777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Mon Feb 13, 2012 2:38 pm

Welcome to the 110th Edition of the New Zealand Aviation Thread. In thread #109 New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 109 (by cchan Jan 25 2012 in Civil Aviation) we learnt and discussed:

- NZ and India ops
- A320 -OJK returning
- NZs ‘Rockstar’ CEO announces he is leaving
- NZ returning to Bali
- JQ quits the CHC-BNE market
- Ex QF B734 ZK-JTG being painted in Alliance colours
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:46 pm

I missed the last thread but the news of Bali was interesting. I hope the 767s stick aorund after the 787 delivery for those low-yielding routes. Though it is kind of remarkable that Bali will be NZ's only southeast Asian destination. I wonder if Manila is on the radar - the VFR traffic could justify it, maybe.

The last thread also mentioned the recent collapse in the satisfaction rates for Jetstar on New Zealand domestic. Reliability must surely be the reason, but I've noticed things seem to be improving a little of late (all flights on time, actually lifting off etc).

I used Jetstar for a WLG-ZQN return a few weeks back. Jam packed aircraft both times which makes me think that NZ has really missed a trick here. They've been operating a one daily ATR flight for a while now but the fares have been horrendous.

So has JQ stimulated the market with its fares or is this latent demand that NZ was simply ignoring because of its monopoly position (which, really, is saying the same thing twice)? And if it works on WLG-ZQN, would a one daily on other regional routes do likewise for JQ? AKL-NSN? AKL-PMR? WLG-HLZ? CHC-IVC? even AKL-IVC? I think all have merit for once or twice dailies, even for A320-sized aircraft, as the lower fares seem to really pull the punters in. It would shake things up for NZ on regional flights, which, I think they've taken advantage of for a little too long now.

If JQ can get its reliability right, I think they could change the doemstic market considerably if they think outside the box a little.

[Edited 2012-02-13 14:48:06]
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4951
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:17 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
on other regional routes do likewise for JQ? AKL-NSN?

Is the NSN runway long enough?
 
TravellerPlus
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:45 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:20 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
If JQ can get its reliability right,

I am happy to go on record and say the it is a myth that JQ is unrelaible. I've flown over 90 sectors on them now, currently twice weekly between AKL and WLG at Monday and Friday peak times. They've won my business as Air NZ is twice the price if not more. By using JQ instead full service airlines, my savings to date on both domestic and international flights are over $15,000.

The only punctuality issue that I have is that they usually arrive 5-10mins early. Indeed this Monday I was 20 mins early on a WLG-AKL!

True, I have had one day this when I was delayed 5 hours due to an aircraft experiencing mechanical difficulties, and its moments like these that give JQ a bad name. I simply paid for lounge access in WLG and worked remotely thanks to WLG's free WIFI. Other than that I have only had 4 flights when I have been more than 15 mins late. Therefore my experience of JQ punctuality is that I'm on time 94.4%.

I believe that JQ gets disproportionately bad rap in the press. Its not half as bad as people make out.
What goes around comes around....unless your luggage is not on the carousel...
 
nz2
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:38 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:33 am

- If you book on AR, you travel on AR. Their tickets are not widely transferable/endorsable to other carriers. Which means if your flight is delayed to South America by 12/24/47/72+ hours you're stuck waiting until your aircraft is fixed/swapped for the next one. At least if LA has big problems they can reroute via SYD to QF EZE/SCL, or via LAX on QF, then LA south. I'm not saying it often happens with LA, but there are usually options, whereas AR have none. LA fly daily whereas AR fly 3 times week, sometimes four a week, during high season. This is usually worth paying the extra cash to go on LA.


Thanks Areorobnz, cheers
 
joelyboy911
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:45 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:24 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
AKL-NSN? AKL-PMR? WLG-HLZ? CHC-IVC?

I think some of these routes would be doable. Certainly my local pet AKL-PMR, and that's based on the same principles you mentioned on the ZQN route.

Naturally it would force NZ to consider cutting frequencies but I think JQ could establish a presence with one or two flights per day, on those routes, however it would require more aircraft and the flights would probably need to be timed in the mornings and evenings which might result in poor utilisation. The ability to boost the demand is there, and the brand is already well-known across New Zealand.

However, the expense of having to have staff on the ground at the new ports would be a factor. You also have to remember that those airports would have to reopen their security screening departments. PMR has one, from the days when international flights by Freedom were flying from there, but they have no staff, and I don't even know if the equipment is all still there to be honest.

I don't know who would be responsible for funding this, but given the airport is trying to court international flights back, presumably they have a plan for it. It wouldn't be cheap though, directly or indirectly, the burden will fall to the user. I think it's the major impediment to JQ opening new routes with their present fleet.
Flown: NZ, NY, SJ, QF, UA, AC, EI, BE, TP, AF
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:48 am

Quoting TravellerPlus (Reply 3):
I am happy to go on record and say the it is a myth that JQ is unrelaible.

And I'm happy to state otherwise.

I have flown on Jetstar on New Zealand domestic on eleven domestic return trips (tallying up one ways) in the past nine months, making 22 flights. Of those, five never left the ground, meaning a ruined weekend away, making an additional four flights redundant (the other one was usable because the replacement Jetstar flight could get me there in reasonable time).

In anyone's book, that's a pretty high rate of outright failure. The only reason I persisted with them was the constant provision of travel vouchers in compensation for cancelled services. My work trialled using them but their constant delays and further cancellations meant that reliability became too much of an issue.

Jetstar also pad out their timetables substantially to increase the chance of being "on time". Five minutes here and there, fine, but it can get frustrating when they pad by up to 20 minutes and you're left lingering at the airport. It's also pretty disingenuous.

Quoting joelyboy911 (Reply 5):
However, the expense of having to have staff on the ground at the new ports would be a factor.

Probably one of the two key cost issues, but I'm pretty sure the local cities would open their arms to them. The other being aircraft availability, as you pointed out.

Quoting joelyboy911 (Reply 5):
Naturally it would force NZ to consider cutting frequencies

not sure about that. Maybe, but you'd likely see larger aircraft, lower fares.

Quoting joelyboy911 (Reply 5):
probably need to be timed in the mornings and evenings

Not sure about that either. Some of the routes aren't likely to have a huge business demand so mid morning/arvo flights could be a goer. And in some cases the fares could be sufficiently low enough for people to accept an overnight stay. that really is how expensive NZ can be on regional flights.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:03 am

Quoting TravellerPlus (Reply 3):
I am happy to go on record and say the it is a myth that JQ is unrelaible.

I think that most of the time they are fine... however, it seems that when things go wrong ( as they will at any airline from time to time) their recovery is very poor.

A friend of mine in CHC used to constantly sing their praises and about 14 months ago she actually berated me for booking NZ and paying 'too much' when I went down to visit her (in fact I booked my itinerary ages out and got a very inexpensive fare) .

Shortly after that she had major problems with 3 Jetstar itineraries in 3 months. In all 3 cases the initial problems could have happened to any airline, but Jetstar dropped the ball on the recovery. She has not purchased another ticket on Jetstar since then.

I hope that your run of problem free Jetstar flights continues... but the proof of reliability ( for me at least) with an airline is in how they handle you when a problem does happen.
 
Mr AirNZ
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:24 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:53 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 7):
Shortly after that she had major problems with 3 Jetstar itineraries in 3 months. In all 3 cases the initial problems could have happened to any airline, but Jetstar dropped the ball on the recovery. She has not purchased another ticket on Jetstar since then.

You've hit on something here bigger than some may realise.

Studies have shown that a positive service recovery experience that passengers/consumers believe was handled well will increase loyalty to a brand more so than just a continous run of good and trouble free experiences. When things go wrong, someone needs to pick up the pieces quickly. Businesses that have empowered staff and processes in place for a wide variety of events generally perform better. Companies that use contractors often perform badly in such a situation simply because staff often have very limited powers (not saying this appliess in the JQ case necessarily, talking more in a general sense).
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:57 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 7):
but the proof of reliability ( for me at least) with an airline is in how they handle you when a problem does happen.

I agree. and it wuld explain the substantial drop in satisfaction with Jetstar in the survey reported in the last thread. I can't see any other variables that have changed. If anything, they've expanded their schedules and the fares are fairly constant. Though I have noticed they've upped their baseline AKL-WLG fare from $59 to $69. Hmmmm.
 
byronicle6
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:38 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:57 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
even AKL-IVC?

Im baffled as to why neither NZ or JQ fly AKL-IVC non-stop. At current, the earliest a business traveller from IVC can be in Auckland is at 10.00am, and the latest they can depart is 5.00pm. ZQN has 5 daily (4 NZ, 1 JQ) and DUD has 4 daily (3 NZ, 1 JQ) non-stop from AKL. And whilst Invercargill is not the tourist hub of Queenstown, or have the population of Dunedin, a 1x daily flight that is timed for business travellers especially would be much welcomed im sure, requiring an overnight for the aircraft at IVC.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
I used Jetstar for a WLG-ZQN return a few weeks back. Jam packed aircraft both times which makes me think that NZ has really missed a trick here. They've been operating a one daily ATR flight for a while now but the fares have been horrendous.

Glad JQ have jumped in here, as you said prices were horrendous. Am i right in saying that JQ have more capacity over NZ on this route? The only domestic route that JQ has more capacity than NZ?

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
And if it works on WLG-ZQN, would a one daily on other regional routes do likewise for JQ? AKL-NSN? AKL-PMR? WLG-HLZ? CHC-IVC? even AKL-IVC?

You can add ROT-CHC to that list aswell. ROT along with HLZ both have security screening already in place. NZ is also boosting capacity on this route to 733 in the 2012/13 summer season. Qantas used to fly this route, but dropped it when domestic operations switched to JQ.

Im also more than happy to fly JQ and have never been more than 5-10 mins late, with most flights being on - time or early. To be honest ive had more issues with NZ in terms of on-time performance
Travel is my thing
 
zkncj
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:09 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
I used Jetstar for a WLG-ZQN return a few weeks back. Jam packed aircraft both times which makes me think that NZ has really missed a trick here. They've been operating a one daily ATR flight for a while now but the fares have been horrendous.

Don't forget that this route is still in the 'Honey Moon' stage, just because the flight was packed didn't doesn't mean it made a profitt. Most of the passengers likely paid $29 for there intro sale fare.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:55 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 11):
Don't forget that this route is still in the 'Honey Moon' stage, just because the flight was packed didn't doesn't mean it made a profitt. Most of the passengers likely paid $29 for there intro sale fare.

That's true. But it just goes to show what lower fares can do to stimulate a market. I work with people in our WLG office who own cribs ( ) down in Wanaka and are jumping at the chance to fly down more often. Where once there was a two-three times yearly visit, they've already booked five-six visits. Pretty good going.

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 8):
Studies have shown that a positive service recovery experience that passengers/consumers believe was handled well will increase loyalty to a brand more so than just a continous run of good and trouble free experiences. When things go wrong, someone needs to pick up the pieces quickly.

Absolutely. And JQ fails miserably, in my experience. The cancellation is not advertised beforehand, (eg. the flight across the ditch was severely delayed, meaning the flight to AKL was cancelled, meaning the retrn WLG-AKL was nixed) so you turn up to the airport thinking hunky dory when it aint, and hasn't been for several hours, there is never anyone who has the authority to make a call on things or provide definitive, accurate information, and I've yet to see JQ deliver clear, simple instruction on what to do next.

Let's hope they learn. PacBlue never seemed to have this sort of chaotic approach. But oddly, JetConnect did. Hmmmm.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:22 am

Quoting byronicle6 (Reply 10):
Im baffled as to why neither NZ or JQ fly AKL-IVC non-stop. At current, the earliest a business traveller from IVC can be in Auckland is at 10.00am, and the latest they can depart is 5.00pm. ZQN has 5 daily (4 NZ, 1 JQ) and DUD has 4 daily (3 NZ, 1 JQ) non-stop from AKL. And whilst Invercargill is not the tourist hub of Queenstown, or have the population of Dunedin, a 1x daily flight that is timed for business travellers especially would be much welcomed im sure, requiring an overnight for the aircraft at IVC.

I doubt there'd be enough demand for a 733.. So what other aircraft would you put on this flight which is currently in NZ's fleet or orderbook?

Quoting TravellerPlus (Reply 3):
I've flown over 90 sectors on them now, currently twice weekly between AKL and WLG at Monday and Friday peak times.

I take it you don't have many sectors involving ZQN in there?
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
cchan
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:30 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
I hope the 767s stick aorund after the 787 delivery for those low-yielding routes.

Agree. The 763s are also very useful on some Pacific Islands routes where a 789 would be a bit of a waste.
 
TravellerPlus
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:45 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:03 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 13):
I take it you don't have many sectors involving ZQN in there?

Sadly, no.  But the aircraft I've been flying on, or departing from the gates next to mine, have nearly always operated through ZQN that same day, so I'd have noticed any flow on effects of service disruption.

Here is a link to JQ's on time performance for those who are interested.
http://www.jetstar.com/nz/en/what-we-offer/our-performance

It looks OK, apart from the July/August troubles due to snow. That said I am curious as it neither lists international punctuality nor does it give the level of cancellations. I note that in June 82% of the flights were on time, but didn't their planes spend half the month on the ground due to ash?

However, as other's posts have reminded me, airline reliability is more than punctuality.
What goes around comes around....unless your luggage is not on the carousel...
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:34 am

Quoting TravellerPlus (Reply 15):
Here is a link to JQ's on time performance for those who are interested.
http://www.jetstar.com/nz/en/what-we...mance

Does this include flights that are summarily cancelled? My issue with JQ has been two flights that were cancelled and my itinerary changed not to suit me, the paying customer, and with the options to go with NZ at that close to departure time being cost prohibitive.

And I really dislike the surly attitude I've experienced from their ground-staff at check-in.

Having said the above, I really applaud them for starting WLG-ZQN.
come visit the south pacific
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:08 pm

New routes for NZ question/thought regarding India and Singapore: with the airline in the past saying it will go back to SIN on arrival of the 787 and also having said it will be looking at India, would it not make more sense for the airline to return to SIN when AI joins Star Alliance? This way the airline can codeshare with AI on flights from SIN to AMD, BLR, BOM, CCU, COK, DEL, HYD, MAA etc. Plus, with TG on flights to BKK, CNX, HKT etc. There's be far less risk in trying to put all India eggs in one airport's basket plus make the SIN return far more viable and attractive.

Thoughts?
come visit the south pacific
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:27 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 9):
upped their baseline AKL-WLG fare from $59 to $69. Hmmmm.

For me now thanks to the stand by fares, if I know I've got to be somewhere at a certain time or got to fly during peak hour then I'll book the fare in advance but if I'm able to arrive at any time I'll try the stand by fares for cheaper then the base fare

Quoting byronicle6 (Reply 10):
You can add ROT-CHC

Maybe also WLG-ROT in peak season with an E190 or B733

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 12):
Let's hope they learn. PacBlue never seemed to have this sort of chaotic approach. But oddly, JetConnect did.

Yip JQ are keeping the Qantas Group reputation alive here!
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7412
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:17 pm

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 17):
Thoughts?

I think your idea would have been successful with a properly specced 763 and also had NZ stayed with the 788.

The only way SIN will return for the time being is if they operate via SIN to India - already touted as a no go "one stopper" at least for the next 11 months...( ) although there will be a new CEO I'm not convinced the apple will fall hugely far from the tree..

I think SIN as a destination like it used to be is a long way down on the NZ list these days, between 3K & SQ the whole market that NZ would be able to chase and occupy is sown up, with any remaining opportunity mopped up by QF/MH.
I personally like your thinking, but their opportunity to re-inject themselves into the SIN market has gone ever since they rolled over and gave up on the destination overnight. From daily 763 to 5x 772s a week to 0x with no thought to re-invest in the 763 fleet until it was too late. First the aircraft was right, but the product was wrong, then the product on SIN was finally right when the 772 arrived, but the aircraft was wrong- hence the 772 service lasted all of about 4 months before they cut it and used the aircraft to fly PVG/YVR..

The relatively minor cost to fit the BP/PE/Y products on the 763 could have made Singapore viable instead of wasting the 772 there (which of course would have been useful elsewhere) but now there is 3K and an opportunity wasted. Since the current CEO started ZK-NCE,ZK-NCF, ZK-NCN,ZK-NCO were all retired from NZ operation. Even if 4 had been kept in the current configuration (or even higher density) for shorthaul, and the other 4 for longhaul, NZs ability to 'right-size' a flight and also operate to destinations with wildly different yields/clientele requirements would have dramatically increased.
Flown to 120 Airports in 44 Countries on 73 Operators. Visited 55 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:31 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 6):
that really is how expensive NZ can be on regional flights.

The cost of regional flights in NZL is a regular refrain. Out of interest, I did a comparison with similar Canadian flights (1 hour), using comparable fare buckets (second lowest bucket, with similar restrictions on changes, etc.) at similar times (morning outbound, late afternoon return).

April 10, 2012

AKL-NPE-AKL
NZ $434 ($CDN 372)

YYZ/AC $431 ($NZ 518)
PD $369 ($NZ 443)
WS $403 ($NZ 484)

So despite NZ having a monopoly on AKL-NPE, and YYZ being highly competitive (hourly flights by AC and WS, 2 hourly by WS), the fares are very comparable in each country's own dollar.

[Edited 2012-02-14 05:36:59]

[Edited 2012-02-14 05:37:23]

[Edited 2012-02-14 05:38:36]
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:42 pm

[Trying again, as the edit function keeps on deleting parts of my post]

The cost of regional flights in NZL is a regular refrain. Out of interest, I did a comparison with similar Canadian flights (1 hour), using comparable fare buckets (second lowest bucket, with similar restrictions on changes, etc.) at similar times (morning outbound, late afternoon return).

April 10, 2012

AKL-NPE-AKL
NZ $434 ($CDN 372)

YOW-YYZ/YTZ - YOW
YYZ/AC $431 ($NZ 518)
PD $369 ($NZ 443)
WS $403 ($NZ 484)

So despite NZ having a monopoly on AKL-NPE, and YOW-YYZ being highly competitive (hourly flights by AC and PD, 2 hourly by WS), the fares are very comparable in each country's own dollar.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
nascarnut
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:43 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:54 pm

Has anyone looked at Air NZ options should Air Tahuti Nui fold. Rumor is that TN are losing money daily and may only last another month.
Air NZ could step in and operate the following with 767-300ER aircraft
AKL-PPT-LAX x 3 weekly
SYD-PPT x 3 weekly
AKL-PPT-South America (GRU/GIG or SCL) x 3 weekly
It may mean Air NZ have to source additional 767 capacity until the 787's come on line

I am not sure how much traffic TN carries to CDG ex PPT but this could be left to AF. The 2 x weekly PPT-NRT market could be rerouted via AKL to connect with the AKL-NRT service.
Currently all SYD-PPT passengers are connected via AKL. Air NZ could fill that market with the PPT-SYD non-stop similar to what they have done with the RAR-SYD service.
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:52 pm

Fyfe departure may be earlier - http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...8546/Fyfe-departure-may-be-earlier

An interesting part:

An industry insider said Air New Zealand could lose the chairman, chief financial officer Rob McDonald and long-serving deputy chief executive Norm Thompson in quick succession.

McDonald and Thompson have both told the board they will not apply for the top job.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:03 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 21):
So despite NZ having a monopoly on AKL-NPE, and YOW-YYZ being highly competitive (hourly flights by AC and PD, 2 hourly by WS), the fares are very comparable in each country's own dollar.

Though I think Canada has relatively higher taxes, no? And if you compare it to average income per capita/some kind of price parity measure that accounts for local labour costs etc (PPP?), I'm fairly certain you'll come out with a differrent result. Simply comparing in relative currencies doesn't really provide a full picture - you need to 'Big Mac Index' it.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 18):
For me now thanks to the stand by fares,

So you've used these? How has it worked out? Is it first in first served? I've only become aware of the standby concept recently. I saw a Twitter feed from NZ to customers' enquiries as to whether there are seats available that day - seems a good idea to clear excess stock. Though don't ask me how Twitter works  
Quoting TravellerPlus (Reply 15):
Here is a link to JQ's on time performance for those who are interested.

Yeah, but it helps with the timetable padding they have, eg. for some reason, JQ's A320s fly 5 minutes slower than NZ's 733s and A320s between AKL and WLG. Convenient.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:24 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
Though I think Canada has relatively higher taxes, no? And if you compare it to average income per capita/some kind of price parity measure that accounts for local labour costs etc (PPP?), I'm fairly certain you'll come out with a differrent result.

It's admittedly a rough and ready comparison, and I'm certainly not an economist.
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:33 pm

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 22):
Has anyone looked at Air NZ options should Air Tahuti Nui fold. Rumor is that TN are losing money daily and may only last another month.

It's difficult to know whether the French Polynesian government would allow TN to fail.

Air NZ could easily resume AKL-PPT-LAX, but I think it's the wrong model. By all means use one flight number, but operate as follows:

763: AKL-(RAR-)PPT
77E: AKL-LAX-PPT-LAX-AKL.

Personally, I expect TN to limp on.
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:31 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 18):For me now thanks to the stand by fares,
So you've used these? How has it worked out? Is it first in first served?

No, I havn't used stand by yet, but several friends have and yes its first in/first served. Your status also seems to help. I'm considering doing an airpoints status run shortly so would be using stand by.
 
agent99nzboi
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:09 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:44 am

With regards to NZ on the WLG-ZQN flights.

I feel that it's not a route that needs to be flown direct, NZ maintains its frequency between the 2 centres by connecting in CHC which dosent take that much longer. The market might not support a direct 737, or multiple ATRs direct, but what about a couple of Q300 flights?

The Direct ATR WLG-ZQN is aimed at the tourism market, and the ROT-WLG flight connects with it, so naturally the fairs will be higher.
 
byronicle6
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:38 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:25 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 27):
I'm considering doing an airpoints status run shortly so would be using stand by.

I didnt think Stand By fares accrued status points. I used Stand by for CHC-DUD and CHC-AKL in July & August last year and wasnt able to get any points out of it
Travel is my thing
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:38 am

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 28):
With regards to NZ on the WLG-ZQN flights.

I feel that it's not a route that needs to be flown direct, NZ maintains its frequency between the 2 centres by connecting in CHC which dosent take that much longer. The market might not support a direct 737, or multiple ATRs direct, but what about a couple of Q300 flights?

The Direct ATR WLG-ZQN is aimed at the tourism market, and the ROT-WLG flight connects with it, so naturally the fairs will be higher.

It's meant to be quite a seasonal route. It has been flown with the 733 or twice daily AT7 flights during peak seasons in previous years. I'll be interested in how Air NZ respond to the competition, the Q300 twice daily may be one way of doing it.



Quoting byronicle6 (Reply 10):
Im baffled as to why neither NZ or JQ fly AKL-IVC non-stop. At current, the earliest a business traveller from IVC can be in Auckland is at 10.00am, and the latest they can depart is 5.00pm. ZQN has 5 daily (4 NZ, 1 JQ) and DUD has 4 daily (3 NZ, 1 JQ) non-stop from AKL. And whilst Invercargill is not the tourist hub of Queenstown, or have the population of Dunedin, a 1x daily flight that is timed for business travellers especially would be much welcomed im sure, requiring an overnight for the aircraft at IVC.

This route was used as an example of one that would not work at a recent company seminar. As someone else pointed out, if a 733 is too much aircraft, what else would you use? Besides, it's possible to get to AKL by 10:00am already (via either CHC or WLG).
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:40 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 7):
I hope that your run of problem free Jetstar flights continues... but the proof of reliability ( for me at least) with an airline is in how they handle you when a problem does happen.

Completely agree, and this is where Jetstar let themselves down. They won't even give you a refund if they cancel will they? Just a booking credit?
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:41 am

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 28):
The Direct ATR WLG-ZQN is aimed at the tourism market, and the ROT-WLG flight connects with it, so naturally the fairs will be higher.

I'm not sure that's even remotely true. The package tourist run from ZQN to ROT goes via CHC just fine. Having used the NZ WLG-ZQN service a handful of times, it was, by the looks and sounds of pasengers, almost entirely catering to local passengers.

Problem was the fares were so high nonstop, care of NZ's monopooly.

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 28):
I feel that it's not a route that needs to be flown direct, NZ maintains its frequency between the 2 centres by connecting in CHC which dosent take that much longer. The market might not support a direct 737, or multiple ATRs direct, but what about a couple of Q300 flights?

Wait, so why would passengers bother with NZ if they have to pay more and fly via CHC to get to ZQN? Jetstar can pack out a 177 seat A320 if the price is right, which lately it seems to have been. I hope this isn't a case of "honeymoon period", but considering there used to be a single daily ATR on the route (66 pax) and JQ can manage 170-odd during a midweek service, I'd say there's a latent market there that via-CHC doesn't satisfy.

Also, have you tried getting a spare seat on CHC-WLG of late in either direction? Capacity is down and my work gave up on fully flexi fares because the only real benefit - flight changes - were proving impossible due to the lack of available seats.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:48 am

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 30):
It's meant to be quite a seasonal route.

Which seasons? Winter only? Nope. Summer only? Nope. Sure maybe a lull in Spring/Autumn, but ZQN and the surrounding area is increasingly a year-round destination.

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 30):
This route was used as an example of one that would not work at a recent company seminar.

I'm not surprised - monopolies always say that until the competitoin toodles in and sets things alight. All depends on the parameters used, I suppose. But I'd bet you that NZ is basing it on existing fare levels (monopoly driven) and maintaining existing services out of CHC (mostly ATR - they could conceivably downgrade to Q300s, though it's not much of a downgrade really, more a downsize, while maintaining frequency).

It took them forever to introduce WLG-IVC and that was after IVC's population dipped below the cherished 50,000 mark.

A 630am departure from IVC, arriving AKL at 830am, with an 8pm departure from AKL and 10pm arrival in IVC for an overnight stay isn't particularly exceptional, though I suppose crew accomodation would factor in (local crewing opportunities?).

[Edited 2012-02-14 19:49:47]
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:02 am

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 31):
They won't even give you a refund if they cancel will they? Just a booking credit?

You can always push back on that. From my understanding it is illegal under the Consumer Guarantees Act for them to refuse to provide a refund since they have not provided the service. However, a lot of customers accept at face value Jetstar's advice that they do not have to provide a refund for cancelled services. A friend of mine went back to them last year in that situation and they caved in once they realised that she knew her rights was not going to accept "No" for an answer.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:26 am

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 31):
They won't even give you a refund if they cancel will they? Just a booking credit?

On the multiple times JQ have cancelled on me, they've given me a full refund and a $100 credit. Though they have stopped giving the credit in Aussie dollars.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:15 am

Quoting byronicle6 (Reply 10):
Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 1):
And if it works on WLG-ZQN, would a one daily on other regional routes do likewise for JQ? AKL-NSN? AKL-PMR? WLG-HLZ? CHC-IVC? even AKL-IVC?

A few once daily flights on those sectors you have mentioned would certainly stir things up a bit. They would probably not bother AirNZ very much. If people want to do a day return trip to go to a meeting, the AirNZ flights in ATRs will still be what they use. Since I am in Dunedin, I would add DUD-WLG to those - even just as a once daily. Idea - JQ currently operate a single daily AKL-DUD return flight. They could give us an AKL-DUD-WLG-DUD-AKL, if they do not need the plane back in AKL really quickly. A milk run flight might be AKL-PMR-CHC-DUD (selling the individual stages) An A320 might be overkill for these stage lengths.

If JQ was prepared to operate more than one type in NZ, the E-175 seats 88 passengers in FlyBe configuration, so it would be below the 90 seat threshold for security screening at Regional Airports. Or JQ could ask Alliance or Sunstate to set up NZ operations to operate Fokker 100s or Q400s on their behalf.
 
agent99nzboi
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:09 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:48 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 32):
Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 33):

Hmm, no there is definitely a majority of pax that are tourist orientated, and it becomes clear when (if you were lucky to fly on a fine day) the ATR did a figure 8 over Mt Cook at 16,000' and all their heads would pop up to the window and cameras focused. Locals only fill the last few rows and are usually all NZ*G/NZ*GE. So I feel I'm justified in making my assumption that the fares for this flight will be high. Yes package groups go through CHC on the same flight number, but many family and agent booked foreighn travellers go through WLG off the Q300 from ROT, it's a tight connection and you often have to wait for them.

Flying direct is not that much of an issue, surely it's better for the consumer to have as many options as possible ( many flights 1 stop, and 1 direct) over a couple of direct with few 1 stop. Many passengers flying ZQN-CHC won't terminate in CHC but will connect to AKL,WLG,HLZ,PMR and International flights. there is an entire National network that people travel and 1 stop ( almost like hubbing) allows an airline to create the best frequencies, connections and all up options to its passengers. It's not just as simple as A-B.

Oh and the ATR is 68pax, not 66. Changed a few years back when they removed some galley space.

Now the same can be said for IVC-AKL, many passengers travel onwards in the domestic and international network and an IVC-AKL would remove passengers from the IVC-CHC CHC-AKL flights without filling a 737 direct. An ATR that distance would take just as long, particularly heading south AKL-IVC with headwinds.
As for crewing, I bet he trusty Ascot would welcome more air crew with open arms.


In contrast lets remember back to when NZ didn't operate HLZ-CHC direct, but as soon as Origin Pacific announced they wanted to operate the route, NZ jumped in with an ATR and now look how successful this route is as a direct service.

I think if nz had slack 737 schedules they would be better on an early morning from PMR-AKL or HLZ-WLG as the ATRs are nearly always full.
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:18 pm

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 37):
I think if nz had slack 737 schedules they would be better on an early morning from PMR-AKL or HLZ-WLG as the ATRs are nearly always full.

Could NZ delay the retirement of an owned B733 and operate the extra B733 on one of those routes? The question then turns to, would NZ keep the extra B733 or order an extra A320 or an A319?
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:25 pm

Quoting byronicle6 (Reply 29):

Just read the T&Cs for stand by fares and here it is

9) Standby Fares are not eligible to accrue Airpoints Dollars™, Status Points or credit towards tier status, and cannot be purchased using Airpoints Dollars™.
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:27 pm

Is QFs AKL-LAX service being chopped at todays rumored announcement? QF - More Cuts Announced Tomorrow? (by SexyAdonis Feb 15 2012 in Civil Aviation) Could we see JQ take over?
 
cchan
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 37):
I think if nz had slack 737 schedules they would be better on an early morning from PMR-AKL or HLZ-WLG as the ATRs are nearly always full.

Unlikely because of security check requirements at HLZ and PMR.
 
Kaiarahi
Posts: 1807
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:55 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:27 pm

Maybe I have a simple mind, but I'm trying to understand why it's cheaper to fly LAX-SFO-AKL return than LAX-AKL return.

According to the NZ website, LAX-AKL-LAX in PE on 29/03 returning 13/04 is $US2767 ($NZ3319), while LAX-SFO-AKL-SFO-LAX on the same dates is $US2635 ($NZ3161). Premium for 77W PE?
Empty vessels make the most noise.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:39 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 33):
Which seasons? Winter only? Nope. Summer only? Nope. Sure maybe a lull in Spring/Autumn, but ZQN and the surrounding area is increasingly a year-round destination.

Yes busy in Summer and Winter with the additional capacity in these seasons, the flight only runs once a week during a significant period of Autumn.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 33):
I'm not surprised - monopolies always say that until the competitoin toodles in and sets things alight. All depends on the parameters used, I suppose. But I'd bet you that NZ is basing it on existing fare levels (monopoly driven) and maintaining existing services out of CHC (mostly ATR - they could conceivably downgrade to Q300s, though it's not much of a downgrade really, more a downsize, while maintaining frequency).

It took them forever to introduce WLG-IVC and that was after IVC's population dipped below the cherished 50,000 mark.
Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 33):
A 630am departure from IVC, arriving AKL at 830am, with an 8pm departure from AKL and 10pm arrival in IVC for an overnight stay isn't particularly exceptional, though I suppose crew accomodation would factor in (local crewing opportunities?).

I agree, JQ would grow the market, but they'd have to! The Q300 could operate the route with max payload in all but the worst weather, however it would be close to a three hour block time. Many of the IVC-CHC flights are already on the Q300 with three aircraft overnighting there on week nights (two ex CHC and one ex WLG).



Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 34):
You can always push back on that. From my understanding it is illegal under the Consumer Guarantees Act for them to refuse to provide a refund since they have not provided the service. However, a lot of customers accept at face value Jetstar's advice that they do not have to provide a refund for cancelled services. A friend of mine went back to them last year in that situation and they caved in once they realised that she knew her rights was not going to accept "No" for an answer.

Thanks for the information.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
cchan
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:19 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 42):
According to the NZ website, LAX-AKL-LAX in PE on 29/03 returning 13/04 is $US2767 ($NZ3319), while LAX-SFO-AKL-SFO-LAX on the same dates is $US2635 ($NZ3161). Premium for 77W PE?

Different fare class?
 
joelyboy911
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:45 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:33 pm

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 36):
A milk run flight might be AKL-PMR-CHC-DUD

I had a similar thought. AKL-PMR-CHC was once a common routing, if I recall correctly. I believe it was flown by Ansett and NZ, and possibly Origin Pacific too. I'd hardly want to do AKL-DUD on that routing though! But AKL-CHC with one stop is not so bad, and there may be demand for a same-plane service rather than the connections offered currently (on the DUD route, mostly). Not significant, but some may be sold on the idea of not having to change planes at the connection in CHC.

My question would be - is it permissible to allow the through passengers to stay aboard the aircraft at the stop?

Quoting cchan (Reply 41):
Unlikely because of security check requirements at HLZ and PMR.

It would be nice if the requirement could be waived for airports with less than a certain number of security-requiring flights per day. That way if NZ or JQ were to start one or two daily 737/A320 flights, they could go out without the security needing to be staffed for just a few hours a day. I guess it's not viable for all sorts of reasons, but the passengers on an ATR-72 are not more secure than the passengers on a 733. I guess the 737 would go in to the secure area at AKL or CHC, which is another complicating factor.

However, as has been said, those airports are desperate to get more service. PMR still holds out a hope that international flights may someday return, and would probably be willing to softly assist the start of jet flights or the entry of JQ if it helps their chances of talking them into starting BNE or SYD.

PMR was once hoping they'd get E-190 service from DJ, I remember DJ once toured an example around the country. Ironically (and it was a bad omen indeed), the E-190 never made its scheduled stop at PMR due to damage incurred at HLZ, if I recall correctly. Local dignitaries (hmm... that's an oxymoron) including the mayor were left waiting at the airport.

[Edited 2012-02-15 13:35:14]
Flown: NZ, NY, SJ, QF, UA, AC, EI, BE, TP, AF
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:39 pm

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 37):
Hmm, no there is definitely a majority of pax that are tourist orientated,

Based on existing fares. Lower them a bit and whammo, you've got the locals interested. And come to think of it, yes of course they're tourist oriented - most people heading to Queenstown are. But you're claiming most of these pax are bound for ROT on package tours. The Jetstar service, which doesn't connect to ROT (no service) suggests otherwise.

Are you basing this on one flight experience? I know I am with Jetstar, but have done three returns with NZ on WLG-ZQN over the past few years. Hardly definitive, I know.

Quoting agent99nzboi (Reply 37):
Flying direct is not that much of an issue,

Direct or nonstop? Like I said, WLG-CHC is fairly packed these days. JQ comes along with a nonstop and the flights are full, midweek! ("honeymoon effect" acknowledged)

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43):
the flight only runs once a week during a significant period of Autumn.

Under monopoly pricing. I wouldn't be surprised if JQ lowered frequency during Autumn, but even then, I doubt it will be as low as one per week. Unless they're losing a bomb on the service, in which case they'd likely just drop it.

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43):
Many of the IVC-CHC flights are already on the Q300 with three aircraft overnighting there on week nights (two ex CHC and one ex WLG).

Interesting, so have pax numbers actualyl declined out of IVC? I recall in the late 90s/early 2000s that there were 5, sometimes 6 (Fridays?) ATR flights per day between IVC and CHC, and that was with a 3 daily Ansett service to CHC. Throw in Wellington flights, and it would appear that if things haven't declined, they haven't really advanced much either under monopoly flights.

And presumably if a nonstop to AKL

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43):
Thanks for the information.

Except it's not really accurate. At least from April 2011, JQ have been offering full refunds and travel vouchers. Perhaps it was a one-off, training issue with groundstaff.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 39):
Just read the T&Cs for stand by fares and here it is

Makes sense - I wonder how it's working out for NZ.
 
agent99nzboi
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:09 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:04 pm

Quoting cchan (Reply 41):

Yeah absolutely, both airports claim to not be viable enough to offer alcohol in their Koru lounges, so don't imagine AvSec will be in any hurry to install checkpoint screening if even NZ don't think it's busy enough.

Of course on those morning flights HLZ, DUD, PMR it makes sense to operate a highly cost efficient A/C full of high yielding passengers, rather than an expensive jet less than full of low yield passengers. I just think that a 737 would be better used on these routes than WLG-ZQN, even though ZQN has screening.



Hey anyone know how long it will take the new ATRs to get RNP approved? Are all the current A320Ds RNP equipped and approved as well?
 
QF175
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:13 pm

Per the advice from QF to the ASX, Auckland to Los Angeles will be suspended from May 2012.

[Edited 2012-02-15 15:15:29]
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7412
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread #110

Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:26 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 42):
Maybe I have a simple mind, but I'm trying to understand why it's cheaper to fly LAX-SFO-AKL return than LAX-AKL return.
Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 42):
Premium for 77W PE?

It's likely a mixture of older 744 product type and availability of lower fare basis due (slightly) lower SFO loads for PE
Flown to 120 Airports in 44 Countries on 73 Operators. Visited 55 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.

Who is online