• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:15 am

NZ321 wrote:
Maybe XMN ? Xiamen airlines seem keen to expand internationally and are starting Australia. But what is happening to Tianjin airlines - didn't they recently suspend service? And I wonder how Hainan is doing into AKL. Interesting Airline. Would be nice to see them hang around but they do have a habit of dropping flights quite quickly if they aren't profitable. Will also be interesting to see how HX do into AKL with upgraded equipment. Might increase market share.


XMN is possible i would say. GS are still here they seemed to suspend for a few weeks, some of these secondary carriers don't seem that reliable, I would have my doubts that any of them make money here. Other than going 14 weekly for the same period as CX DEC-FEB HX are still running A332's, not really sure if they make money either?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7942
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:55 pm

aklrno wrote:
I will happily stand for a few seconds to get a more comfortable bed. If the crew sees me starting to get ready for bed and wants to do the work, fine with me. If they are busy elsewhere I'm happy to do it myself


I don't mind the standing really, but it triggered such bizarre behaviour from the crew which I didn't like. I was already over halfway (I had laid underlay and blanket and was just about to get something out of my bag and strap myself in when they basically pushed me out of the way and actually slowed me down to getting back to what I was doing. I like to put in bed mode to watch movies anyway, and if I want help I will ask for it. I'm sure it seems minor to many, but it felt an invasion of my personal space bubble at the time.

I hope whatever happens that they use an entirely new/heavily revised design like the new QR Q Suites.
Flown to 128 Airports in 48 Countries on 81 Operators. Visited 56 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
LamboAston
Posts: 554
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:46 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:59 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
aklrno wrote:
I will happily stand for a few seconds to get a more comfortable bed. If the crew sees me starting to get ready for bed and wants to do the work, fine with me. If they are busy elsewhere I'm happy to do it myself


I don't mind the standing really, but it triggered such bizarre behaviour from the crew which I didn't like. I was already over halfway (I had laid underlay and blanket and was just about to get something out of my bag and strap myself in when they basically pushed me out of the way and actually slowed me down to getting back to what I was doing. I like to put in bed mode to watch movies anyway, and if I want help I will ask for it. I'm sure it seems minor to many, but it felt an invasion of my personal space bubble at the time.

I hope whatever happens that they use an entirely new/heavily revised design like the new QR Q Suites.

Yeah, but when the herringbone seats were introduced there were already better seats on the market. You would hope so. I personally am hoping for the BE Aerospace Apex seat that Oman Air and JAL have.
AS350, B733/4/7/8, B744/8, B762/3, B77E/L/W, B789, A319, A320, A321, A332, A346, A380, AT73/5/6, Q300, Q400, CR2/7, E190, S340, B1900C/D, E110 (E for epic)
NZ, EK, QF, SQ, UA, US, CO, FZ, FR, U2, BA, VA, VS, MH, EI, EY, LH, EN, NM, TG, GZ
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:36 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
Other than going 14 weekly for the same period as CX DEC-FEB HX are still running A332's, not really sure if they make money either?

I have heard that HX do not make money, period.

However, why would they run double-daily to AKL, if AKL was losing money? They could have used the extra frame to start the likes of SEA, which has no CX service.

Is AKL a long-term investment for them?

Cheers,

C.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:25 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Other than going 14 weekly for the same period as CX DEC-FEB HX are still running A332's, not really sure if they make money either?

I have heard that HX do not make money, period.

However, why would they run double-daily to AKL, if AKL was losing money? They could have used the extra frame to start the likes of SEA, which has no CX service.

Is AKL a long-term investment for them?

Cheers,

C.


NW peak period to AKL, they want to compete with CX and theme their traffic and stimulate the market.

I think they will hang round a while. Until they realise they actually need to make money or that taking on CX isn't such a good idea.
 
NPL8800
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:47 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Other than going 14 weekly for the same period as CX DEC-FEB HX are still running A332's, not really sure if they make money either?

I have heard that HX do not make money, period.

However, why would they run double-daily to AKL, if AKL was losing money? They could have used the extra frame to start the likes of SEA, which has no CX service.

Is AKL a long-term investment for them?

Cheers,

C.

They've at least been profitable between 2010-2013, whether they still are or not I don't know, I read the latest HU annual report (2014) with the hope of finding more but didn't, though HU most certainly was profitable then and no doubt still is. Though it's not uncommon for many of the world's carriers to dip in and out of profitability at various stages in their operating lifetime.

As for double daily, I'd be quite sure that if the route wasn't meeting their expectations they wouldn't be doing it. Whether it's profitable is another question, however if it's providing extensive feed and helping sustain their remaining network then I have no issue as it's a strategic investment, after all we know it took NZ a decade to achieve profitability on PVG which with the growth and importance that China has become to NZ will likely have made it a worth while wait for the airline.

I'm a firm believer that any route launched, particularly long haul is done with the intention of being in it for the the foreseeable future, especially when the set up costs can be eye wateringly high, I see HX being no different, they clearly saw a market opportunity with AKL and aside from CXs seasonal up gauges there really has been little growth from the HKG market, especially during the quieter parts of the year with just NZ and CX on the route. The codeshares with EY and FJ on the route no doubt also add a bit of extra viability as well.

As for your China route post, I think all the cities you mentioned have a chance of being added at some stage in the future, some more likely than others however, I have heard Xiamen, Qingdao and Hangzhou all specifically mentioned in the past but we shall see. MF does seem quite likely, though we are less than 3 months from Dec which is even cutting it a bit fine for the Chinese carriers who are notorious for their short lead in times.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:30 am

aerorobnz wrote:
I hope whatever happens that they use an entirely new/heavily revised design like the new QR Q Suites.


While we don't yet know what the next J product will be, we do know precisely how it'll all be played out.

It'll be marketed as new and innovative, but will in fact be lifted from another mid level carrier. The difference being NZ will make it just *slightly* smaller, enabling them to squeeze in 10% more seats per cabin than any other operator using a similar product. This fact will be lost completely on the travel media including Grant Bradley who will all be caught up in the not insignificant hype. There will be one utterly gimmicky point of difference - VR connectivity for example - that will help perpetuate the fanfare, along with All Black forwards who will be involved in the marketing but through their own physical bulk will inadvertently display the inadequate dimensions of the seat.

The hapless passenger, now a seasoned victim of NZ's gaslighting, will somehow blame themselves for the fact they just didn't have as good a time as that flight on EK, and will hurriedly book another overpriced ticket on NZ while seeking reassurance from how well NZ did in the latest bogus Skytrax survey.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:09 am

I was reading the latest edition of NZ's inflight magazine today ("Kia Ora"), and noticed the following in the destination maps section:

SQ:
- The SQ codeshare map is outdated, not accounting for various route developments (like MAN now being served non-stop from SIN, and not via MUC).
- WLG - SIN is shown as being part of the NZ - SQ alliance - aside from the inaccuracy of not including the CBR stop, I thought that NZ do not codeshare on SQ's WLG service?
- CDG is not listed as a codeshare destination, whereas almost all other SQ destinations in Europe are - why is this so?
- There is a disclaimer that "Codeshare routes from Singapore to Moscow and Indonesia are subject to government approval" - is this correct, and if so, what is taking so long with the approvals?

VA:
- NZ only codeshare with VA to XCH (Christmas Island) - why not to CCK (Cocos Island) too?

AC/UA:
- YUL is listed as a Star Alliance hub, whereas YYZ, NYC and BOG are not - this is clearly incorrect.

CA:
- NZ codeshare to many smaller cities in China (like TYN and WNZ), and not to various bigger cities (like KMG, XIY, CAN, SZX and XMN) - why is this?

Aside from these, various codeshares and partnerships are not represented, like GZ, FJ and AR, and DUD is not listed as an international destination (despite VA's DUD - BNE service).

The inaccuracies do irk me, particularly when the inflight magazine (and its maps) were only re-branded / re-designed a few months ago.

Further, the magazine even includes this disclaimer:

"Routes shown operated by Air New Zealand and key codeshare partners were correct at time of printing and are subject to change without notice."

:mad:

Cheers,

C.
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:44 am

Oh my goodness! Such stress for your flights. If that's what's important......
Well let's all grow up a bit. We've got a great forum here, where we can all
be CEO for a day, bringing up all sorts of clever ideas that interest us as
industry followers. Petty gripes..... (maybe someone didn't get the upgrade).
complain to AirNZ, not us.
 
NZ321
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:00 am

planemanofnz wrote:
I was reading the latest edition of NZ's inflight magazine today ("Kia Ora"), and noticed the following in the destination maps section:

SQ:
- The SQ codeshare map is outdated, not accounting for various route developments (like MAN now being served non-stop from SIN, and not via MUC).
- WLG - SIN is shown as being part of the NZ - SQ alliance - aside from the inaccuracy of not including the CBR stop, I thought that NZ do not codeshare on SQ's WLG service?
- CDG is not listed as a codeshare destination, whereas almost all other SQ destinations in Europe are - why is this so?
- There is a disclaimer that "Codeshare routes from Singapore to Moscow and Indonesia are subject to government approval" - is this correct, and if so, what is taking so long with the approvals?

VA:
- NZ only codeshare with VA to XCH (Christmas Island) - why not to CCK (Cocos Island) too?

AC/UA:
- YUL is listed as a Star Alliance hub, whereas YYZ, NYC and BOG are not - this is clearly incorrect.

CA:
- NZ codeshare to many smaller cities in China (like TYN and WNZ), and not to various bigger cities (like KMG, XIY, CAN, SZX and XMN) - why is this?

Aside from these, various codeshares and partnerships are not represented, like GZ, FJ and AR, and DUD is not listed as an international destination (despite VA's DUD - BNE service).

The inaccuracies do irk me, particularly when the inflight magazine (and its maps) were only re-branded / re-designed a few months ago.

Further, the magazine even includes this disclaimer:

"Routes shown operated by Air New Zealand and key codeshare partners were correct at time of printing and are subject to change without notice."

:mad:

Cheers,

C.


There is no doubt room for a better and more accurate map but maybe not the top of priorities :)
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4003
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:33 am

georgiabill wrote:
Would NZ consider flights from AKL to CTS perhaps 3-4 weekly? I am sure with the fishing industry changing crews etc might be worth a look. Any chance of NZ taking a few 788'S to open new routes which the 789 fleet or 777 fleet are to big?

CTS 3x weekly Dec-Feb might work for the Ski market.

A big N.O. to the 788. The 788 is now a lame duck airplane that won’t have any more orders once the current lot are completed. The 789 can do everything the 788 can and most with a lower operating cost/better CASM or at worst only very slightly more for short routes. It’s basically like the 762 (once the 763 arrived the 762 was irrelevant).
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:55 am

Deepinsider wrote:
Oh my goodness! Such stress for your flights. If that's what's important......
Well let's all grow up a bit. We've got a great forum here, where we can all
be CEO for a day, bringing up all sorts of clever ideas that interest us as
industry followers. Petty gripes..... (maybe someone didn't get the upgrade).
complain to AirNZ, not us.

Why a post including honest questions on the extent of an airline's code-sharing attracts personal attacks like "grow up" and "petty" is beyond me - please take your disdain and intolerance elsewhere.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:58 am

Deepinsider wrote:
Oh my goodness! Such stress for your flights. If that's what's important......
Well let's all grow up a bit. We've got a great forum here, where we can all
be CEO for a day, bringing up all sorts of clever ideas that interest us as
industry followers. Petty gripes..... (maybe someone didn't get the upgrade).
complain to AirNZ, not us.


I dunno, Deepinsider, it seems to generate a fair bit of chat. I won't delve into the many reasons as to why it might be suitable for discussion around the onboard product of New Zealand's only, and much hyped, major carrier on a New Zealand aviation thread.

But perhaps you'd like to volunteer an alternative subject?
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:09 am

Deepinsider wrote:
Oh my goodness! Such stress for your flights. If that's what's important......
Well let's all grow up a bit. We've got a great forum here, where we can all
be CEO for a day, bringing up all sorts of clever ideas that interest us as
industry followers. Petty gripes..... (maybe someone didn't get the upgrade).
complain to AirNZ, not us.

TBH the whole discussion of onboard product bores me completely - my personal travel strategy favours the quirky and obscure choices rather than the most comfortable. But this IS the NZ Aviation thread, and it's a perfectly legitimate subject for discussion. Just don't expect to ever read anything from me on that subject. Ever! :smile:
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
NZ321
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:10 pm

Changing the subject.... :) HX like HU have discontinued many unprofitable routes. Will be interesting to see how long they give AKL to measure up. 2x daily is quite aggressive. Obviously they are in an expansion phase and this entails route investment and so forth. Review of recent inaugural HKG-YVR was interesting reading. Looks pretty good. But I don't believe they've announced A350 for AKL yet. Does anybody know?

On a separate note, with MH starting ex Air Berlin A332 to AKL with recovered seats from Feb, there is an 8 seat jump in the Y seat configuration over Air Berlin's, with identical in J. Looking at the seat map on seat maestro looks pretty tight so do we presume they will squeeze in an extra row in the main cabin behind business? Thoughts?
 
PA515
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:33 pm

Gasman wrote:
While we don't yet know what the next J product will be, we do know precisely how it'll all be played out.

It'll be marketed as new and innovative, but will in fact be lifted from another mid level carrier. The difference being NZ will make it just *slightly* smaller, enabling them to squeeze in 10% more seats per cabin than any other operator using a similar product. This fact will be lost completely on the travel media including Grant Bradley who will all be caught up in the not insignificant hype. There will be one utterly gimmicky point of difference - VR connectivity for example - that will help perpetuate the fanfare, along with All Black forwards who will be involved in the marketing but through their own physical bulk will inadvertently display the inadequate dimensions of the seat.

The hapless passenger, now a seasoned victim of NZ's gaslighting, will somehow blame themselves for the fact they just didn't have as good a time as that flight on EK, and will hurriedly book another overpriced ticket on NZ while seeking reassurance from how well NZ did in the latest bogus Skytrax survey.


Here we go again. Gasman, your QF friends are engaged in exactly the same PR exercise re their about to be delivered 789s. Most airlines do it, and would be fools not to. Living in WLG, you will not be exposed to the full extent of the QF promotion which will be mostly via the Australian media for local consumption. Your cynical attacks on Air NZ are tiresome.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:44 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
SQ:
- The SQ codeshare map is outdated, not accounting for various route developments (like MAN now being served non-stop from SIN, and not via MUC).
- WLG - SIN is shown as being part of the NZ - SQ alliance - aside from the inaccuracy of not including the CBR stop, I thought that NZ do not codeshare on SQ's WLG service?
- CDG is not listed as a codeshare destination, whereas almost all other SQ destinations in Europe are - why is this so?
- There is a disclaimer that "Codeshare routes from Singapore to Moscow and Indonesia are subject to government approval" - is this correct, and if so, what is taking so long with the approvals?

Air NZ codeshares on SQ SIN-CBR, SIN-WLG and CBR-WLG as NZ3291, WLG-CBR, WLG-SIN and CBR-SIN as NZ3292.

PA515
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:59 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
IFurther, the magazine even includes this disclaimer:

"Routes shown operated by Air New Zealand and key codeshare partners were correct at time of printing and are subject to change without notice."


It seems like a perfectly standard legal disclaimer to me, boiler plate stuff, and I'm not sure why it irks you.

As New Zealand continues to rush to the embrace of the U. S. culture, I imagine you'll see more such disclaimers.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:13 pm

PA515 wrote:
Gasman wrote:
While we don't yet know what the next J product will be, we do know precisely how it'll all be played out.

It'll be marketed as new and innovative, but will in fact be lifted from another mid level carrier. The difference being NZ will make it just *slightly* smaller, enabling them to squeeze in 10% more seats per cabin than any other operator using a similar product. This fact will be lost completely on the travel media including Grant Bradley who will all be caught up in the not insignificant hype. There will be one utterly gimmicky point of difference - VR connectivity for example - that will help perpetuate the fanfare, along with All Black forwards who will be involved in the marketing but through their own physical bulk will inadvertently display the inadequate dimensions of the seat.

The hapless passenger, now a seasoned victim of NZ's gaslighting, will somehow blame themselves for the fact they just didn't have as good a time as that flight on EK, and will hurriedly book another overpriced ticket on NZ while seeking reassurance from how well NZ did in the latest bogus Skytrax survey.


Here we go again. Gasman, your QF friends are engaged in exactly the same PR exercise re their about to be delivered 789s. Most airlines do it, and would be fools not to. Living in WLG, you will not be exposed to the full extent of the QF promotion which will be mostly via the Australian media for local consumption. Your cynical attacks on Air NZ are tiresome.

PA515


Cynical? I'm wounded. :)

We'll just wait and see exactly how many of my predictions come true. What I describe, albeit with a homeopathic dose of cynicism, is precisely NZs modus operandi dating from their last major product launch. Skycouch was the trojan horse that blinded the media to 10 abreast on the 777 - which for an airline like, NZ should've been HUGE news. It was actually very cleverly played. Whether the company were deliberately manipulating the media I don't know; but it sure worked.

I reject your assertion that QF are the same. In my four year experience with them I've found they consistently under promise and over deliver - almost the exact opposite of what NZ does with its marketing. And QF - so far anyway - are not on the race to the bottom with long haul cabin comfort. Have you flown J on one their A380's? Old product, but you could put a small pool table between the rows of seats. And their new 789s have what - 60 fewer seats than is the case on NZ?? That's huge!

Shame you find my posts tiresome. I usually enjoy reading yours. It's all good.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:24 pm

NZ do have 39 more seats on their premium 789's that QF, however still 15 less J on NZ. I do wonder if NZ will add a third 789 config in a few years as part of the 772 replacement, but more premium seats say 35J 40W 170Y, total 245. Would it be enough to replace the 77W's with 100 less seats? NZ are growing and adding more destinations with smaller frames. Throw in a few 778's for ORD,NYC, LAX with a similar count to the 77W.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:56 pm

Would existing 5th freedom rights allow NZ to fly AKL-JFK-LHR? If so, as soon as the aircraft capable of flying the route economically becomes available, sit back and watch it happen (slots at LHR notwithstanding).

On the other hand, I don't share the same enthusiasm for ORD. It isn't that much of a leisure destination in its own right, and surely HOU has taken some of the wind out of those sails?
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:00 am

mariner wrote:
It seems like a perfectly standard legal disclaimer to me

mariner wrote:
I'm not sure why it irks you

It irks me because, through the disclaimer, NZ purport to have checked that all routes represented are accurate as the printing of each edition (that is, monthly) - in reality, they have not done this, and they continue not to do this month after month.

Any half decent lawyer will urge caution in throwing in a so-called 'boiler plate' or 'standard legal disclaimer,' without verification and appropriate amendments (if needed). Ultimately, because of this oversight, the disclaimer is misleading readers.

Strip back all of the perks like seat pitch, IFE and FFPs, and what is the core product offering of an airline? Its network. If you cannot get the network right in your communications strategy, then what hope is there for the rest of your product offering?

Gasman wrote:
Skycouch was the trojan horse that blinded the media to 10 abreast on the 777 - which for an airline like, NZ should've been HUGE news

Gasman wrote:
I reject your assertion that QF are the same. In my four year experience with them I've found they consistently under promise and over deliver

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

I love NZ, but I agree with Gasman here.

It is the little things, like NZ announcing on every flight that it is the "proud winner for the fourth consecutive year of Airline Ratings' 'Airline of the Year' award." You do not hear equivalent announcements on other airlines that have also received various awards, like SQ or QF, and it is really only setting up the passenger for disappointment when they get on their long-haul flight and discover that NZ have no amenity kits (in Y) or in-flight magazine in each seat pocket, and that various other perks that one would expect from the top airline in the world are lacking.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:03 am

Gasman wrote:
Would existing 5th freedom rights allow NZ to fly AKL-JFK-LHR? If so, as soon as the aircraft capable of flying the route economically becomes available, sit back and watch it happen (slots at LHR notwithstanding).

It won't happen - NZ only have enough LHR slots to cover their LAX tag (they sold the rest to CX), and there's no way that they will drop LAX - LHR for JFK / EWR - LHR, when they've built up a strong reputation on LAX - LHR over the course of several decades.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:17 am

planemanofnz wrote:
It irks me because, through the disclaimer, NZ purport to have checked that all routes represented are accurate as the printing of each edition (that is, monthly) - in reality, they have not done this, and they continue not to do this month after month.

Any half decent lawyer will urge caution in throwing in a so-called 'boiler plate' or 'standard legal disclaimer,' without verification and appropriate amendments (if needed). Ultimately, because of this oversight, the disclaimer is misleading readers..


I've worked with many more than half way decent lawyers (I have been extremely litigious in OZ and the US and have never lost a case) and have had to wade my way through many boiler plate clauses. The clause - boiler plate or otherwise - does provide a level of first-line protection against some of the crazies out there who spend their lives looking for someone to sue - or something to sue about.

But I still have no idea "the oversight" what is. When you say the route map isn't checked before publication, I'm not sure how you know this. If it is inside information from Air NZ, I don't think that you should post it in a public forum.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:31 am

mariner wrote:
[But I still have no idea "the oversight" what is. When you say the route map isn't checked before publication, I'm not sure how you know this. If it is inside information from Air NZ, I don't think that you should post it in a public forum.

mariner

Surely the point is - it's just sloppy practice. That in itself is enough to irk some people; but there is also a bigger picture here. I often use those route maps to conjure up travel possibilities for the future, many of which have progressed into a reality. For that reason, a degree of accuracy is probably desirable for the carrier, let alone the passenger. Being incorrect at the time of publication is pretty poor.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:59 am

Gasman wrote:
Surely the point is - it's just sloppy practice. That in itself is enough to irk some people; but there is also a bigger picture here. I often use those route maps to conjure up travel possibilities for the future, many of which have progressed into a reality. For that reason, a degree of accuracy is probably desirable for the carrier, let alone the passenger. Being incorrect at the time of publication is pretty poor.


I can't understand why a disclaimer - boilerplate or otherwise - would irk anyone. Most people don't bother to read them, and, as I said, they do provide a level of first line defence against law suits.

If the complaint is that the map is inaccurate, that's a seperate issue, and not one I have discussed, mostly because I don't care. Since you've raised it in a post to me, I'll say that there is more than "a degree of accuracy" in the published route map, the complaints are extremely minor and some of them may be the result of contractual issues between the airlines.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:06 am

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/1 ... n-in-2018/

NZ increasing flights to IAH in 2018 to 6-7 weekly up from 5 in 2017, using the premium 789's.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:02 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/10/air-new-zealand-lifting-capacity-to-houston-in-2018/

NZ increasing flights to IAH in 2018 to 6-7 weekly up from 5 in 2017, using the premium 789's.

Great news. And from there, a very small mental step to a permanent daily service.

You'd have to say though that it doesn't bode well for the introduction of a service to ORD however, if indeed that is still on the radar.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5694
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:10 am

Gasman wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/10/air-new-zealand-lifting-capacity-to-houston-in-2018/

NZ increasing flights to IAH in 2018 to 6-7 weekly up from 5 in 2017, using the premium 789's.

Great news. And from there, a very small mental step to a permanent daily service.

You'd have to say though that it doesn't bode well for the introduction of a service to ORD however, if indeed that is still on the radar.


Smaller frames though, IAH was always going to go daily permanently at some point which it will soon enough, then 2 more 789's next year to go somewhere, I agree with your comments that it's not a huge local market but if they can take more connecting traffic from LAX/SFO where possible and send it via IAH/ORD leaving SFO/LAX services more to the larger local markets.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:26 am

Gasman wrote:
[NZ increasing flights to IAH in 2018 to 6-7 weekly up from 5 in 2017, using the premium 789's]

You'd have to say though that it doesn't bode well for the introduction of a service to ORD however, if indeed that is still on the radar.

I don't see that at all. It's apparent that the US market is in strong growth (did I read 10% plus year-on-year the other day?) and that NZ is growing its capacity primarily by adding new destinations and building the frequency there to daily. I read this as a sign that ORD may be nearer than otherwise assumed, not further away. Glass half full, not half empty!
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:33 am

DavidByrne wrote:
Glass half full, not half empty!


Always, mate, always. Image

Grant Bradley thinks ORD is still on the cards in his piece about the bump up at IAH:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11931733

"The airline also flies to Los Angeles and San Francisco on the US mainland and is assessing other long-range flights, including Chicago."

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4003
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:38 am

mariner wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Glass half full, not half empty!


Always, mate, always. Image

Grant Bradley thinks ORD is still on the cards in his piece about the bump up at IAH:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11931733

"The airline also flies to Los Angeles and San Francisco on the US mainland and is assessing other long-range flights, including Chicago."


mariner

The rumour mill is swirling that NZ is about to announce ORD very soon apparently.

In the meantime EK has announced they are dropping AKL Tasman Services. QF will up their flights to compensate.
CHC-SYD will remain as will AKL-DXB.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
gardermoen
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 1999 9:52 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:44 am

Well I never saw this coming.
Emirates will can all remaining Australia-AKL A380 services, leaving it with a sole DXB-AKL non-stop service. Looks like the QF/EK tie up is getting a lot loser now.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11931831

So AKL goes from having 3 Airbus 380s on the ground at once to just one.
 
A330NZ
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 2:23 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:48 am

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/977464 ... ul-flights

Emirates suspending the BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL tag-ons from March 2018. Capacity being replaced by additional QF frequencies, and upgauging some services to A330s. Emirates has implied that they "may add more New Zealand to Dubai direct services".

These details were announced as part of the extension to the QF-EK partnership, and are pending regulatory approval. There is no change the the DXB-SYD-CHC service.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:56 am

mariner wrote:
[
Grant Bradley thinks ORD is still on the cards in his piece about the bump up at IAH:

"The airline also flies to Los Angeles and San Francisco on the US mainland and is assessing other long-range flights, including Chicago."

mariner

Several issues.

"Grant Bradley thinks..................." doesn't really clinch terribly much I'm afraid. It's become apparent over the years that he really has no inside knowledge of anything relating to aviation matters, and rarely reports anything we didn't know already. To an aviation enthusiast, forums like this one will provide much more current and thought provoking information.

Secondly, "assessing" is hardly the same as "on the cards". The first time - to my knowledge - that NZ "assessed" ORD was in the mid 1990's, and has been doing so ever since. ORD clearly requires a lot of assessment. Must try harder.

Thirdly, if you really believe that the US market is expanding so rapidly that IAH and ORD services would not even compete for the same pool of passengers at this point in time when IAH has just expanded...... you're dreaming. You're basically arguing that there is a 787 sized pool of passengers who would otherwise go to ORD; but existing services via IAH or LAX are just not good enough, dammit - so for now they'll stay at home instead.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:00 am

Gasman wrote:
. . . if you really believe that the US market is expanding so rapidly that IAH and ORD services would not even compete for the same pool of passengers at this point in time when IAH has just expanded...... you're dreaming. You're basically arguing that there is a 787 sized pool of passengers who would otherwise go to ORD; but existing services via IAH or LAX are just not good enough, dammit - so for now they'll stay at home instead.

The way I see it, on the back of my envelope I calculate that there are five daily frequencies to North America on NZ as things stand. If traffic is growing at 10% pa (as I believe I read the other day) then this means that just to maintain its position in the market NZ needs to add a half a daily frequency every year. Meaning that a 3x weekly flight to ORD, growing to daily in a year's time, is not at all fanciful.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4003
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:07 am

Gasman wrote:
mariner wrote:
[
Grant Bradley thinks ORD is still on the cards in his piece about the bump up at IAH:

"The airline also flies to Los Angeles and San Francisco on the US mainland and is assessing other long-range flights, including Chicago."

mariner

Several issues.

"Grant Bradley thinks..................." doesn't really clinch terribly much I'm afraid. It's become apparent over the years that he really has no inside knowledge of anything relating to aviation matters, and rarely reports anything we didn't know already. To an aviation enthusiast, forums like this one will provide much more current and thought provoking information.

Secondly, "assessing" is hardly the same as "on the cards". The first time - to my knowledge - that NZ "assessed" ORD was in the mid 1990's, and has been doing so ever since. ORD clearly requires a lot of assessment. Must try harder.

Thirdly, if you really believe that the US market is expanding so rapidly that IAH and ORD services would not even compete for the same pool of passengers at this point in time when IAH has just expanded...... you're dreaming. You're basically arguing that there is a 787 sized pool of passengers who would otherwise go to ORD; but existing services via IAH or LAX are just not good enough, dammit - so for now they'll stay at home instead.

Have met Grant and he is often gagged to what he can release if he wants to stay on the right side of the airlines etc.
As DB has just said NZ needs to add 3x flights per week each year just to keep up with growth. IAH isn’t really growing so much either as the 789 is smaller than the 77E
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:12 am

DavidByrne wrote:
Gasman wrote:
. . . if you really believe that the US market is expanding so rapidly that IAH and ORD services would not even compete for the same pool of passengers at this point in time when IAH has just expanded...... you're dreaming. You're basically arguing that there is a 787 sized pool of passengers who would otherwise go to ORD; but existing services via IAH or LAX are just not good enough, dammit - so for now they'll stay at home instead.

The way I see it, on the back of my envelope I calculate that there are five daily frequencies to North America on NZ as things stand. If traffic is growing at 10% pa (as I believe I read the other day) then this means that just to maintain its position in the market NZ needs to add a half a daily frequency every year. Meaning that a 3x weekly flight to ORD, growing to daily in a year's time, is not at all fanciful.

Yep

I suspect though the maths isn't quite as simplistic as that, and 10%pa will have to be shared between frequency/destinations and airframe size..... and also of course most of that 10% will still want to go to LAX, SFO & IAH......
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:13 am

Gasman wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
The way I see it, on the back of my envelope I calculate that there are five daily frequencies to North America on NZ as things stand. If traffic is growing at 10% pa (as I believe I read the other day) then this means that just to maintain its position in the market NZ needs to add a half a daily frequency every year. Meaning that a 3x weekly flight to ORD, growing to daily in a year's time, is not at all fanciful.

Yep

I suspect though the maths isn't quite as simplistic as that, and 10%pa will have to be shared between frequency/destinations and airframe size..... and also of course most of that 10% will still want to go to LAX, SFO & IAH......

As I said, "back-of-the-envelope". But the principle of needing to continually add frequencies is obvious. The only question is whether you strengthen existing markets. or try to get a commercial advantage over QF/AA by adding new destinations.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 2010
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:15 am

mariner wrote:
I can't understand why a disclaimer - boilerplate or otherwise - would irk anyone. Most people don't bother to read them, and, as I said, they do provide a level of first line defence against law suits.

If the complaint is that the map is inaccurate, that's a seperate issue, and not one I have discussed, mostly because I don't care. Since you've raised it in a post to me, I'll say that there is more than "a degree of accuracy" in the published route map, the complaints are extremely minor and some of them may be the result of contractual issues between the airlines.

Mariner, I reiterate that the magazine's disclaimer says that "Routes shown operated by ... key codeshare partners were correct at the time of printing." This is stronger wording than had the disclaimer been drafted to say something along the lines that that routes shown are "indicative only."

The disclaimer is printed twice - once on page 187, and once on page 189.

The disclaimer is not true - not only are routes incorrect, but a destination called "Pulau" has even been made up (shown as served from SIN). The disclaimer is therefore a misrepresentation of NZ's offering to the market, and would not be a defence for NZ, despite what you say to the contrary.

Why is this important? Liability. New Zealand's Fair Trading Act makes it an offence for companies to make misleading claims about their goods and services. For example, NZ faced a hefty fine in 2006, for misleading customers about the price of its airfares - it used a headline price which was not the total price of the available airfare and the existence and type of additional charges was not prominently disclosed.

Singapore Airlines codeshares
- WLG - SIN should be WLG - CBR - SIN (as as it is on the NZ website)
- SIN - MUC - MAN should be SIN - MAN (as it is on the NZ website)
- SIN - BCN should include an MXP - BCN tag (as it does on the NZ website)

Note - The map includes other tags, like the JNB - CPT flight.

Silkair codeshares
- SIN - KLO and SIN - DVO should include tags from both KLO and DVO to CEB
- There is a route from SIN to "Pulau," which is dotted as just off Peninsular Malaysia - no such destination exists (nor is represented on the NZ website)
- LOP is referred to as "Praya," when it should be "Lombok" - indeed you have to type "Lombok" on SQ and MI's websites (you cannot type "Praya")
- SIN - KCH and SIN - PLM should not be represented, as SQ and MI do not fly these routes - they have been transferred to TZ

Note - The map includes other tags, like the DAD - REP flight.

Cathay Pacific codeshares
- HKG - CHC has not yet started and should include a disclaimer as such

Virgin Australia codeshares
- BME - PHE is not operated and should not be represented
- BME - DRW is not operated and should not be represented
- BME - KNX is not operated and should not be represented
- DRW - KNX is not operated and should not be represented
- DRB has no flights from VA whatsoever, and so DRB - KNX should not be represented
- CNS - TSV is not operated and should not be represented
- TSV - ROK is not operated and should not be represented
- SYD - ROK is not operated and should not be represented
- BNE - ISA and BNE - CNJ should include an ISA - CNJ tag
- CFS - MEL is not operated and should not be represented

Indonesian codeshares
There is also a separate disclaimer that "Codeshare routes from Singapore to Moscow and Indonesia are subject to government approval." Flights from SIN to Indonesia (such as SIN - CGK) are represented in the map, whereas SIN - DME is not. If the Indonesian codeshares have not yet received government approval, then they should not be represented in the map, just as SIN - DME is not. It is about consistency. In any event, it seems that the codeshares have not yet been approved, as the route map on NZ's website only includes CGK connections via Australia, and no other destinations in Indonesia.

I have not had time to check the UA or CA maps, but given the errors that I have picked up above, I am not holding my breath for those to be perfect either.

I have already stated what else is sloppy in the magazine, like YUL and IAD being represented as Star Alliance hubs, whereas NYC and YYZ are not - though, this is not covered by the original disclaimer cited above, which clearly just referred to "routes" being accurate.

Cheers,

C.
Last edited by planemanofnz on Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1638
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:16 am

Zkpilot wrote:
Have met Grant and he is often gagged to what he can release if he wants to stay on the right side of the airlines etc.

That might well be the case; but the end result either way is that he just becomes a mouthpiece for NZ's PR department. I lost a lot of respect for him after he completely failed to call NZ to task when they introduced 10 abreast on the 77W. Either he didn't grasp the significance of it or he was being politically expedient for some perceived pragmatic reason. But it was very sanitised, vanilla reporting.
 
a7ala
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:22 am

planemanofnz wrote:
- WLG - SIN should be WLG - CBR - SIN (as as it is on the NZ website)


Air NZ do not sell the WLG-CBR sector. They only sell WLG-SIN (via CBR), so to avoid confusion I presume they have only put the "direct" route in the map.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:23 am

a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
- WLG - SIN should be WLG - CBR - SIN (as as it is on the NZ website)


Air NZ do not sell the WLG-CBR sector. They only sell WLG-SIN (via CBR), so to avoid confusion I presume they have only put the "direct" route in the map.

Sure they sell WLG-CBR (though I recall, somewhat reluctantly). Check the timetable - it's NZ3291/3292.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
a7ala
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:29 am

DavidByrne wrote:
a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
- WLG - SIN should be WLG - CBR - SIN (as as it is on the NZ website)


Air NZ do not sell the WLG-CBR sector. They only sell WLG-SIN (via CBR), so to avoid confusion I presume they have only put the "direct" route in the map.

Sure they sell WLG-CBR (though I recall, somewhat reluctantly). Check the timetable - it's NZ3291/3292.


Try booking it on their website....

They definitely sell WLG-SIN via CBR, but not WLG-CBR.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:30 am

duplicated
Last edited by DavidByrne on Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:34 am

a7ala wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Air NZ do not sell the WLG-CBR sector. They only sell WLG-SIN (via CBR), so to avoid confusion I presume they have only put the "direct" route in the map.

Sure they sell WLG-CBR (though I recall, somewhat reluctantly). Check the timetable - it's NZ3291/3292.


Try booking it on their website....

They definitely sell WLG-SIN via CBR, but not WLG-CBR.

Why on earth do they show it on their timetable then . . .? Mysterious (or disorganised)?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:36 am

Gasman wrote:
"Grant Bradley thinks..................." doesn't really clinch terribly much I'm afraid.


No. but it was mildly droll in the circumstances. Perhaps you need a sense of humour.

As I've said many times before, I don't believe any route is happening until the airline announces it.

planemanofnz wrote:
The disclaimer is not true - not only are routes incorrect, but a destination called "Pulau" has even been made up (shown as served from SIN). The disclaimer is therefore a misrepresentation of NZ's offering to the market, and would not be a defence for NZ, despite what you say to the contrary.


I didn't dispute that. I accept that some things were/are inaccurate, but then any proof reader can make a mistake. Although I cannot get exercised about whether YUL is a hub or not, it's like the old battles - here - about whether Southwest has hubs or not.

I disputed your statement that it had not been checked because I don't know how you know this. It may have been checked badly but see above, about proof readers. All I can say is that you blokes have astonishingly high standards.

For the rest, I shrug. Perhaps we have a different view of route maps, which I see as not much more than, at best, fairly glamorous advertising. I don't regard them as literal representations of where the airlines fly. Or the airline flies.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
a7ala
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:54 am

DavidByrne wrote:
a7ala wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Sure they sell WLG-CBR (though I recall, somewhat reluctantly). Check the timetable - it's NZ3291/3292.


Try booking it on their website....

They definitely sell WLG-SIN via CBR, but not WLG-CBR.

Why on earth do they show it on their timetable then . . .? Mysterious (or disorganised)?


I think you'll find the reason they dont sell WLG-CBR is that it would cause complications with the NZ/VA tasman alliance.

I suspect the online schedules are the physical flights they have access to, but not the OD booking seat allocations which will be in a different system.
 
NPL8800
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:55 am

A330NZ wrote:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/97746417/emirates-eyes-more-nz-longhaul-flights

Emirates suspending the BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL tag-ons from March 2018. Capacity being replaced by additional QF frequencies, and upgauging some services to A330s. Emirates has implied that they "may add more New Zealand to Dubai direct services".

These details were announced as part of the extension to the QF-EK partnership, and are pending regulatory approval. There is no change the the DXB-SYD-CHC service.


Disappointing but not too much of a surprise, not uncommon for the Tasman 5th freedom airlines to ditch the Oz sectors once their respective non - stops come online (TG in the past comes to mind amongst others, could see D7 leave OOL-AKL if they decide to non-stop their KUL-AKL flight), I wouldn't be surprised to see a 2nd daily DXB flight on a 77L in the next year or so
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19125
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - October 2017

Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:40 am

With the airline dropping its trans-Tasman services, the Emirates situation has become a fair ol' brain teaser:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11931831

"Emirates cans A380 superjumbo flights from Auckland to Australia

Emirates is also evaluating potential new direct services between New Zealand and Dubai."


What new direct services? They already fly DXB-AKL, so any increase in that is simply an increase in frequency. Maybe that's what they mean.

I don't think that even with the runway extension a fully laden A380 could make WLG-DXB as a non-stop, so that leaves CHC-DXB (non-stop) as the only other possibility.

I suppose they could consider another stop - not Australia - on the way, but that would make it a two-stop to London/Europe and I'm not sure they'd want that.

There might be interesting possibilities, though, if they stopped at HKT or even CMB. AKL-HKT-DXB? It doesn't do it for me, but ALK-CMB might.

I'll be interested to see where this goes - or if it goes anywhere.

mariner
aeternum nauta
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos