybe he was seeing himself as an Australian Michael O'Leary.
But no - Michael O'Leary would never apologize for stranding passengers. It has happened, and Ryanair's basic attitude is "you're on your own."
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 102, posted (5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 6188 times:
Returned from CHC today from a day trip and had B733s both ways. The new safety add got around 90% of the pax on the flight down watching it and around 98% watching it coming back. The video looked very clear on the screen but because of the screens size and the words that were being said were also displayed on the screen the actual add was slightly reduced in size. For the first minute you couldn't really tell the staff were naked, but once it got to the brace position/seat belt you could tell and at that stage you could hear some comments from pax.
IMHO one way to get pax looking at the video is to have the senior FA announce that a new safety video is about to play which could get the whole plane watching it
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
TN486 From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 374 posts, RR: 1 Reply 103, posted (5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 6141 times:
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 89): The JQ check-in issue is just a sideshow - people will get used to that and will accept that these are the rules that a LCC runs by - I have no doubt.
Spot on DavidByrne.
JQ had a lot of "teething problems" when they commenced in Australia, mostly caused by what the flying public expected from an Aussie domestic airline (read QF, AN). The LCC concept was in its infancy (read VB - and they wern't truly LCC). On intro of services, there was no seat allocation, although JQ decided it was in their best interests to intro that service some 6 months after commencement. JQ received a lot of bad press, etc etc. Now that the public has accepted the LCC model, the only time you hear about JQ is when they have a very rare lengthy op problem. JQ has now been op domestically in Australia for 5 years, has made a profit every one of those years, and their patronage continues to grow. I flew them recently AVV-SYD-AVV on the same day (0600 dep AVV, 1710 dep SYD) and on each flight I counted at least 6 "suits", so with the GFC these guys are finding the prices suitable for their travel needs.
The LCC model is not for everyone, however once the public get used to this business model, they shall come to accept it. As for the ac they use, they are clean, extremely well maintained, and are of a very young age.
Quoting Cchan (Reply 100): Regardless of whether they are full service or LCC, they should treat their customers with respect.
Totally agree.
remember the t shirt "I own an airline"on the front - "qantas" on the back
Flyjetstar From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 926 posts, RR: 0 Reply 104, posted (5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 6142 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 99):
Yes but NZ and DJ are advertising as being full service.
How so? When was the last time you saw an ad for NZ and especially DJ that indicated that. I think the traveling public in NZ are we aware that no airlines offers full service within NZ. NZ in particular have made it quite clear that is the case. Maybe its that DJ and NZ are able to do LCC but with style.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 105, posted (5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6127 times:
Quoting TN486 (Reply 103): Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 89):
The JQ check-in issue is just a sideshow - people will get used to that and will accept that these are the rules that a LCC runs by - I have no doubt.
Spot on DavidByrne.
JQ had a lot of "teething problems" when they commenced in Australia, mostly caused by what the flying public expected from an Aussie domestic airline (read QF, AN).
I beg to differ.
In Australia, Qantas kept the City Flyer routes between the largest cities and just put Jetstar on predominantly leisure routes. In contrast, in New Zealand they are putting Jetstar as their carrier between the big cities.
The key difference is that they are delivering Jetstar to passengers who want Qantas, not to cheapskates seeking cheap fares.
NZ's domestic scene already was low-cost based, ever since the Air NZ Express model. But Air NZ manages to deliver their low-cost product without making the passenger feel cheap and nasty, whereas Jetstar doesn't.
Yes but NZ and DJ are advertising as being full service.
How so? When was the last time you saw an ad for NZ
Air NZ "We've got nothing to hide"... sound familiar?? Full service does not just relate to whats onboard... it also relates to things like ticketing and baggage, how delayed passengers are looked after (ie accomodation, food, etc).
Cchan From South Africa, joined May 2003, 979 posts, RR: 2 Reply 107, posted (5 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6085 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 101): They are one of the most continuously profitable airlines in the world and their CEO, the colourful and loud mouth Michael O'Leary, is one of the most controversial men in the airline industry.
They are quite ruthless in the way they stick to their rules and just when you think they couldn't possibly find another passenger charge to make - they do.
We haven't reached the end of the story yet. When they impose more of these ruthless things (i.e. overdoing it), then the negative effects maybe more obvious.
Passengers may tolerate some of these, but there is a limit of tolerance for every person.
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 109, posted (5 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 5956 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 107): Passengers may tolerate some of these, but there is a limit of tolerance for every person.
The deciding factor will be schedule reliability - that's what killed Qantas on domestic and if JQ don't get their act to gether, it'll kill them too.
Seriously, you have to wonder just how important NZ domestic is to Qantas. Wouldn't it be easier (and cheaper) to just interline with Air NZ for domestic pax?
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 110, posted (5 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5935 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 107): We haven't reached the end of the story yet. When they impose more of these ruthless things (i.e. overdoing it), then the negative effects maybe more obvious.
I can't predict the future. Many insist that Ryanair has "overdone it" already, but there is no sign of that in their pax numbers.
Ryanair has been doing what they've been doing for nearly twenty years. Yes, it is possible there may come a point when the pax rebel at the additional charges - known as "ancillary revenue" - but there is no indication that we are not there yet.
At least in the immediate future, it seems more likely that other airlines will adopt more of Ryanair's practices.
This is already happening in the United States, where "ancillary revenue" is increasingly the difference between profit and loss at the (few) profitable airlines.
Cchan From South Africa, joined May 2003, 979 posts, RR: 2 Reply 114, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5550 times:
Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 109): The deciding factor will be schedule reliability - that's what killed Qantas on domestic and if JQ don't get their act to gether, it'll kill them too.
I don't really understand what was the problem with all those Jetconnect delays. There is a LCC called 1 Time here in South Africa, despite operating a fleet of 20+ year old MD80s with as short as 40 min turn around time, they have good on time performance. While Jetconnect's aircrafts are "old", they are not as old as these MD80s.
Quoting Mariner (Reply 110): At least in the immediate future, it seems more likely that other airlines will adopt more of Ryanair's practices.
When a competitor appears, offering better service but same price, then the effects will start to appear. With some of those ridiculous ideas like charging people for going to toilet, problems are just going to start one day. These type of practices may not work for other airlines. For airlines operating in parts of the developing world, charging people for the toilet will most likely end up more costly for the airline as some people will start going to a corner of the cabin to take a relief.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 113): Those B717s would have been perfect for the New Zealand domestic market for both the main trunk and regional routes to HLZ, DUD, ZQN, PMR and ROT
As an Oz airline, they will keep the good planes in Oz!
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 115, posted (5 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5534 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 114): These type of practices may not work for other airlines. For airlines operating in parts of the developing world, charging people for the toilet will most likely end up more costly for the airline as some people will start going to a corner of the cabin to take a relief.
I doubt the pay toilet deal will ever fly, but the point is that other airlines have adopted much of the Ryannair model - such as Air Asia.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 117, posted (5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5343 times:
Quoting Cchan (Reply 114): Quoting 777ER (Reply 113):
Those B717s would have been perfect for the New Zealand domestic market for both the main trunk and regional routes to HLZ, DUD, ZQN, PMR and ROT
As an Oz airline, they will keep the good planes in Oz!
QF have sold some B717s so those sold ones could have been used. If either QF/JQ or DJ operated them here then it would have enabled a faster expansion.
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, RR: 24 Reply 118, posted (5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5341 times:
Did anyone notice the full page add JQ had in the Dominion Post (and possibly other major papers) today? After reading the add, it totally sounded like a desperate PR attempt at painting JQ a better view
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Quote: The airline will add staff and implement new procedures at airports and plans better communications with passengers over check-in progress, according to the advertisements. Customers will get NZ$50 ($31) vouchers if their flights are more than an hour late arriving.
Damn. They should have had this in place in the beginning. It would have nearly paid for my entire joyflight to WLG last week.
Quote: “There’s enough business to sustain Jetstar,” Buchanan told the broadcaster. “We’ve got massive booking volumes. We’re looking at more capacity because demand’s been overwhelming."
More capacity already.. Well.. IMO they should have foreseen this from forward bookings at cheap prices.. Maybe they will be able to get their schedules right soon. Will this become the race between DJ and JQ to secure gate slots for those particular times?
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 1 Reply 121, posted (5 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5261 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 115): Quoting Cchan (Reply 114):
These type of practices may not work for other airlines. For airlines operating in parts of the developing world, charging people for the toilet will most likely end up more costly for the airline as some people will start going to a corner of the cabin to take a relief.
I doubt the pay toilet deal will ever fly, but the point is that other airlines have adopted much of the Ryannair model - such as Air Asia.
news that Ryanair is planning to replace seats with stool type seating. If they do introduce pay as go toilets, will people leave their stools outsite the toilet door?
QF45 From New Zealand, joined Feb 2009, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 122, posted (5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5247 times:
Jetstar have admitted fault, apologised and are working towards reversing what has happened since their start up. It seems though New Zealanders in general are very unforgiving and Jetstar may have a bit more trouble than they anticipate in turning things around. In saying this of course I beleive the media in New Zealand has fueled a lot of the negativity toward Jetstar through some really amateruish reporting.
Kdm From New Zealand, joined Feb 2006, 113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 123, posted (5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5225 times:
Anyone have any idea who the dignitary was on today's 5:30pm ANZ flight from Wellington to Auckland. They kept us on the plane while he took the steps down and climbed into a car they had bought upto the side of the plane. They also unloaded his bags and put them straight into the boot. Not bad service. He had a couple of helpers in a very flash uniform.
Is this how they normally offload these people, i.e they don't use the air bridge?
CHCalfonzo From New Zealand, joined Mar 2007, 73 posts, RR: 0 Reply 124, posted (5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5214 times:
Quoting Kdm (Reply 123): Anyone have any idea who the dignitary was on today's 5:30pm ANZ flight from Wellington to Auckland. They kept us on the plane while he took the steps down and climbed into a car they had bought upto the side of the plane. They also unloaded his bags and put them straight into the boot. Not bad service. He had a couple of helpers in a very flash uniform.
Is this how they normally offload these people, i.e they don't use the air bridge?
Could have been the governer general maybe? I saw him board an NZ 737 in CHC once. A crown BMW drove him to the plane accompanied by several people in military uniform.
Kiwiandrew From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 125, posted (5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5189 times:
Quoting QF45 (Reply 122): In saying this of course I beleive the media in New Zealand has fueled a lot of the negativity toward Jetstar through some really amateruish reporting.
but not as much as Jetstar themselves have fueled it with some really amateurish PR - so far we have had them blame the competition , blame the pax and blame the media rather than blaming themselves for not having done the most basic research before entering the market .
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 126, posted (5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5240 times:
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 125): blame the media rather than blaming themselves for not having done the most basic research before entering the market .
Exactly. They had plenty of time to research and failed miserably when they released the product. It seems as though the first month of service has been their biggest R&D experience.
Knid From New Zealand, joined Aug 2005, 201 posts, RR: 0 Reply 127, posted (5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5216 times:
Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 124):
Could have been the governer general maybe? I saw him board an NZ 737 in CHC once. A crown BMW drove him to the plane accompanied by several people in military uniform.
No, he was in AKL this afternoon, maybe an ambassador returning from presenting their credentials yesterday?
Quoting QF45 (Reply 122): New Zealanders in general are very unforgiving and Jetstar may have a bit more trouble than they anticipate in turning things around
Well they say you never get a second chance at a first impression, they may have already blown it, it will be interesting to see.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 128, posted (5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5206 times:
Quoting QF45 (Reply 122): It seems though New Zealanders in general are very unforgiving and Jetstar may have a bit more trouble than they anticipate in turning things around.
Within my experience, New Zealanders are among the more forgiving people I know. Sometimes I wish they would be a lot more unforgiving.
Jetstar royally screwed up. Having loudly denied they did anything wrong, they are now apologising for doing it all wrong.
Mr. Buchanan may be extraordinarily clever at many, many things - but as noted above he does lousy pr.r.
I'm an Australian and I was embarrassed by it. It made us - Aussies - look like dingbats.
Aerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 1609 posts, RR: 18 Reply 129, posted (5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5179 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 128): I'm an Australian and I was embarrassed by it. It made us - Aussies - look like dingbats.
Haha! Haven't heard that term used for a while
Once they get their reliability sorted, things will come right-ish, I think. Though with their terrible scheduling and the atrocious publicity surrounding the ridiculous delays to date, they may well have blown it with the business community and confined themselves to the leisure market. Which, in my opinion, makes Jetstar the weakest of the three. Now if PacBlue could maybe boost their frequencies, particularly on AKL-WLG (5 a day, at least, say with 2 738s during downtime from international services and E190s on the other 3) and AKL-CHC (similar to my proposed WLG frequencies), then Ithink they can solidify into the second domestic carrier fairly quickly.
IMO they should theoretically do it very soon to pounce on the opportunity before JQ levels out and/or NZ takes more of the rather monopolistic pie that is available to them.
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 131, posted (5 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5005 times:
Quoting Kdm (Reply 123): Anyone have any idea who the dignitary was on today's 5:30pm ANZ flight from Wellington to Auckland. They kept us on the plane while he took the steps down and climbed into a car they had bought upto the side of the plane. They also unloaded his bags and put them straight into the boot. Not bad service. He had a couple of helpers in a very flash uniform.
Is this how they normally offload these people, i.e they don't use the air bridge?
There has been speculation that the head of the NSA has been in NZL recently... he would however be flying in a private jet most likely.
ANstar From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3365 posts, RR: 6 Reply 135, posted (5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4850 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 134): What routes are restricted by ETOPS180? And I believe this is only regarding NZ-Aus flights because the other services are Aussie registered planes.
Only VH routes are the ones to the Solomons, Bali and PNG... all others are ops by ZK aircraft.
Indeed, so what routes need ETOPS180 in order to be flown either trans Tasman or into the Islands? Having a look at the Great Circle Mapper, I don't see any problems with only having ETOPS120 as you could get anywhere between Australia, New Zealand and most of the South Pacific with the possible exception of PPT and I don't really expect Pac Blue to be expanding that far so quickly when they have yet to substantially build up the New Zealand network both domestically and to Australia.
AerorobNZ From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 4150 posts, RR: 11 Reply 137, posted (5 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4765 times:
Quoting QF45 (Reply 122): Jetstar have admitted fault, apologised and are working towards reversing what has happened since their start up. It seems though New Zealanders in general are very unforgiving and Jetstar may have a bit more trouble than they anticipate in turning things around. In saying this of course I beleive the media in New Zealand has fueled a lot of the negativity toward Jetstar through some really amateruish reporting.
JQ screwed things up with or without the media. The fact is we live in a country that is small and insular in nature, so the bad PR goes further and wider into the population than somewhere larger. Whats more is that JQ alienated the passengers that were flying them rather than try to recover their business, and it's not like NZ/DJ/JQ share a large market to afford them a buffer for that kind of thing.... They're still a strong competitor tho, so unfortunately I don't think they'll be bankrupt any time soon - but I can hope can't I...??
DJ738 From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 396 posts, RR: 2 Reply 139, posted (5 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4735 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 136): I don't see any problems with only having ETOPS120 as you could get anywhere between Australia, New Zealand and most of the South Pacific
We've been told ETOPS 180 will enable a more direct flightpatch for some routes.
Quoting ANstar (Reply 135): Only VH routes are the ones to the Solomons, Bali and PNG... all others are ops by ZK aircraft.
And don't forget BNE - WLG, also operated by VirginBlue with VH aircraft...
Kdm From New Zealand, joined Feb 2006, 113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 141, posted (5 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4728 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 131): There has been speculation that the head of the NSA has been in NZL recently... he would however be flying in a private jet most likely.
I thought it was a foreign military leader of some sort. The car had no flags. The two support people, one female and one male had very flash uniforms and the top bloke was sort of huddled into the car rather than a casual stroll. I would have said it was MJ in different times.
My real question I guess was not who was it as I am usually not bothered about the whose who of the world, but rather is it standard procedure with such a guest to not use an air bridge but have the entire plane deplane through stairs just so one guy can get straight into his car.
Kiwiandrew From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 144, posted (5 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4715 times:
Quoting NZB (Reply 143): Quoting NZ99 (Reply 138):
When are we going to see the first NZ 763 with Winglets
Due back in AKL Monday
yeehah! please somebody get some nice photos of it and post them for me - I am not likely to get the chance to see it in real life until February next year when I pop back home to New Zealand to get married ( and I may not be able to make much time for spotting on that trip !)
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 146, posted (5 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4670 times:
Quoting DJ738 (Reply 145): PolynesianBlue flights are operated BY PacificBlue. So yes, any PolyBlue routes are indirectly covered by the new ETOPS extension.
Great, thanks for the clarification. But as I said earlier, from looking on the Great Circle Mapper, the only route that anyone would want to do and seems restricted by ETOPS 120 would be AKL-PPT. Maybe there are tiny areas which aren't covered by that map.
CHCalfonzo From New Zealand, joined Mar 2007, 73 posts, RR: 0 Reply 147, posted (5 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4644 times:
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 144): yeehah! please somebody get some nice photos of it and post them for me - I am not likely to get the chance to see it in real life until February next year when I pop back home to New Zealand to get married ( and I may not be able to make much time for spotting on that trip !)
I've seen a pic, they look great! They are identical to the tail design with teal/blue and a white koru. Don't have the pic handy though sorry.
AerorobNZ From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 4150 posts, RR: 11 Reply 148, posted (5 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4549 times:
Quoting FlyPacificBlue (Reply 77): Yep if you check-in right on close out at AKL international, do have your running shoes handy as it is just ridiculously far and will definately require you a fast walk or run. Passengers often complain to us about the distance, but I quietly reply saying "try doing this walk EVERY day?" That often works
It really isn't that far....when I flew out on A380 EK412 I went down to greet my parents coming off the flight from WLG at domestic, I decided to have a coffee with them so I ended up leaving domestic at 1640. The biggest delay was at customs where I waited for 7-8minutes yet I arrived at the gate at around 1705..... I could have completed it in less time but I was with someone who has a shorter slower stride than mine...
Having said that DJ does have their flights in the middle of hub congestion time
To what extent do UA and NZ already work together? I know UA left LAX-AKL and NZ left SYD-LAX at the same time to streamline services, but is their any joint operation beyond the codeshare and Star Alliance agreements?
I also wonder whether NZ and AC might try and use the DJ/DL proposal to have their proposed joint venture reexamined by the ACCC...
V/F
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large. Then make the dream real. - Donald Douglas Snr
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 151, posted (5 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4398 times:
Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 150): To what extent do UA and NZ already work together? I know UA left LAX-AKL and NZ left SYD-LAX at the same time to streamline services, but is their any joint operation beyond the codeshare and Star Alliance agreements?
I also wonder whether NZ and AC might try and use the DJ/DL proposal to have their proposed joint venture reexamined by the ACCC...
It strikes me that Air NZ has three options across the Pacific.
OPTION ONE: Continue to go it alone
In this model the airline continues to funnel through Auckland passengers from across NZ and from ADE, BNE, CNS, MEL and OOL.
The advantage is that the Australian traffic is a bonus, but the drawback is that volumes are relatively small and leave UA, QF, DL and VA effectively setting the prices and profit margins.
OPTION TWO: Acquire V Australia, plus or minus Virgin Blue
This would unabashedly be my option. It would expand Air NZ's "home" market from 4 million New Zealanders to 14 million including Queensland and Victoria, and would allow the airline to tap into a much more profitable pair of states which Qantas ignores.
It would also open up the possibility of adding SFO-LHR services to the existing LAX-LHR service. The NZ-US-UK traffic rights allow Air NZ to sell 392 seats per day between California and LHR, which is why there is the daily 744 NZ1/2 service.
But V Australia could add a MEL-SFO-LHR service on a 772 to add to an Air NZ 772 LAX-LHR service and the group would effectively have around 580 seats per day between the UK and California.
Air NZ would now be on a more or less even footing with Qantas in terms of the Australia/NZ-USA market and could set prices instead of following them.
I would see the following routes in this model, where brackets indicate that the "other" airline or a different connecting flight operates a connecting sector.
In other words, the purchase of a small fleet of 773s with an Australian flag allows a much more comprehensive network to be developed. There are no cabotage hinderances, and I'd foresee a movement of 773s from VA to NZ with 772s going the other way.
OPTION THREE: Formally cooperate with UA and AC
This model leaves me uncomfortable because Air NZ remains a minor partner. UA and AC would wear the trousers, and Air NZ would be fully exposed to the inpact of other carriers coming and going across the Pacific.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 152, posted (5 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4385 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 151): This would unabashedly be my option. It would expand Air NZ's "home" market from 4 million New Zealanders to 14 million including Queensland and Victoria, and would allow the airline to tap into a much more profitable pair of states which Qantas ignores.
I'd agree with that.
Whether or not Virgin Blue would now sell V Australia, in view of the Delta tie-up, is an open question
Again, I'd agree, except that the world has changed somewhat in the last twelve hours with the news that United and Continental have been given anti-trust immunity.
A formal co-operation with United and Continental would change the game for Air NZ.
Mostly, I think you're right that Air NZ needs to do something. My eyebrows are raised quite high at the possible implications of the Delta deal.
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 153, posted (5 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4317 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 152): Mostly, I think you're right that Air NZ needs to do something
Quoting Mariner (Reply 152): My eyebrows are raised quite high at the possible implications of the Delta deal.
Quoting Mariner (Reply 152): the world has changed somewhat in the last twelve hours with the news that United and Continental have been given anti-trust immunity
Air New Zealand's world has just collapsed, if you want my opinion.
The "small target" policy of having no current new direction for a post-recession world has just collapsed. If Air NZ is not careful its most profitable long-haul flights (North America) are going to be reduced to the new role of being a feeder into UA/CO services at Sydney.
We now know that that precious secondary MEL/BNE market to North America is going to disappear, because the DL/VA partnership won't just have non-stop flights from SYD but from BNE and MEL too, where one week ago it looked as if VA would fail going it alone from those markets.
Until the UA/CO move got the tick I thought that acquiring V Australia would be a nice extra for the airline. But the VA/DL and UA/CO link-ups mean that either Air NZ buys V Australia now or it has to follow MALEV and Czech into being a short-haul only airline.
ANstar From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 3365 posts, RR: 6 Reply 154, posted (5 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4269 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 153): Until the UA/CO move got the tick I thought that acquiring V Australia would be a nice extra for the airline. But the VA/DL and UA/CO link-ups mean that either Air NZ buys V Australia now or it has to follow MALEV and Czech into being a short-haul only airline.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 155, posted (5 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4250 times:
Quoting Koruman (Reply 153): But the VA/DL and UA/CO link-ups mean that either Air NZ buys V Australia now or it has to follow MALEV and Czech into being a short-haul only airline.
I think - and it is early days so I can't be sure - that we are seeing the start of a whole new approach to the way airlines are structured.
Lufthansa has three or four European airlines under its wing and has a stake in JetBlue, Republic is buying both Midwest and Frontier (and has said they would buy more) and - if the rumors are true - Indigo/Oaktree will have Air Jamaica in their stable as well as Spirit.
Virgin Blue, written off by many just a few months ago, now has the Delta alliance and also could easily use the Samoan rights they have through Polynesian to make a serious mark in the Pacific - and Asia.
I'd love to think that small, independent airlines can survive on their own, but I'm not sure they can. The rash of LCC's in this part of the world are dramatically changing the landscape, just as the new major alliances will do.
I think it is close to imperative that Air NZ align themselves with someone.
United and Continental might well welcome Air NZ into their bed and if Air NZ wanted to revive the failed, proposed Qantas union, I would think there is more than enough competition now - here and in Oz - to satisfy the regulators.
I am sure there are other partnerships that could be beneficial, but I think the concept of the national "stand alone" carrier may be going - as you suggest with some of the European airlines - the way of the dodo.
ETA Unknown From Comoros, joined Jun 2001, 1618 posts, RR: 0 Reply 156, posted (5 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4169 times:
Why even contemplate buying V Australia when Virgin Blue can revoke the interline agreement the next day? NZ might as well go back to operating SYD-LAX nonstop themselves in such a scenario.
Hey- here's a theory- why doesn't NZ get Virgin to buy them!!!
Macilree From New Zealand, joined Dec 2006, 139 posts, RR: 5 Reply 157, posted (5 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3960 times:
Do any readers have ready access to month-by-month domestic passenger numbers for CHC for 2007 and earlier if possible? These would have been released by the airport company but are not available on its web site.
It being a wet afternoon, I have been doing some graphs of domestic passenger numbers at AKL, WLG and CHC with a view to following what impact Jetstar has over coming months on overall domestic passenger numbers. The data sources I am using are available at: AKL,WLG and CHC.
As readers may know, detailed domestic air transport data for New Zealand has been hard to get hold of since deregulation in the 1980s but the major airports have been required to release the total numbers. If I am correct, virtually all domestic airline routes now pass through or originate or terminate at AKL, WLG or CHC. The only notable exception is I think Air NZ's PMR-HLZ sector.
My preliminary conclusion is that since November 2008 there has been a relatively marked drop off in domestic passenger numbers compared with the same month in the previous year. However November 2007 saw the start up of domestic services by Pacific Blue. Given the recession and the sharp drop in international arrivals from NE Asia through AKL, will the switch from Qantas to Jetstar on 10 June 2009 have anything near the same positive impact?
Koruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 160, posted (5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3831 times:
Quoting ETA Unknown (Reply 156): Why even contemplate buying V Australia when Virgin Blue can revoke the interline agreement the next day? NZ might as well go back to operating SYD-LAX nonstop themselves in such a scenario.
Firstly, the whole point is that when Air NZ operated SYD-LAX the only aircraft with long enough legs in the fleet was the 744, and it was so big that they needed domestic feed. But 772 aircraft are perfect for all MEL/BNE-USA routes and domestic Virgin Blue feed wouldn't be required.
Secondly, V Australia would bring Air NZ an Australian flag, possibly allowing it to operate an SFO-LHR sector in addition to NZ1/2 LAX-LHR, and definitely allowing it to operate AKL-MEL-JNB.
Thirdly, some Australians may balk at flying Air NZ from BNE/MEL to the USA, for both xenophobic and Ansett-related reasons, and would consider V Australia to be a dinky-di Aussie option.
Fourthly, SYD-LAX is probably the very last Australia-USA sector the airline should consider: it has too much competition and one of the two markets is in a terrible recession (NSW).
Honestly, I'd use the VA 773 aircraft for HKG-LHR and LAX-LHR and MEL-JNB, and use 772 aircraft on every other sector.
ETA Unknown From Comoros, joined Jun 2001, 1618 posts, RR: 0 Reply 168, posted (5 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3539 times:
Contemplate operating BNE-LAX without any domestic Australia feed?!? Noooooooooo!
Sorry, but if NZ couldn't make a 744 SYD-LAX work with all of AN's resources feeding the flight- you can forget it.
Secondly- as the NZ Govt. owns NZ now, there is no way they can justify using public money to buy an Australian airline after the AN fiasco.
VirginFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4287 posts, RR: 54 Reply 169, posted (5 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3533 times:
Quoting NZA320 (Reply 163): Link to first pics of the 767 with winglets First Air New Zealand 767 With Winglets (PIC) (by Dab920 Jul 12 2009 in Civil Aviation)
Looks like the thread has been deleted - I'm guessing it linked to photos on a certain other website? Anyway, there are some pics over at Juliet Papa November - hopefully they'll make an appearance in this website sooner rather than later so we can link them into this thread!
Quoting TG992 (Reply 165): Personally I think having the Koru on the winglets as well actually lessens its impact. Sorry to be a killjoy
I'm going to have to agree with my learned friend I'm afraid - it looks a touch crowded. Maybe it is just the photo and it will look great in real like. I'd like to see how it looks without the koru, like on the 747s:
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 170, posted (5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3479 times:
Quoting ETA Unknown (Reply 168): Sorry, but if NZ couldn't make a 744 SYD-LAX work with all of AN's resources feeding the flight- you can forget it.
Secondly- as the NZ Govt. owns NZ now, there is no way they can justify using public money to buy an Australian airline after the AN fiasco.
Something has to give. Around the world, airlines are forging new types of alliances and ownership structures.
Air NZ has a core market, a home market of 4 million people. It has available to it ways to increase that home market by 20 million. Yet they take little advantage of it.
I don't think V Australia is available for sale - but it might have been, a year ago. The whole of Virgin Blue could have been had for a song, but that was then, this is now and Virgin Blue has shown themselves adept at survival - by doing deals.
No Australian domestic feed? That can be fixed. If the Government would get the wobblies about a purchase, do deals.
Do a deal with Rex Aviation, say, and get all that remarkable country (Australian) feed. Or did Virgin Blue beat us to that punch, too?
Not to forget that Rex took advantage of the dark circumstances last year and bought themselves a hefty slab of Virgin Blue at about 20 cents a share. Those shares are now worth 50% more, and in view of the Delta deal will probably go higher.
Why does Virgin Blue have a stake in Polynesian and not Air NZ - the Pacific is supposed to be our natural home?
Mostly, I'd like to see Air NZ use those extraordinary beyond Australia rights, not with "the big routes" to Europe, but by capitalizing on the more regional ones - especially to Asia through Australia.
We cannot look at the future as the under-dog. We may be small but we have to fight for survival, not take what comes.
Ansett was a total cock-up, I agree. But is that ghost of Ansett to hang around our necks - like a millstone?
ETA Unknown From Comoros, joined Jun 2001, 1618 posts, RR: 0 Reply 173, posted (5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3278 times:
There are reports that after the DL-DJ interline fare deal was struck, DJ pulled their fares from UA, so this is a threat to NZ feed. Rex's little props aren't going to do the trick to fill a LAX service. Instead of NZ buying an Aussie outfit, perhaps best if they base a few A320's across the Tasman and run their own domestic flights.
In my opinion, the AN fiasco is going to hang around for quite some time- but not in Australia.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 175, posted (5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3277 times:
Quoting ETA Unknown (Reply 173): Rex's little props aren't going to do the trick to fill a LAX service.
No, they aren't - nor did I suggest that. But why miss out on the traffic they do provide?
Something is better than nothing.
Nor does it just have to be Rex. Or even Rex. I'm sure a good, inventive business brain can come up with other options.
Quoting ETA Unknown (Reply 173): Instead of NZ buying an Aussie outfit, perhaps best if they base a few A320's across the Tasman and run their own domestic flights.
Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 3492 posts, RR: 10 Reply 176, posted (5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3279 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 155):
United and Continental might well welcome Air NZ into their bed and if Air NZ wanted to revive the failed, proposed Qantas union, I would think there is more than enough competition now - here and in Oz - to satisfy the regulators.
It may well be that if NZ does pretty much the status quo, it does a deal with UA/CO to operate their Oz-USA routes for them with 77W... perhaps as a full 50:50 air services agreement like how QF and BA do on the kangaroo route.
If CO and UA end up merging then I would be completely shocked if the combined entity did not have its own metal flying to Oz and indeed possibly even resuming NZL flights.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 178, posted (5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3231 times:
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 176): It may well be that if NZ does pretty much the status quo, it does a deal with UA/CO to operate their Oz-USA routes for them with 77W
Certainly, I think that is one answer, but I don't now how easy it would be to achieve to achieve.
The problem (for me) is that Air NZ has been aligned with United and I think they have become the least visionary of the the US majors.
The deal with Continental may change that, but I don't think Air NZ should just rest on the laurels of the Star Alliance.
Kiwiandrew From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 179, posted (5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3227 times:
[quote=Zkpilot,reply=176]It may well be that if NZ does pretty much the status quo, it does a deal with UA/CO to operate their Oz-USA routes for them with 77W... perhaps as a full 50:50 air services agreement like how QF and BA do on the kangaroo route.[/quote
small point , the BA/QF JSA is not 50:50 ( unless it has been re-negotiated recently ) revenues and costs are split in proportion to the capacity provided by each carrier on the route - eg if QF supply 75% of capacity and BA supply 25% then QF are liable for 75% of the JSA costs and earn 75% of the revenue - this makes a similar arrangement for UA/CO/NZ extremely unlikely - if NZ were to supply 100% of the capacity ( or close enough if you ignore GUM-CNS ) they would get 100% ( or close enough ) of the costs against them but also 100% of the revenues . If a UA/CO/NZ deal were done it would have to run on a different type of agreement from the BA/QF JSA
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 180, posted (5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3225 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 175): Quoting ETA Unknown (Reply 173):
Instead of NZ buying an Aussie outfit, perhaps best if they base a few A320's across the Tasman and run their own domestic flights.
Yes. That, too.
I agree that the landscape has changed, and there is a risk of NZ becoming an also-ran (gone are the "AN" days of just a few years ago when the airline claimed it was in the top 20 carriers globally . . . !). The issue of Australian feed for NZ is an interesting one, and I've several times previously postulated the idea of having limited domestic services to feed long-haul ops. The interesting question is, though - from where to where?
As far as long-haul services to North America and the Pacific are concerned, the best feed of all for NZ is into its hub at AKL directly from Australia. In that regard, they have CNS, BNE, OOL, SYD, MEL and ADL covered already, so the only realistic destinations that lack such a feed woudl be PER, HBA, CBR, NTL and TSV. These destinations could be served in one of two ways:
(a) Non-stop service to AKL connecting to NA flights, arriving at AKL at around 1800-1830; or
(b) Domestic connections via SYD/MEL/BNE/OOL
Looking at (a) first: PER could connect to NA flights three-four times weekly on a daily schedule that alternated thus: Day 1 AKL 0700-1045 PER 1210-2230 AKL; Day 2 AKL 0100-0445 PER 0740-1800 AKL and so on. A bit antisocial on three days out of seven, but not impossibly so.
HBA, CBR and NTL could be served from AKL thus - AKL 0730 - 0930 HBA 1030 - 1700 AKL etc, but none are likely to be able to support more than (say) three flights a week to AKL, even with the North America connection, TSV would also be doable as a day return trip, a bit tighter schedule-wise, but OK (as CNS is now). Again, I'd be concerned about the frequency being low.
Looking at (b), connecting to NA via SYD/MEL/BNE/OOL from HBA/CBR/NTL/TSV and again in AKL would in effect mean at least a two-stop journey from home to North America, which doesn't really cut it competitively. So my conclusion would be that the only way to serve NA from Australia is to hub through AKL with as many Australian destinations directly timed to connect by arriving at around 1800-1830.
There's no need for feed into Asian services, because no Australian in their right mind would transit AKL to get to Asia. That situation might change if NZ offered (say) CHC-SYD-HKG-MAN flights and conenctions from ADL/HBA/MEL might become viable, but that's not on the immediate horizon (and with the announcements of the last few days this is becoming an immediate issue)
That leaves Tasman services. Again, feed for Tasman services is only required where a nonstop flight doesn't operate, or where it operates so infrequently as to be a disincentive to travel. Introducing new nonstop TT services as in the above analysis might be very risky in the current economic climate - we've seen low-demand TT services cut this year (despite allegedly record numbers of Asutralian visitors to NZ).
The way to feed Tasman services would be to concentrate on the "natural" hubbing opportunities that exist at SYD/MEL/BNE in the mid-morning (0900-1030-ish and early evening (1800-1930-ish) and feed more aircraft into SYD/MEL/BNE from secondary Australian destinations. I could imagine, for example, the following flights hubbing:
CHC-SYD-CNS, coupled with
HBA-SYD-CHC
plus WLG-SYD-TSV, coupled with
ADL-SYD-WLG
Effectively, a HBA-SYD-TSV flight is scheduled to connect with existign CHC-SYD-CHC flights and run as a TT service uising the new "domestic" arrangements that will soon exist. Routes like SYD-HBA, SYD-CNS, SYD-ADL and SYD-TSV might well be able to stand on their own on a daily basis. The advantage here is that seamless connections would be provided to ALL NZ ports - AKL, WLG, CHC, ZQN (and even DUD), giving connectivity better than rivals DJ and JQ are able to offer (so far).
Such flights, operating once or at most twice daily to meet the two hubbing opportunities, are not going to make huge inroads into the Australian market. However, if A320 aircraft are used with proper PTVs then they may attract a niche market domestically, as well as enhancing TT travel opportunities.
So my conclusion is that NZ might well offer limited domestic flights in Australia, but only to support TT operations and improve the number of seamless TT city pairings - and that this might be a brilliant strategy in the forthcoming "domesticated" TT market.
If the need is to support North American flights, then this strategy won't work, as it's competitively preferable to have nonstop services from the Australian secondary ports into AKL.
Could NZ do either in the current economic climate? Hmm - launching into the Australian domestic market with a limited suite of connections via SYD's domestic terminal into HBA, TSV and even ADL, CNS, PER etc might at least allow a concentration of marketing effort around SYD. But ports like CBR and NTL are not going to be served with A320s from SYD, and so some kind of fragmentation of marketing effort and serving these ports from BNE or MEL might be required. But with Tiger on the prowl, it will be a hard row to hoe . . .
As for the nonstop services from secondary ports to AKL: It will be tough to get enough pax to support such routes, even with the connections to North America. I think this would be my preferred option, but I'm also mindful that the perceived advantages of NZ's hub at AKL might be seriously dissipated, depending on the way in which the freeing up of the Australasian "domestic" market occurs, specifically what the airlines do and/or are required to do in terms of where they handle customs and immigration clearance.
All in all, no easy solutions for NZ on this one.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 13711 posts, RR: 94 Reply 181, posted (5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3198 times:
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 180): All in all, no easy solutions for NZ on this one.
I agree, and I certainly don't have answers, nor do I think that anything I can come up with is necessarily "right."
And I agree that the AKL hub must be protected - the problem is that protecting the hub may lead to stagnation of everywhere else. And missed opportunities.
The strong resistance I see (here and elsewhere) to the beyond Australia rights is two-fold: (i) the lack of domestic Australian feed and (ii) the ghost of Ansett.
I really don't understand (i). No one can tell me that Continental's GUM-CNS relies entirely on O&D, they are sending pax on from CNS to other places in Oz and getting pax from elsewhere in Oz to GUM.
(Not that I am suggesting Air NZ start CNS-GUM, but it is an easy leg for the A320, just as CNS-POM would have been.)
As to (ii) I have no idea how to lay that Ansett ghost except - as usual for me - to think smaller. And think more regional. Asia, say.
I don't think too many Kiwis would cry "Ansett doom!" if Air NZ added a 1 or 2 x weekly AKL-CNS-PVG.
I guess Kiwis might cry "Ansett doom!" if Air NZ added CBR-CNS, but maybe not, especially if they could somehow wangle a WLG-CBR as well.
Again, I am not suggesting CNS as a focus city for Air NZ, it's just that I can think of a lot of (regional/Asia) routes from there that make some sense, without being too much of a red rag to the Oz airlines.
Forget CNS - use BNE and similar rules apply, just to other places.
More importantly, I'd like to see stronger direct alliances with a couple of other airlines, not just the blanket coverage of Star.
What I am seeing in the rest of the world is a realignment (Lufthansa's flock of airlines, eg) and a whole new attitude to airline corporate structure (Lufthansa's flock of airlines, eg).
So I'll be fascinated to see what Virgin Blue comes up with on Wednesday morning, and why they thought it was necessary to halt trading in their shares today, until then.
The betting is that it is an infusion of capital. I wonder from whom?
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 182, posted (5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3130 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 181): So I'll be fascinated to see what Virgin Blue comes up with on Wednesday morning, and why they thought it was necessary to halt trading in their shares today, until then.
The betting is that it is an infusion of capital. I wonder from whom?
I'm likewise betting that it's an infusion of capital, but the reason behind it will be more interesting. Is it (a) to allow implementation of an expansion strategy, or (b) to fill up the hole left by the red ink that has already been spilled? With all the doom and gloom discussion about DJ, it sounds like it could be (b) - but who knows?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
"A Macquarie Equities analyst, Russell Shaw, upgraded the airline to a neutral because of forecast strong growth in earnings per share next year and the year after."
So, sitting on the fence, I'm guessing it is a combination of your (a) and (b).
IMHO what Tauranga and Hamilton airport are doing is also what Rotorua, Taupo and other near by areas should be doing. No region like the BOP can handle 2+ international airports so its in their best interest to join forces with HLZ and provide a bus to/from HLZ and Tauranga, Rotorua and Taupo that serves all the other towns in between those destinations.
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
QF45 From New Zealand, joined Feb 2009, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 185, posted (5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2999 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 184): IMHO what Tauranga and Hamilton airport are doing is also what Rotorua, Taupo and other near by areas should be doing. No region like the BOP can handle 2+ international airports so its in their best interest to join forces with HLZ and provide a bus to/from HLZ and Tauranga, Rotorua and Taupo that serves all the other towns in between those destinations
Agreed, it is a far more realistic idea for the region.
Kiwiandrew From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, RR: 17 Reply 186, posted (5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3011 times:
OK , going to get shot down in flames here but I would be interested to get peoples feedback on the following :
Australia is an important market for NZ but realistically NZ is never going to be able to challenge QF full on due to lack of capital and the fact that QF might tolerate them when they are a minor nuisance but definitely have the resources to destroy NZ if they become too much of a threat .
QF have already established , on a limited basis , the practice of selling Australian domestic seats from International terminals .
*A airlines deliver many pax to Australia ( off the top of my head TG SQ SA CA AC UA OZ and soon to be member CO all operate to Australia , some at low capacity and to a single gateway , others with multiple gateways and frequencies ) but if those pax wish to visit more than one city in Australia they have no *A option ( other than UA pax wanting to do both SYD and MEL )
NZ already have an established set up in a number of Australian cities , including their own lounges in SYD , MEL and BNE (? not 100% sure about the last one ) .
To my mind a relatively low investment ( and therefore low risk ) option is for NZ to extend their flights arriving into SYD/MEL/BNE from various New Zealand points to provide a limited domestic network in Australia - I acknowledge that it is normally tag flights are regarded as relatively expensive , but I envisage NZ in the first phase continuing these flights to cities they already serve and therefore have existing ground handling agreements , marketing etc ( two possible exceptions to the 'no new cities rule' could be a CBR tag daily on one of the WLG-SYD services and a HBA tag onto a MEL service being the only new points on the network ) .
disadvantages :
-some extra investment would be required as the tag services could not be operated using solely the existing capacity to Australia
-it would piss QF off which has inherent dangers , but I dont think that in the current environment QF would be prepared to invest too much energy in 'clobbering' NZ provided they do not get too big .
advantages :
-would enhance the value of NZ to *A
- because these flights would operate from the international terminals they would enable good connections to/from other *A carriers services
- the inbound market to NZ is always going to be the most important thing for NZ but many of those people doing a 'once in a lifetime' trip want to do New Zealand and Australia , NZ can only provide limited offerings to these people .
- would give Australian based *A frequent flyers additional earn and burn opportunities thus enhancing loyalty for people such as Koruman
- would go some way towards fixing the gap in the *A network left by the implosion of AN ( although I personally dont think that the absence of an Australian domestic network hasn't been as much of a blow to *A worldwide ops as some Australian-based posters would have us believe )
If this worked purely with tag services for a year or so and seemed to be viable then the following options open up in the medium term
- add a couple of Australian based aircraft to provide limited additional frequencies ( I would be very reticent to start adding destinations , frankly I think SYD MEL BNE PER ADL OOL CNS CBR HBA would cover the needs of most travellers )
- start using some of those international rights out of Australia ( mainly ex MEL and BNE where they can possibily capitalise on the feeling that QF only cares about SYD )
- it would put NZ in a better position to take advantage of the situation if another operator ( such as Tiger ) decided to drop out of the market or if V Australia collapses in a screaming heap .
Please note that I am not suggesting trying to duplicate DJ or become a replacement AN , I accept that the yields will be relatively low because the network and frequencies I am suggesting will be unattractive to business travellers , I re-iterate my feeling that NZ would need to keep it small to avoid incurring the wrath of the 400kg gorilla known as QF .
Alright , I am ready , shoot me down
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
Alangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 1 Reply 187, posted (5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3002 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 184): IMHO what Tauranga and Hamilton airport are doing is also what Rotorua, Taupo and other near by areas should be doing. No region like the BOP can handle 2+ international airports so its in their best interest to join forces with HLZ and provide a bus to/from HLZ and Tauranga, Rotorua and Taupo that serves all the other towns in between those destinations.
What time will those buses operate? If flights depart HLZ at dawn and arrive back near midnight, the passengers to/from Tauranga will be best advised to stay at an Airport Hotel in Hamilton. Check in at HLZ would start around 5 am, so people from Tauranga would leave their homes about 3 am? Surely people from Tauranga are still better off driving to AKL to catch flights in the middle of the day.
DavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 15 Reply 188, posted (5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2997 times:
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 186): To my mind a relatively low investment ( and therefore low risk ) option is for NZ to extend their flights arriving into SYD/MEL/BNE from various New Zealand points to provide a limited domestic network in Australia - I acknowledge that it is normally tag flights are regarded as relatively expensive , but I envisage NZ in the first phase continuing these flights to cities they already serve and therefore have existing ground handling agreements , marketing etc ( two possible exceptions to the 'no new cities rule' could be a CBR tag daily on one of the WLG-SYD services and a HBA tag onto a MEL service being the only new points on the network ) .
Very similar to one of the options I was proposing in Post 180 above. I'd be aiming to keep the short sectors to a minimum (instead of doing SYD-CBR, for example, how about MEL-CBR or BNE-CBR?) but connectivity through the number of Transtasman city pairs that could be offerd by NZ would be greatly enhanced compared with today. With the Tasman likely to become a domestic market, it's possible that all NZ flights into and out of Australia could be run through domestic terminals, too, greatly enhancing the marketing possibilities for such flights.
So, no, I refuse to shoot you down!
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
Yes thats a good point, but those pax would be giving their spending money to the Auckland region economy and not to the BOP economy which is why HLZ really wants their international flights to work.
On Monday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday when flights leave between 7-7.15am a bus would need to leave Tauranga at 4.50am at the latest to make the flights and still be able to make 3-4 stops en-route to pick up passengers.
On Tuesday and Thursdays when a flight leaves at 6am a bus would need to leave Tauranga at 3.50am at the latest to make the trip that is slightly over 1 hour.
for the return journey a bus could leave 40mins after arrival and make it back to Tauranga before 2am
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
And then it comes back to the point of how much longer it'd take to get to Auckland. If you're only adding on another couple of hours, I don't see why the likes of NZ would want to care about such a small number of passengers in comparision to those already situated on the Auckland Isthmus. They know that there are multiple schedules from AKL and ones that would suit them much better than taking a bus at 3am or straight after they arrive which would be 1am. Say you're travelling to Sydney - catch the bus to AKL and take NZ107/EK413/QF44 which leave around about 6pm, +/- 30 mins. On the return journey, you take NZ100/EK412/QF141 and that would get those people back home around 6pm/7pm. This would be much more suited for the airlines themselves.
I wonder if it'd be viable for NZ to offer a reasonable discount for those connecting onto international flights to save them having to open up a new route like HLZ-SYD or TRG-SYD.
Sponsor Message: 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 9889 posts, 
From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 2957 posts, 
From Australia, joined Sep 2000, 4287 posts, 
From Brunei, joined Apr 2008, 552 posts, 
From Mauritius, joined Jun 2005, 5538 posts, 
From China, joined Sep 2004, 797 posts, 
From South Africa, joined May 2003, 979 posts, 
Well, I tried, at least.
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 291 posts, 
Spot on DavidByrne.
From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 4150 posts, 
From Comoros, joined Jun 2001, 1618 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 2808 posts, 
