Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air New Zealand To Denver?  
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2082 posts, RR: 3
Posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 17912 times:

I will believe it when I see it, but it's interesting for discussion. I wonder how much of a market exists.

http://business-news.thestreet.com/d...ew-zealand-may-add-flights-dia-1/1

95 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineazstar From United States of America, joined May 2005, 627 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 17892 times:

Since UA has forsaken its plans to add IAH-AKL service, it seems like a good opportunity for NZ to take advantage of Star Alliance connections there. Connecting opportunities at IAH are greater than at DEN, IMO.

User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 17888 times:

The title should read 'Air New Zealand to Houston or Denver"
It being discussed already in the IAH pulldown thread. Here is the last post I posted as it really should be a separate topic...
Quoting point2point (Reply 78):
Can this only fuel my thoughts that JS maybe coulda called his friends down at NZ and had them throw DEN into the mix just as a way to get back at IAH? Those conspiracy theories, eh?

LOL...

Quoting point2point (Reply 78):
Although maybe DEN got the whole airport world's attention with their $22M and the DEN-NRT route?

Maybe, I honestly think the mention of DEN is concessionary and the real meat of the issue is that New Zealand also lamented the non start of this flight, as evidenced by media from down under. They could be postulating a way to get back to IAH. As mentioned before if they did do this I think a mixture of less than weekly frequencies alternating between DEN and IAH may work. The interesting part of the article is that they say they are looking to start before the 2014 anticipated arrival of the 787s and that "cities like Houston and Dallas" are already within the range of their current 777s.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineZKOJH From China, joined Sep 2004, 1722 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 17559 times:

Where would the flex in the current 772 fleet come from? The only way it could happen before 2014 is scale back the lhr-hkg flight, by the sounds of it then they will be keeping the 763s longer then?  


CZ 787 to AKL can't wait.
User currently offlinecat3dual From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 17489 times:

Considering the carrier has options for a dozen or so 777s, these could easily be firmed up. Not to mention the second-hand 77L and 77W aircraft on the market.

User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1017 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17359 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

First of all, Denver is a very small market, this is absurd. Second, the altitude there is like 7000ft. I wonder how far a 777 can fly west bound.

User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2766 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17357 times:

I did a good job of resisting starting a thread here on this, partly because it was being discussed in the UA IAH pulldown thread. And I do like that someone else start it   

Nonetheless, I got the impression from the original CAPA article where I first read it that it seemed pretty much improbable of happening, and even considered that UA people got their friends at NZ just to mention DEN in that article so the IAH people would read it and p*ss in their shorts. UA is after payback with IAH after the City of Houston approved the FIS over at HOU, and it does seem like UA here has more fury than a woman scorned.

Then I read the Denver Post article about this, and this article states that the DEN officials didn't even know anything about this, and they haven't even talked with the NZ people. This group I think is pretty savvy, but to not know about this, and then not having even to have talked with the NZ people, well, it seems that a AKL-DEN route is pretty far from their minds as well

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 2):

Moving along, my new friend here posted some thoughts that I had about this, but those were in for fun.

Now here are some important logistics with this here....

As DEN is mentioned along with IAH, per the Great Circle Mapper, DEN is about 60 miles less distance to AKL than IAH, with DEN at 7352 miles and IAH from AKL 7415. I believe the flight would be planned with a 787 if for DEN. I also plugged in a couple of other points of data there, and I do believe that the 787 could make it both ways, w/o restrictions, for both U.S. airports.

Okay, if by some miracle if this flight were to ever materialize, I averaged out the time for this at about 13 hours or so flight, for now not dealing with maybe a couple of hours difference in travel direction, but this would be the basic setup. With the time difference of 17 of 18 hours, I think that logistically a flight could leave AKL at 12 pm (past a morning bank in AKL) and it would arrive in DEN 5 pm, same day, with still enough time for a DEN evening bank. The plane would then be on the ground for a couple of hours and leave DEN at 7 pm, (catching the day's banks, and avoiding at least the real hot part of the hot/high) and it would arrive in AKL at 3 pm, 2 days later, and still in time for an evening bank at AKL.

So if I did my calculation correctly here, timing-wise, it really wouldn't be such a bad flight within these parameters.

When NK announced, of all places, that it was starting up in DEN, I was so flabberghasted by this that I thought that now I'd seen everything now in this crazy airline/airport business. So about NZ serving DEN....... I'd say probably not, but then, who knows?



   


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17292 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 5):
Second, the altitude there is like 7000ft

What does"like" 7000ft mean? Is it more than or less than 7000ft?


User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3533 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17263 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 7):
What does"like" 7000ft mean? Is it more than or less than 7000ft?

Isn't it roughly one mile? (mile high city)

Wikipedia says DEN is at 5,431. So 1,569 less than 7,000 feet.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlinedia77 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 705 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17255 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 5):
First of all, Denver is a very small market, this is absurd. Second, the altitude there is like 7000ft. I wonder how far a 777 can fly west bound.

Denver is at 5280ft - not sure where you got 7000ft. While Denver isn't a huge market, Colorado has more people than all of New Zealand. Just like Icelandair found a niche with outdoorsy like minded travelers, NZ might find a similar market in DEN (plus massive Star Alliance connections).


User currently offlineUNITED91 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17232 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 5):
First of all, Denver is a very small market, this is absurd. Second, the altitude there is like 7000ft.

Altitude is 5,431 ft.  
Quoting drerx7 (Reply 2):
As mentioned before if they did do this I think a mixture of less than weekly frequencies alternating between DEN and IAH may work.

I agree, the flight would definitely have to be less then daily to work for DEN.

I think this flight could work with the right planning and help from its Star Alliance partners. But who knows, I never would've thought NZ would consider DEN.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17229 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 6):
As DEN is mentioned along with IAH, per the Great Circle Mapper, DEN is about 60 miles less distance to AKL than IAH, with DEN at 7352 miles and IAH from AKL 7415. I believe the flight would be planned with a 787 if for DEN. I also plugged in a couple of other points of data there, and I do believe that the 787 could make it both ways, w/o restrictions, for both U.S. airports.

Now what about their 777s? I can see IAH opening up more convenient (for lack of a better term) connection opportunities...would DEN encroach on a similar catchment as LAX or SFO? This is why I'd see 4x weekly IAH and 3x weekly DEN (vs. IAH solely or 4x DEN).

In reading the various articles, I am not sure how much of this is media wordplay to try and appease the NZ locals that were anticipating the projected $ that IAH-AKL was supposedly going to provide to the local economy vs. actual plans. With that said, AirNZ 787s will need to go somewhere...



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9703 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17175 times:

I wonder about this. NZ says DEN is within range of the 777, but the range charts don’t look very good for a 777-200ER operating more than 7,000 miles from 5,000ft.

Also, NZ has a monopoly on US – New Zealand. DEN offers some more connection points than SFO/YVR/LAX, but mostly to second tier cities. What would NZ get from going into DEN or IAH? I don’t think overall traffic to New Zealand would go up significantly with a connection offered from DEN or IAH.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 17139 times:

Quoting dia77 (Reply 9):
Denver is at 5280ft - not sure where you got 7000ft. While Denver isn't a huge market, Colorado has more people than all of New Zealand. Just like Icelandair found a niche with outdoorsy like minded travelers, NZ might find a similar market in DEN (plus massive Star Alliance connections).

Still don't know what AKL-DEN's advantage is over AKL-IAH, other than a few Pacific Northwest and plain states connections.


User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5154 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 17054 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 12):
but the range charts don’t look very good for a 777-200ER operating more than 7,000 miles from 5,000ft.

They look down right ugly! To me this means NZ didn't have DEN in mind when it said they could operate with their existing 77E aircraft. Westbound IAH-AKL is about 7000nm ESAD and their 77E's should be good for about a 37t payload according to the load/range table for the type. Typically they would be out from AKL about 1800 into IAH 1430; out at 2230 into AKL at 0600. This would allow for some Australian feeds in both directions and to get 1630 outbound wave from IAH and the ~1700 wave out of ORD/EWR /YYZ etc. to IAH.


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16991 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Please remember that DIA has a 16,000ft runway that they extended from 12,000 ft a while back JUST FOR THIS... Altitude isn't the problem anymore. They built it specifically to overcome this problem and now there are regular flights on LH's 346's direct to Germany (wouldn't have been able to happen on the shorter runways). This is how ANA can justify DEN-NRT direct also.

User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16935 times:

Quoting 135mech (Reply 15):
now there are regular flights on LH's 346's direct to Germany (wouldn't have been able to happen on the shorter runways). This is how ANA can justify DEN-NRT direct also.

Its not as simple as that. DEN-AKL is more than 2,000nm farther than either of the routes you mentioned. A 77E would take payload restrictions even if the runways was 30,000ft long on DEN-AKL at that altitude. The 787 made DEN-NRT finacially viable, not the runways.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineQantas744er From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1294 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16876 times:

Quoting 135mech (Reply 15):

Please remember that DIA has a 16,000ft runway that they extended from 12,000 ft a while back JUST FOR THIS... Altitude isn't the problem anymore. They built it specifically to overcome this problem and now there are regular flights on LH's 346's direct to Germany (wouldn't have been able to happen on the shorter runways). This is how ANA can justify DEN-NRT direct also.

Incorrect.

Lufthansa operated the A343 without issue from DEN all the way to FRA. Of course the RTOW was below MTOW, and the A346 and B744 lifted even more payload out of the 12,000ft runways.

The 16,000 runway simply made the typical performance limiting factor (field length) less of an issue. However the limting factor you will always come across in DEN is tire speed! (approx. 204kts groundspeed for B744/B777). So the NZ 777 would not be able to go out at MTOW in DEN even if the runway was 25,000ft because of the maximum tire speed.

Altitude is precisely the problem because at sea level, your ground speed would be nowhere near 204kts at rotation on a MTOW departure. (B744/B777/B767).



Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineairfrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2827 posts, RR: 42
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16853 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 5):
First of all, Denver is a very small market, this is absurd. Second, the altitude there is like 7000ft. I wonder how far a 777 can fly west bound.

Two incorrect statements in the same sentence. O&D wise, due to a high propensity of travel, Denver basically is a airport "oasis' in the middle of the great American desert. Also, the city is at a Mile High.

There are a lot of different possibilities opening up thanks to the 787 which has the golden combo of more range, and less mandatory seats.


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16850 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 16):
Quoting 135mech (Reply 15):
now there are regular flights on LH's 346's direct to Germany (wouldn't have been able to happen on the shorter runways). This is how ANA can justify DEN-NRT direct also.

Its not as simple as that. DEN-AKL is more than 2,000nm farther than either of the routes you mentioned. A 77E would take payload restrictions even if the runways was 30,000ft long on DEN-AKL at that altitude. The 787 made DEN-NRT finacially viable, not the runways.

It does and HAS made the difference...the longer you can wait to rotate at a higher altitude, the more airflow/airspeed you can gain to overcome the restrictions... It was specifically why they extended the runway. I know from being on the OLD KC-135's in the desert conditions and high altitudes of the many places I have gone! When we are working out of Nellis AFB, the tankers will stage out of McCarran due to thier 14,000 foot runway so we can take off with the required and NOT restricted fuel loads.

My dad was a pilot for United on the DC-10s' out of Stapleton and the later DIA and wishes they would have had that longer runway back then!


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 16824 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Qantas744er (Reply 17):
Incorrect.

Lufthansa operated the A343 without issue from DEN all the way to FRA. Of course the RTOW was below MTOW, and the A346 and B744 lifted even more payload out of the 12,000ft runways

So, it was restricted... then I was correct...


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2766 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16790 times:

I'm thinking about the wind patterns here with such a flight. I think that I know them in the Northern Hemisphere, but I'm not sure about the Southern Hemisphere. I also think that I had it explained to me in another thread a few years ago, but what thread that was in, and to go searching.....

Anyways, I keep thinking that the southern is the opposite of the northern, but maybe I'm wrong? I would think that on the the AKL-DEN, the plane would be flying into the headwinds, and then when it crosses the equator, it would pick up the tailwinds? And the opposite for the DEN-AKL segment? Or would it be all tailwinds from AKL-DEN, and all headwinds DEN-AKL? Now I'm looking here what would be average or normal, we know that there can be some weird variances, so......

Does anyone know how this would work here? If so, please give me some info if anyone can.

edit added.... where's mariner?

 

[Edited 2012-07-03 10:47:14]

User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16765 times:

Quoting airfrnt (Reply 18):
Two incorrect statements in the same sentence. O&D wise, due to a high propensity of travel, Denver basically is a airport "oasis' in the middle of the great American desert. Also, the city is at a Mile High.

There are a lot of different possibilities opening up thanks to the 787 which has the golden combo of more range, and less mandatory seats.

I believe the poster is talking about the specific market from DEN to AKL not DEN's O&D as a whole. The market to AKL from DEN is very small...just like IAHs - so the routes would have to born from connections.

Quoting 135mech (Reply 20):
So, it was restricted... then I was correct...

Not exactly

Quoting 135mech (Reply 19):
It does and HAS made the difference...the longer you can wait to rotate at a higher altitude, the more airflow/airspeed you can gain to overcome the restrictions... It was specifically why they extended the runway. I know from being on the OLD KC-135's in the desert conditions and high altitudes of the many places I have gone! When we are working out of Nellis AFB, the tankers will stage out of McCarran due to thier 14,000 foot runway so we can take off with the required and NOT restricted fuel loads.

You are ignoring the rest of the facts. DEN-AKL is more than 2,000miles further than the routes you speak of. Re-read my post and Qantas744er's. If you still feel that the runway extension will make DEN-AKL feasible with a 77E in lieu of the laws of physics then we just have to agree to disagree.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5154 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16679 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 21):
Does anyone know how this would work here? If so, please give me some info if anyone can.

The headwinds are when heading southbound. Look at reply 14. The ESAD is about 7000nm , the airways distance is about 6500nm. based on timetable times. Typically these times are on the high side. But they allow for a benchmark as it were. I have used the LAX-AKL times to calculate the ESAD ( equivalent still air distance) since the airways routing would be over LAX.


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 16677 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 22):
You are ignoring the rest of the facts. DEN-AKL is more than 2,000miles further than the routes you speak of. Re-read my post and Qantas744er's. If you still feel that the runway extension will make DEN-AKL feasible with a 77E in lieu of the laws of physics then we just have to agree to disagree.



Okay, I'm not ignoring the rest of the facts, but with the beginning of the thread people repeatedly mentioning that DEN was high altitude and not taking into account the new longer runway, that was my point behind my initial post.

I never mentioned 777's, just that I know pilots personally that would have given anything to have that longer runway back in the day of underpowered technologies.

The airport and city of Denver have done wonderfully at making huge strides to acquire more traffic inspite of it's geographical challenges and that was my original point, but most a.netters love to attack on here instead of just adding to...

Cheers.


25 af773atmsp : FI also has the advantage of connecting major U.S. cities with major European cities via KEF at a cheaper price than other carriers (BA, AF, DL, UA).
26 Roseflyer : Predominantly north south flights typically don't have significantly different flight times. NZ's LAX-AKL service is about 20 minutes longer on avera
27 Qantas744er : Nobody is questioning the efforts the city of Denver has made to improve the conditions! However as i have already attempted to make clear to you, le
28 Roseflyer : Just to help clarify. At 5,000ft and Normal Temp +15C, a 777-200ER is limited to about 580K MTOW from its normal of close to 660K lbs. With a 6500 nm
29 Post contains images ZKOJH : ''cat3dual'' Considering the carrier has options for a dozen or so 777s, these could easily be firmed up. Not to mention the second-hand 77L and 77W a
30 zkeoj : Maybe just wishful thinking, but couldn't they do AKL-DEN-HNL-AKL? DEN would be very attractive to me (as would be IAH) for connections to Europe. I j
31 DerwentWater747 : yo. Can they reallyt stretch that bird out to ORD instead? I thought mile high and hot would prohibit westbound. Also, ORD more O and D and money etc.
32 mogandoCI : Call me crazy but instead of competing with UA on LAXLHR, how about killing 2 birds at once using 787-9 to do AKL-DEN-LHR ?
33 drerx7 : Well Air NZ officials specifically mentioned Houston and Denver. AKL-ORD is 800 miles or so further than AKL-DEN and 700 or so miles further than AKL
34 UA735WL : The altitude at DEN is not a problem. 16R/34L is 16000 ft. long and was designed to let fully loaded long haul a/c take off without trouble. This see
35 DeltaB717 : Not to mention a reasonably attractive connection point that avoids LAX.
36 Post contains images drerx7 : Check out these earlier post.
37 aznmadsci : Same could be true for IAH.
38 UA735WL : I stand corrected. But it does seem like NZ could make it work given an aircraft that could overcome tire restrictions. (will the 789 have this capab
39 UNITED91 : LOL More importantly, both DEN and IAH offer a great connection point other than dealing with LAX/SFO.
40 UA735WL : Does the route have to be direct and operated by NZ all the way to DEN? Maybe NZ could start IAH-AKL and codeshare pax on UA's DEN-IAH flight for a co
41 UNITED91 : NZ already does codeshare with UA on flights to DEN.
42 Caspian27 : 204 kts may be the limitation for these aircraft you mentioned, I don't know because I don't fly them. But I am a DEN based pilot and I wouldn't thin
43 Post contains links thegeek : I may be just a simple hyper chicken from a backwater asteroid, but doesn't this graph: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7772sec3.pdf
44 zkojq : Bingo. There is a brand-new Boeing 777-200LR (F-OLRB) sitting somewhere around Paine Field. Air Austral, who ordered it, cannot afford to take delive
45 777ER : I thought that rule only applied to LAX/SFO services?
46 zkojq : I understood that the limit was the total number of seats between anywhere in the USA and the UK. I could be wrong though. Macilree can clarify for u
47 Roseflyer : Are you sure you are not looking at the 4,000ft line?
48 thegeek : Right, yes. At DEN you might get to (I estimate) 595k lbs if the line were drawn to it's elevation but that is a long way from the sea level 660k lbs
49 thegeek : Can anyone actually tell me what this flying to DEN instead of IAH is for? I very roughly estimate the payload out of IAH would be approx 80k lbs - en
50 koruman : The UK-US carriage capacity limit ended around five years ago. Quite why they never opened SFO-LHR and LAX-MAN defeats me, given that they have a UK s
51 Post contains images point2point : DEN does know how to steal the headlines, eh? This sure is a long flight just to step outside eh? (ok, couldn't resist) I think that maybe we're on t
52 thegeek : Raising it's profile as a place to fly to?
53 notdownnlocked : Would love to see ANZ return scheduled flights to DFW after all these years but probably will be only weather diversions up from IAH same as the QF fl
54 Post contains links ZK-NBT : http://www.centreforaviation.com/ana...line-eyes-asia-and-us-growth-76299 Not sure but from what I have read and heard NZ have definatly mentioned IAH
55 drerx7 : As point2point said, AirNZ mentioned DEN not DEN officials. I think part of it is rhetoric though to soften the economic blow that UA did to NZ by ca
56 Post contains images LAXdude1023 : This coming from the guy that thought QF's DFW flight was a bad idea. Sheesh. Not saying AKL-DEN wouldnt work, but the LHR continuation wouldnt.
57 travelin man : I think people are focusing too much on the technical capabilities of the aircraft, versus the real issue: is there a market for DEN-AKL service? L.A.
58 GEsubsea : I will say that for Houston the AKL-IAH service may not necessarily produce full flights even X3 weekly, BUT it will be a viable option concerning Biz
59 Post contains links GEsubsea : Based on comments today from John Palmer of NZ it looks like long haul expansion could take a back seat to growing its domestic services into 2013 bas
60 Post contains images point2point : I think that it is quite wise of NZ to be focusing on the domestic front. With that, they are scheduled to take delivery of some 10 787s I do believe
61 sunrisevalley : NZ are in the process of replacing their 733 's with A320's on a one for one basis as the 733's are retired. The 787's will replace their 5- 767-300E
62 nomorerjs : AKL-ORD has been mentioned on 787s. Would provide great connections to the midwest, eastern US, eastern Canada, and Ireland / UK.
63 slcdeltarumd11 : I would have to think IAH probably offers alot more one stop connections to unique markets for AUK. Alot of the smaller western cities probably alread
64 747400sp : Wait, there are second-hand 77L and 77W on the market? I am surprise, because I thought a new 777 was like gold to an airlines these days.
65 RWA380 : About 5 years ago, my NZ rep in SFO was indicating that SFO-LHR was being considered, guess not yet at least. Unless there is great demand for NZ / U
66 eagle125 : There's no way they initiate DFW, with OW's QF already settled in with the AA connecting network through DFW. Will look forward to the occasional div
67 PA515 : AKL-HKG-LHR is still going with the 77E five weekly, daily Jul/Aug and Dec/Jan. The TE DFW flight was AKL-PPT-DFW-LGW twice weekly with the 747-200.
68 ATCtower : And from what I hear quite the niche, with flights going out quite full. Though I will admit their 752 climbs like poo! Lets see, the route is flown
69 GEsubsea : Yes, but a 77L is going to be to much for a DEN service....it would have to be a 787 and on a less than daily service, whereas a 772 or 773 would be
70 bobloblaw : Yes, it is. UA DEN-FRA had all sorts of problems with weight restrictions in the summer. The problem in order to get off the ground you have to go a
71 135mech : Yup, there are always limiting factors and conditions, mostly due to the summer heat, and a few people have already beat everyone up about this...scr
72 ATCtower : I will partially agree, in that I overestimated the route and a 772/77W would be a much better plane for the route, I assumed it was longer than it i
73 thegeek : What? The hotter the temp and the higher the elevation, the thinner the air. Meaning the faster you need to go to achieve the same lift. Lift rises w
74 Post contains links ATCtower : The following link (albeit old, I knew it was around here somewhere) is the best answer I can come up with considering the effect of altitude on V sp
75 thegeek : Is that IAS or true speed? I suspect IAS. Without your link, I would have been scratching my head for quite a while! Tyres don't care about IAS, only
76 GEsubsea : Disagree...IAH has better connections to C./S. America hands down, but this could really be debated all day long concerning size of aircraft and lift
77 DavidByrne : Actually, it was only ever once a week, which to my mind is the kiss of death for a long-haul flight. And after they finished with AKL-PPT-DFW-LGW, t
78 sunrisevalley : [quote=ATCtower,reply=74]Example of Vr increase due to altitude / temperature: 5,000ft p.a. + 30oC New Vr = Vr + 3 Vr plus 3 of what?
79 sunrisevalley : This is in the FWIW department. According to PIANO X a 788 with 30t of payload with fuel for a 6600nm sector , at sea level and a standard day, needs
80 bobloblaw : No, UA not LH. UA used the 777. I dont know about the A340s.
81 LAXdude1023 : The IAH-New Zealand travel market is tiny. DEN/DFW-New Zealand are also tiny. IAH-Australia (the whole country) is only 30 PDEW. DFW-Australia is aro
82 ATCtower : Even better. The 77s Vr speeds range from 104-162KIAS based on weight (154KIAS at 550,000lbs). The 340s normally run 145-150KIAS depending on a numbe
83 GEsubsea : Honestly, very good arguments...but I think were still missing the point here....corporate contracts keep this kind of service operational and IAH ha
84 Post contains links bmacleod : Checked range charts http://www.gcmap.com Seems the 77W can do it with extra fuel to spare. Can it fill NZ 77W out of DEN?[Edited 2012-07-21 11:46:15]
85 Post contains images point2point : In terms of connections, I would think that IAH has most of the southern half of the U.S. covered, and DEN has most of the northern U.S. along with a
86 GEsubsea : Agreed....after more research I do feel now that the deciding factor is in fact back seat traffic in relation to tourism. The "front seat" traffic wi
87 Post contains links and images point2point : There's a thread here... US Upgauges CLT-GIG To A332 During Winter (by LipeGIG Jul 21 2012 in Civil Aviation) about CLT and US upgauging the bird to
88 DavidByrne : My prediction - there is no way NZ would seriously contemplate a DEN flight but an IAH flight is a distinct possibility, starting with a 77E and then
89 Post contains images point2point : I mostly agree with this. Yet, when NZ officials heard that DEN basically gave UA (in form of rent rebates, etc) about $22M and then UA the next day
90 DavidByrne : The only thing that we know for sure is that NZ is SOON looking to increase capacity to the USA, and that it has previously signalled its intention t
91 GEsubsea : That will be the difference....if cash is thrown their way you have to believe NZ lean toward starting DEN, because IAH will NOT throw cash at an air
92 ytib : Would it be using the GC route, or would it fly towards LAX and catch up with one of the airways to AKL?
93 sunrisevalley : For sure it would be flying airways roures.
94 ATCtower : Having been out of the development loop for some time, I will certainly agree with those who preach the 787 is a better model for the route be it IAH
95 Post contains images point2point : From info that I have, I think that UA by itself serves 38 states to/from DEN plus DC. If you count IAD in Virginia then it's 39, and then if you can
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Air New Zealand To Oppose DL-Virgin Blue Deal posted Sun Jul 26 2009 18:00:12 by SLCUT2777
Air New Zealand To Get New Livery posted Fri Mar 24 2006 02:37:37 by TG992
Air New Zealand To Double Flights To SFO posted Wed Nov 30 2005 21:41:11 by Squirrel83
Air New Zealand To London posted Wed Nov 2 2005 01:48:19 by Usa1984
Air New Zealand To Mexico? posted Sat Jan 22 2005 19:19:37 by Ghost77
Air New Zealand To Begin WLG-NAN posted Tue Aug 24 2004 07:19:32 by NZblue
Air New Zealand To Name Its Int'l Jets posted Tue Aug 24 2004 07:13:29 by NZblue
Air New Zealand To Cook Island posted Wed Feb 11 2004 04:32:50 by Flybynight
Air New Zealand To San Francisco! posted Wed Jan 7 2004 13:38:59 by StarFlyer
Air New Zealand To 'consider' HKG-LHR posted Fri Aug 23 2002 13:20:04 by United Airline