User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:48 am

Continuation from the last thread which can be found here: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 124 (by 777ER Feb 10 2013 in Civil Aviation)

NZ1
Forum Moderator
--
✈ NZ1 / Mike
Head Forum Moderator
www.airliners.net
www.twitter.com/airliners_net
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:13 am

Does anyone know why QF38 (supposed to go from Wellington to Melbourne) has diverted?

[/url]
ZK-ZQH QF38
First to fly the 787-9 with Air New Zealand and ZK-NZE (2014-10-09, NZ103)
 
haggis73
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:28 am

Quoting zkojq (Reply 1):
Does anyone know why QF38 (supposed to go from Wellington to Melbourne) has diverted?

Diverted for fuel. WLG is on fuel allocation.
 
nz2
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:38 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:37 am

If you were GE as opposed to G you could access R inventory now for a Recognition Upgrade, but in spite of the spin we now know that your Recognition inventory at 72 hours will be whatever hasn't been OneUp'd, so my advice is just request to use a Recognition if your OneUp is rejected.

Thanks for feedback Koruman
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:53 am

TN is dumping seats AKL/LAX/AKL in Christmas school holiday period, at least as part of a MEL/AKL/PPT/LAX ticket.

Saw a cheap airfare MEL/LAX on www.gumtree.com.au of all places & when went to compare on www.webjet.com.au & QF fare came up, but it was only QF MEL/AKL/MEL (with overnight accommodation at AKL on way over not included) & TN rest of way for just over AUD$2k inc taxes. Still cheap if don't mind spending night at AKL & going 2 stops in each direction. QF nonstops were $3375 & VA $3200.

How are TN going ? Weren't they in trouble financially recently ?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:11 am

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 4):
How are TN going ? Weren't they in trouble financially recently ?

Every year since they began they have been in a constant state of financial trouble.

As far as the TN fare goes, unless the days they operate work for you I probably wouldn't consider it from Australia, just from AKL.
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.
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:21 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 5):
Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 4):
How are TN going ? Weren't they in trouble financially recently ?


Every year since they began they have been in a constant state of financial trouble.

As far as the TN fare goes, unless the days they operate work for you I probably wouldn't consider it from Australia, just from AKL.

In a way TN is similar to FJ. FJ now back in profit. So what are FJ doing that TN is not ?


Think TN used to fly from SYD, but now think only AKL/PPT. Surely their A343's would have legs to fly nonstop PPT/SYD with a full load ?

Then if they did that they could offer SYD/LAX direct via PPT with PPT stopover options.

Even if they flew nonstop SYD/PPT twice a week with other options via AKL it would be vast improvement.

People don't mind one stop but 2 with a compulsory overnight is a bit of a stretch.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:53 am

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 6):
So what are FJ doing that TN is not ?

FJ have the right aircraft for the right jobs, and they are moving forward to replace the weakpoints (read 744s). TN have a ridiculous fleet for what they use them for AND they show no sign of digging themselves out by ordering a better fleet for their requirements. With the A32xNEO on the horizon that is what they should be focussing on for the South Pacific services to AKL/SYD/BNE/MEL/NAN/HNL and something in the 763/788/332 size for flights like HKG/NRT/PVG/LAX/CDG.

My dream scenario is a predatory takeover by NZ of both FJ & TN which involves a full disestablishment of both their businesses, and the set up of a Pacific subsidiary that uses NZ for fleet bargaining, maintenance and fleet commonality with the greater NZ fleet.
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.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18100
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:43 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 7):
My dream scenario is a predatory takeover by NZ of both FJ & TN which involves a full disestablishment of both their businesses, and the set up of a Pacific subsidiary that uses NZ for fleet bargaining, maintenance and fleet commonality with the greater NZ fleet.

  

I'm with you on that, or something close to it.

I hoped the Virgin Blue/Polynesian deal might become a model for some of the smaller island airlines.

mariner

[Edited 2013-03-20 20:44:13]
aeternum nauta
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:01 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 7):
My dream scenario is a predatory takeover by NZ of both FJ & TN which involves a full disestablishment of both their businesses, and the set up of a Pacific subsidiary that uses NZ for fleet bargaining, maintenance and fleet commonality with the greater NZ fleet.

I'm with you on this as well, though the politics of running an airline in the islands is fraught with difficulty - different difficulties for different islands,as we have seen recently with Chatham Pacific and the Tongan government. Fiji is hardly the most stable place to do business right now, and French Polynesia would surely require some kind of "deal" to ensure ongoing support for its tourist industry - which might make any takeover rather less appealing. But notwithstanding, I think the idea has considerable merit in principle.

I still also harbour dreams that NZ might set up a subsidiary with a single Q300 to connect the islands along the old Coral route and also to feed the sole remaining service from the islands to LAX at RAR. NAN-APW-IUE-RAR-PPT anyone? Or K'man's RAR-BOB perhaps? But these dreams are probably just about as far-fetched . . .
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:03 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
My dream scenario is a predatory takeover by NZ of both FJ & TN which involves a full disestablishment of both their businesses, and the set up of a Pacific subsidiary that uses NZ for fleet bargaining, maintenance and fleet commonality with the greater NZ fleet.

NZ ?

Aren't you dreaming.

NZ had to be bailed out by the govt after Ansett debacle. You guys have short memories.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18100
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:19 am

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 10):
NZ had to be bailed out by the govt after Ansett debacle. You guys have short memories.

And has been profitable virtually ever since. The last reported profit a couple of weeks ago bested Virgin Australia by some scores of millions and - relative to ROI - may have bested Qantas:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...363153/Air-NZ-interim-profit-soars

"Air NZ interim profit soars

Air New Zealand says it is back in "growth mode" after declaring a huge improvement in half-year net profit to $100 million, up from $38m at the same time last year."


mariner
aeternum nauta
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:50 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 11):

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 10):
NZ had to be bailed out by the govt after Ansett debacle. You guys have short memories.

And has been profitable virtually ever since.

shouldn't that be offset by losses previously ?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18100
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:01 am

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 12):
shouldn't that be offset by losses previously ?

Why - and what losses previously?

i thought we were talking about now and the recent past, not the dark ages before re-nationalization. Unlike Qantas and Virgin Australia, Air NZ remained profitable throughout the GFC.

mariner

[Edited 2013-03-20 23:14:05]
aeternum nauta
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:14 am

just had a look at fares to Queenstown in August form Brisbane. Will virtually no competition (Qantas only has 1 flight for about 2 months in winter) fares seem to have increased a lot. AUD$862 on Virgin/Air NZ. For $200 more can go to LAX.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:25 am

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 10):

NZ has a modern fleet better suited to its operating conditions with no extra costs involved, unlike AN and TN. TNs A340 fleet is like NZs B744 fleet (which is now down to only two frames pending arrival of more long haul aircraft) and that is being fuel hungry. NZs 777 fleet costs way less to run then A340s.

A340s arn't suitable for TN operations due to their higher costs

Quoting mariner (Reply 13):
Unlike Qantas and Virgin Australia, Air NZ remained profitable throughout the GFC.

         Because NZ was able to change its operations better then QF and VA.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6804
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:25 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
A340s arn't suitable for TN operations due to their higher costs

That's true but the only reason TN got 340s to start off with was due to being a new start up carrier and not having the ability to operate twins due to ETOPs requirements until it has been proven their maintianence program is reliable. I'm not sure if this has been proven yet but if not, then the 340 is pretty much their only choice, PPT being so isolated from anywhere else.

I'm sure given the choice years ago they would have rather operated 767s or 777s
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:38 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 7):
My dream scenario is a predatory takeover by NZ of both FJ & TN which involves a full disestablishment of both their businesses, and the set up of a Pacific subsidiary that uses NZ for fleet bargaining, maintenance and fleet commonality with the greater NZ fleet.
Quoting mariner (Reply 8):
I'm with you on that, or something close to it.
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
I'm with you on this as well

I sort of agree.

The main common need is to for Air Tahiti Nui, Fiji Air, Air Calin and Air New Zealand to merge their China and Japan operations, as all four airlines need the Asian market, but none of them can make the routes viable on their own.

I've previously shown how I'd do that:




It's got to make more sense than parallel losses operating

 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:06 pm

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 14):
For $200 more can go to LAX.

You can't ski in LA and the scenery is knowhere near as pretty.
 
SYDAIRPORTS
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:14 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 18):
For $200 more can go to LAX.

You can't ski in LA and the scenery is knowhere near as pretty.

the point being, people will weigh up the fact that flying 3+ hours to Queenstown is not much less than 13-15 hours to LAX.

Those people who aren't necessarily looking for a ski holiday, just a holiday, might, in a lot o cases, go LAX is much better value & so go there instead.

On the other hand, there are many hundreds of Qantas frequent flyer seats into ZQN from SYD & MEL with connections from BNE, but Qantas makes these hard to find, ie. if for example, you search for BNE/ZQN on Qantas website for frequent flyer seats, the only options that appear, will be via AKL with an overnight & same day flights won't show up.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:46 pm

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 19):
the point being, people will weigh up the fact that flying 3+ hours to Queenstown is not much less than 13-15 hours to LAX.

But if they only want to go for a long weekends skiing holiday in Queenstown (which is what most Aussies going to Queenstown are going to do) won't be in the market for a trip to LA.
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:35 pm

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 19):
On the other hand, there are many hundreds of Qantas frequent flyer seats into ZQN from SYD & MEL with connections from BNE, but Qantas makes these hard to find, ie. if for example, you search for BNE/ZQN on Qantas website for frequent flyer seats, the only options that appear, will be via AKL with an overnight & same day flights won't show up.

This shouldn't be a problem for someone living in DRW, like yourself who could travel via SYD or MEL, but it could be a pain for a BNE resident wanting Simplicity. Someone from BNE once suggested flights to IVC were the answer  

PA515
 
aklrno
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:54 am

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 18):
You can't ski in LA and the scenery is knowhere near as pretty.

For about $90 you can walk to the next terminal over and fly Southwest to Reno. Better skiing than in NZ (I've done both, and I'm skiing in the Sierra tomorrow morning.)
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:00 am

Apparently the next ATR72-600 for Air New Zealand (ZK-MVC) will be c/n 1084.

www.planespotters.net/Production_List/ATR/ATR-42/index.php?p=11

PA515
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:06 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 21):
This shouldn't be a problem for someone living in DRW, like yourself who could travel via SYD or MEL, but it could be a pain for a BNE resident wanting Simplicity.

Haha!

Quoting SYDAIRPORTS (Reply 14):
Will virtually no competition (Qantas only has 1 flight for about 2 months in winter) fares seem to have increased a lot. AUD$862 on Virgin/Air NZ. For $200 more can go to LAX.

Did Virgin fly this separately prior to the "merger"? If so, I agree it's probably a casualty of what really was a highly anticompetitive move by NZ and VA. Though they are able to charge that much because of demand, driven in large part by well (over?) paid Queenslanders seeking some snow.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:33 am

Quoting aklrno (Reply 22):
For about $90 you can walk to the next terminal over and fly Southwest to Reno. Better skiing than in NZ (I've done both, and I'm skiing in the Sierra tomorrow morning.)

But that's not a weekend trip, you can't fly to LA on a Friday night, have two days skiing then fly back Sunday night ready for work Monday morning, which is what a lot of Aussies flying to Queenstown during winter do.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:57 am

Quoting koruman (Reply 17):
The main common need is to for Air Tahiti Nui, Fiji Air, Air Calin and Air New Zealand to merge their China and Japan operations, as all four airlines need the Asian market, but none of them can make the routes viable on their own.

As much as this makes sense, most of this has to do with both prestige and employment generation in their respective countries. Such a move would be a weakening in both aspects unfortunately to a few of the smaller countries.

Such a hub would definitely strengthen the ability to make profits though.
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:22 am

In what way is Air Pacific like Air Tahiti Nui?

The former derives almost 70% of its passengers from Australia, the latter sources fewer than 5% of its passengers from that market.

They could develop similar Asian interests, but their existing markets could hardly be more different.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18100
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:41 am

Quoting koruman (Reply 27):
The former derives almost 70% of its passengers from Australia, the latter sources fewer than 5% of its passengers from that market.


Hmmmm? Tahiti appears to be a growth market for Australians - this is dated March 2013:

http://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/...ter-chill-tropical-tahiti/1797983/

"According to annual tourism figures, Australian visitor numbers to Tahiti increased 24 per cent in 2012 - the third largest increase experienced by any international destination last year.

"The last time we saw Australian visitors around this mark was before the GFC so we couldn't be more thrilled," Tahiti Tourisme Australia Director Robert Thompson said.

"From what we've already seen this year and looking at forward bookings, it's a trend that we expect to continue throughout 2013."


This dated September 2012:

http://www.etravelblackboardasia.com...tahiti-attracting-affluent-aussies

"Tahiti attracting ‘affluent’ Aussies

Tahiti Tourisme has reported a 26 percent increase in the number of Australian visitors to French Polynesia for the first half of the year, compared to the period in 2011.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics revealed that French Polynesia experienced the largest growth in Australian travellers across all international destinations during the last financial year, rising 43 percent."


And 2011 was pretty good, too:

http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic...he_good_news-French_Polynesia.html

"In April, the number of Australian visitors has practically doubled with 86.5 percent more visitors from this market and New Zealand visitors are coming back in force with a record 103 per cent increase compared to the same month in 2010."

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:08 am

Air NZ are dropping domestic standby travel effective 6th May. I guess it wasn't as lucrative as first thought.

http://www.theflyingsocialnetwork.com/archives/13174

NZ1
--
✈ NZ1 / Mike
Head Forum Moderator
www.airliners.net
www.twitter.com/airliners_net
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:13 am

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 29):
Air NZ are dropping domestic standby travel effective 6th May. I guess it wasn't as lucrative as first thought.

More grabaseats though, people in N.Z didn't really pick up and run with standby fares as first thought...Personally I think if the grabaseat site wasn't such a major thing for NZers it might have been more popular, but the standby fare was not the best option when you could often get standard fare for not much more than standby and be guaranteed to go.
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.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:26 am

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 29):
Air NZ are dropping domestic standby travel effective 6th May. I guess it wasn't as lucrative as first thought.

That's a shame, seemed like a good idea. As geeky as it sounds, the measures of its effectiveness would be fascinating to see. Did it fill otherwise empty seats? Did it cannibalise higher fares? From memory, they did raise the fares from $49 to $69, which probably didn't help. I think it proved useful for some Cantabrians needing to escape their situation post-earthquake though.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6804
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:35 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 30):
More grabaseats though, people in N.Z didn't really pick up and run with standby fares as first thought..

Standby fares really took off in the regions. Constantly a queue at the terminals, was a successful venture I would have thought

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 31):
Did it fill otherwise empty seats?

Yes it did. A few flights I've been on have been filled to capacity thanks to SBY fares. Seats would have otherwise gone out empty. Whether or not it was worth it economically I don't know, but it proved popular with the public (at least in the regional ports that I'm thinking of)

I'm wondering if the reason for standbys being scrapped has more to do with it being hard to deal with from a staff perspective rather than lack of popularity
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:20 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 32):
I'm wondering if the reason for standbys being scrapped has more to do with it being hard to deal with from a staff perspective rather than lack of popularity

I am fairly confident that was not the reason. A firm ticket was always obtainable for staff regardless of commercial standby, often for cheaper than standard staff standby. Personally speaking I never travel on standby staff tickets domestically.
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.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:13 pm

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 29):

I think its sad that NZ is stopping a great idea like stand by fares. NZs reason on twitter was that passengers prefered a confirmed ticket instead of not knowing if they would travel. If passengers liked a confirmed ticket then they could have easily purchased a full class fare (which NZ would certainly prefer) but for passengers needing to make last minute travel/emergency plans the stand by fares for last minute bookings were excellent. Just wish NZ offered at least status points on stand by fares since all the other fares earned status points
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:43 pm

IVC is set to receive all NZ international stop over flights from ZQN this winter for fuel top ups after NZ trialed IVC as a fuel stop over destination last winter. NZ Employees/aircraft fuelers have been trained on working with A320s. Sending the A320s to IVC saves the flight 1 hour flying time compared to sending the A320 to CHC as previously done

http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-tim...Airport-set-to-host-more-stopovers
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4950
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:20 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 35):
IVC is set to receive all NZ international stop over flights from ZQN this winter for fuel top ups after NZ trialed IVC as a fuel stop over destination last winter

What are the specific weather conditions ( or their effect) that require a reduction in fuel load ( thus TOW ) for a ZQN- Aus sector?
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:24 pm

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 33):
I am fairly confident that was not the reason. A firm ticket was always obtainable for staff regardless of commercial standby, often for cheaper than standard staff standby. Personally speaking I never travel on standby staff tickets domestically.

I took from ZKSUJs comment that he was questioning weather it took a comparatively large amount of staffing resource to process the standby passengers, rather than any impact on staff travel 'privileges".
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6804
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:20 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 33):
I am fairly confident that was not the reason. A firm ticket was always obtainable for staff regardless of commercial standby, often for cheaper than standard staff standby

Staff travel privilleges hadn't crossed my when I wrote up that comment. I was thinking of SBY fares on a few occasions leading to more work for staff before departure. Are these tickets worth the extra hassle for the company?
Once again it's my take on it. Could be totally off the ball

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 37):
I took from ZKSUJs comment that he was questioning weather it took a comparatively large amount of staffing resource to process the standby passengers, rather than any impact on staff travel 'privileges".

Exactly my point

[Edited 2013-03-23 19:23:45]

[Edited 2013-03-23 19:47:14]
 
taieridrome
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 10:18 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:33 am

Have just noticed a very long and impressive contrail over CHC. Not too unusual to see these except this one was coming from the east (from direction of Port Hills) and heading in a westerly direction. Possibly from South America somewhere heading for Australia?? Would have a guess and say 30,000 ft ++
 
deconz
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:44 am

Quoting taieridrome (Reply 39):
Have just noticed a very long and impressive contrail over CHC. Not too unusual to see these except this one was coming from the east (from direction of Port Hills) and heading in a westerly direction. Possibly from South America somewhere heading for Australia?? Would have a guess and say 30,000 ft ++

it was QF28 SCL/SYD ... http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/qf28
 
taieridrome
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 10:18 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:52 am

Thanks for the quick response. Is this the usual track or is weather dictating otherwise?
 
deconz
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:41 am

Quoting taieridrome (Reply 41):
Thanks for the quick response. Is this the usual track or is weather dictating otherwise?

It's often much further south. I'm NZNV1 close to IVC and often catch her going over and coming back  
 
aotearoa
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 1:50 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 9:48 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 36):

It is more often related to a number of factors, not just the ZQN weather.

Here is an example. If a ZQN BNE flight has to carry additional fuel for a more distant alternate airport like SYDNEY instead of a typically closer airport like OOL, than this extra fuel can easily amount to an additional 2000kgs.

Combine this with a full load of pax and baggage, then throw in a wet runway, low atmospheric pressure and no headwind on the takeoff runway and the total aircraft weight can exceed the maximum for the conditions.

This normally occurred on RWY 05 in the past, as this runway had more significant obstacles in play that restricted the weight more than RWY 23. However, new RNP based procedures were put in place last November that now deliver significantly more weight on RWY 05.

Still, if all the factors line up, an IVC technical stop makes sense. Roll out the red carpet Tim!
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:58 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 38):
. I was thinking of SBY fares on a few occasions leading to more work for staff before departure. Are these tickets worth the extra hassle for the company?

Nah, not really much extra work from a passenger handling perspective - standby go where they're put, no need for seat preferences and no guaranteed seat meaning that you can leave them behind/inhibit certain flights/insist cabin luggage only if it poses a risk to departure OTP/MTOW etc.

From a baggage/loading perspective potentially yes it may present a time limitation getting standby bags from check in to gate, and loaded but if I'm honest it isn't really that much extra work over and above what they have to do anyway
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.
 
wstakl
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:43 am

The Sultan of Brunei's private 767 is at WLG if any Welly spotters want to get a few shots of it.
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:19 am

Quoting WSTAKL (Reply 45):

Any idea when it departs? This aircrafts been at WLG several times previously but I've never had my camera on me  
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6804
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:47 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 46):
Any idea when it departs? This aircrafts been at WLG several times previously but I've never had my camera on me

The news says hes here for 4 days, so I presume Thursday
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:59 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 47):

Sweet, thanks. Plenty of chances to get out to WLG.

Anyone have any idea where its parked?
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6804
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 125

Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:51 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 48):
Anyone have any idea where its parked?

I'm there on Wednesday, let you know then if no one else does before hand