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

New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:41 am

Welcome to the 141st edition of the New Zealand Aviation Threads. Part 140 can be found here: New Zealand Aviation Part 140 (by ZKOJH Feb 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

NZ1
--
✈ NZ1 / Mike
Head Forum Moderator
www.airliners.net
www.twitter.com/airliners_net
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:02 am

Found the below in the latest Infratil operational report;


"Wellington has benefited from the Qantas-Emirates alliance which is seeing more long haul passengers traveling to Wellington via East Coast Australia rather than via another New Zealand airport. As a result, Qantas' Tasman loadings have been the highest of any of Wellington's services and these were not affected by the service cuts announced last week by Qantas in Australia.

The additional traffic is causing marked terminal congestion. It had been planned that work would already be underway on an expansion to facilities, but this was delayed due to extensive airline consultation. This is however now concluded and the final value-engineering of the project is occurring with construction to commence shortly"


I believe a similar pattern is occurring in Christchurch. The Emirates tie up may not be working for Qantas at large, but it has certainly helped them in NZ.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
aerohottie
Posts: 702
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:34 am

Quoting unclekoru (Reply 1):
I believe a similar pattern is occurring in Christchurch. The Emirates tie up may not be working for Qantas at large, but it has certainly helped them in NZ.

Indeed, for my own purposes I travel across the tasman on a weekly basis, and where previously I was exclusively AirNZ/Virgin. I now use EK's A380 services on a fairly frequent basis, and QF whenever the schedule is more suitable.
I still use NZ/VA 70-75% of the time from what was 100%
What?
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:02 am

We talked about this before but here goes;


''Canberra Airport in talks with 4 international airlines including NZ!''

Canberra Airport is looking to Asia for its first international route and has reportedly met with at least four overseas airlines, in addition to Qantas and Virgin Australia, as the airport seeks to bust out of its current domestic-only status.

Air New Zealand, Emirates, Etihad Airways and Singapore Airlines have all been courted by Canberra Airport and senior members of the ACT Government to press their case.

According to Canberra Airport managing director Stephen Byron, it's only a matter of time before the airport's departure board lists its first international service – and more flight will quickly follow.

CBA expected services across the Tasman to both Auckland and Wellington by the end of 2012, or 1st QTR of 2013 at the latest ! and were still waiting....

http://www.ausbt.com.au/canberra-airport-eyes-flights-to-asia
Vietnam time..
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:04 am

I think this worth a tip of the hat:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...841084/Aviation-deal-mind-boggling

"Aviation deal 'mind boggling'

Pacific Aerospace, the Hamilton aircraft manufacturer which traces its roots back to the early days of top dressing, has struck a $75 million deal in China with one of the world's largest car companies.

Prime Minister John Key is signing a co-operation agreement this afternoon between Pacific and Beijing Automotive, which will see the Kiwi company manufacturing its flagship P-750 for the Chinese market.

Pacific chief executive Damian Camp said the deal was the culmination of more than two years' work, but the scale of the deal was still "mind boggling" in terms of scale.

The P-750, which can carry up to 10 passengers, was "ideally suited" for the Chinese market because of its ability to be adapted for a number of uses, from aerial surveying to sky diving to fire fighting, Camp said.

Projections for how many planes would be required ranged between about 20 a year initially, to around 200 a year in several years time. Currently Pacific produce around 12 of the P-750 model a year, but it has capacity to increase this to around 30 annually, Camp said."


Congrats to Pacific Aerospace.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
CHCalfonzo
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:56 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:04 am

The mystery of NZ's 767 schedule to CHC continues even after the latest timetable update.

NZ94 NRT-CHC arrives 06:00 267

NZ161 CHC-PER leaves 15:00 26
NZ162 PER-CHC arrives 06:20 37

There are no CHC-AKL sectors on the timetable and when booking NRT-AKL flights, NZ94 is not an option (in the past you could book NRT-CHC-AKL on NZ90).

There are currently no CHC-SYD/MEL/BNE scheduled for 767s, and there is not enough time to operate a TT sector on Tuesday and Saturday between NRT and PER flights. Given that currently there is only a single VA flight and no NZ flights CHC-SYD on these days, wouldn't it make more sense to push the PER departure back an hour to fit a CHC-SYD-CHC rotation in?

This all seems very strange, how is NZ planning on getting the 767 back to AKL on Wednesday and more importantly Sunday when there will be 2 767s arriving first thing in the morning?
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:26 am

As well as the planned service in June NZ will fly another rotation to the Cook Islands on April 18 ex AKL, with the 747.

NZ046 AKL0930 – 1515-1 RAR 744
NZ045 RAR1645 – 1915+1 AKL 744

What is the reason for theses flights or just extra capacity?
Vietnam time..
 
deconz
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:48 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
As well as the planned service in June NZ will fly another rotation to the Cook Islands on April 18 ex AKL, with the 747.

NZ046 AKL0930 – 1515-1 RAR 744
NZ045 RAR1645 – 1915+1 AKL 744

What is the reason for theses flights or just extra capacity?

Extra capacity ... Easter and the start of the NZ school holidays have seen existing flights sold out right up to just a handful of full Y left on offer. These extra seats (north bound) will be snapped up in a flash  
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:04 pm

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 5):
NZ161 CHC-PER leaves 15:00 26
NZ162 PER-CHC arrives 06:20 37

That CHC-PER departure time should be 1540, and the CHC-SYD and CHC-AKL schedules are not updated.

Re: Mo Fr NRT-CHC 1415/0600 Tu Sa.
Tu Sa CHC-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-CHC 0930/1430, CHC-PER 1540/1800, PER-CHC 1910/0620 We Su, CHC-AKL 0800?/0920?.
The We 0620 PER aircraft is required for AKL-APW 1300/1755, and the Su 0620 PER aircraft for AKL-HNL 1040/2025.

Re: Sa NRT-CHC 1415/0600 Su.
Su CHC-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-AKL Su 0930/1430, or a Su CHC-AKL 1300?/1420?.
The Su 0600 NRT aircraft is required for AKL-MEL 1530/1730.

PA515
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:23 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 8):
That CHC-PER departure time should be 1540, and the CHC-SYD and CHC-AKL schedules are not updated.

Re: Mo Fr NRT-CHC 1415/0600 Tu Sa.
Tu Sa CHC-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-CHC 0930/1430, CHC-PER 1540/1800, PER-CHC 1910/0620 We Su, CHC-AKL 0800?/0920?.

I'd suggest that the fact that CHC-PER has been scheduled for a 1500 departure on TuSa would signal that there isn't an intention to run CHC-SYD-CHC with that aircraft at 0700 on TuSa. Doing that would anyway leave a 763 "loose" in SYD on Tu, having flown AKL-SYD at 0700/0830. Then you've still got to figure out how to get that aircraft back to meet its next obligation, which is presumably in AKL later that afternoon or evening. Why woudl they announce a 1500 departure time if they were even thinking of plans already which would require it to be shifted back to 1540?


Quoting PA515 (Reply 8):
Re: Sa NRT-CHC 1415/0600 Su.
Su CHC-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-AKL Su 0930/1430, or a Su CHC-AKL 1300?/1420?.

Again, this leaves a 320 that has operated AKL-SYD at 0700/0830 Su "stranded" in SYD as the return trip is already "spoken for". So in effect you are shifting the "problem" from CHC to SYD.

Much more likely in both cases that the aircraft will operate CHC-AKL IMHO.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:19 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
I'd suggest that the fact that CHC-PER has been scheduled for a 1500 departure on TuSa would signal that there isn't an intention to run CHC-SYD-CHC with that aircraft at 0700 on TuSa.

Where I said the 1500 CHC departure should be 1540, I meant there's a transcribing error. The present CHC-PER is 1540/1800, PER-AKL 1910/0620. And if it left at 1500 there would two Air NZ aircraft at PER at the same time.

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
Doing that would anyway leave a 763 "loose" in SYD on Tu, having flown AKL-SYD at 0700/0830.

Not so. There would be Tu Sa CHC-SYD 0700/0830 and Tu Sa SYD-CHC 0930/1430, followed by Tu Sa CHC-PER 1540/1800.

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
Again, this leaves a 320 that has operated AKL-SYD at 0700/0830 Su "stranded" in SYD as the return trip is already "spoken for". So in effect you are shifting the "problem" from CHC to SYD.

Not if an AKL-SYD 0700/0830 320 does a Su SYD-ZQN or WLG or ROT return then a Su evening SYD-CHC or WLG, thereby shifting the 'problem' to a CHC or WLG 320 flight to AKL.

Could be wrong, but don't think so.

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 1910
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:24 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
Again, this leaves a 320 that has operated AKL-SYD at 0700/0830 Su "stranded" in SYD as the return trip is already "spoken for". So in effect you are shifting the "problem" from CHC to SYD.

Don't forget the SYD-NLK-SYD services, that could possiable using this A320
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:39 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 11):
Don't forget the SYD-NLK-SYD services, that could possiable using this A320

True. And there could be just a straight swap at SYD on the Su with a 320 doing AKL-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-CHC 0930/1430 and the 763 doing CHC-SYD 0700/0830, SYD-AKL 0930/1430. Hope they update the schedule soon.

PA515
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:11 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 10):
Where I said the 1500 CHC departure should be 1540, I meant there's a transcribing error. The present CHC-PER is 1540/1800, PER-AKL 1910/0620. And if it left at 1500 there would two Air NZ aircraft at PER at the same time.

OK, that makes perfect sense if the departure time is actually 1540..

Quoting PA515 (Reply 10):
Not so. There would be Tu Sa CHC-SYD 0700/0830 and Tu Sa SYD-CHC 0930/1430, followed by Tu Sa CHC-PER 1540/1800.

In challenging that I got completely confused - you're of course corerct!

Quoting PA515 (Reply 10):
Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 9):
Again, this leaves a 320 that has operated AKL-SYD at 0700/0830 Su "stranded" in SYD as the return trip is already "spoken for". So in effect you are shifting the "problem" from CHC to SYD.

Not if an AKL-SYD 0700/0830 320 does a Su SYD-ZQN or WLG or ROT return then a Su evening SYD-CHC or WLG, thereby shifting the 'problem' to a CHC or WLG 320 flight to AKL.

On this one, though, I think that CHC-AKL is most likely (also one of your options), given that at the (literal) end of the day the 320 in question is still in CHC or WLG when it needs to be in AKL. Unless there is a need for additonal SYD-ZQN, ROT or NLK services, why not just take the 763 straight back to AKL and avoid all that palava?.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:53 am

''Air New Zealand’s On-Time Performance (OTP) Among World’s Best''

Air New Zealand has been named as one of the world’s most reliable airlines in the annual FlightStats On-time Performance Service Awards.

The On-time Performance Service Awards recognise those airlines that demonstrate consistently high performance while delivering on their promise to get passengers to their destinations in a timely manner.

The high profile aviation website ranked Air New Zealand in the top three major international airlines in Asia/Pacific in terms of on-time performance, along with Japan Airlines and ANA.

http://new-zealand.etbnews.com/19439...performance-otp-among-worlds-best/
Vietnam time..
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2251
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:32 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 4):
Congrats to Pacific Aerospace.

Indeed, though I would be planning for the Chinese to effectively pinch the design and build their own within 4-5 years. I've seen it happen with so many client firms that were totally caught off guard a few years after thinking they'd hit the jackpot. At the very least Pacific should be considering manufacture in China to delay or possibly prevent this.

Pacific are also extremely conservative - they know their niche, which is reasonable, but there's absolutely no gusto there to do much that is innovative or something that can't simply be replicated elsewhere with a little financing.

Sorry to sound cynical, but nothing is ever straightforward with China. Though there may be an off-chance they'll use the opportunity to demonstrate they can be good corporate citizens. Judging by the ARJ21 (aka MD95) and the C919 (aka, A320) though, hrmmm...
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:49 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 15):
Indeed, though I would be planning for the Chinese to effectively pinch the design and build their own within 4-5 years.

You may well be right, I can't predict the future. For a small firm in Hamilton, I think it's good news, whatever the future brings - better than bad news, at least.

I am more than mildly surprised that China has agreed to direct trading of the Kiwi dollar with their own currency - so congrats to NZ, too, but I'm sure some will find a downside to that.

It is what it is.

mariner

[Edited 2014-03-18 23:51:38]
aeternum nauta
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9858
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:57 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 15):
Pacific are also extremely conservative - they know their niche, which is reasonable, but there's absolutely no gusto there to do much that is innovative or something that can't simply be replicated elsewhere with a little financing.

I'm surprised that Pacific haven't built ski and floatplane dirivitives of the 750, maybe they really are a little to conservative, not enough of the kiwi get up and go spirit.

[Edited 2014-03-19 00:58:20]
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:56 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 15):
Pacific are also extremely conservative - they know their niche, which is reasonable, but there's absolutely no gusto there to do much that is innovative or something that can't simply be replicated elsewhere with a little financing.

I think that is the key really. The PAC 750 XL traces its lineage directly back to the Fletcher of 1953, so the fundamental platform is getting fairly long in the tooth although obviously heavily updated and enlargened over the decades.

Innovation in aviation is expensive and there is some serious innovation needed if they are going to continue with this platform. Avionics is an area that needs attention and certification does not come cheap. It is becoming increasingly difficult now to source and repair the old "steam driven" instrumentation. Like everyone else PAC will need to fit a "glass" solution to all of their products.

Pilatus went down the non-integrated post assembly fit with G950's on the PC-6 Porters and that seems to be more problematic than a more integrated line fit system like the G1000. Obviously cost is a big determinant here.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:23 pm

So word is being said about JQ finally giving up on AKL-SIN from July.. Guess we won't be seeing a long haul 787 route from them for a little while then. But when you only have a 3-4 weekly schedule, who would really want to fly with you?

EDIT: Got a source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11223039

July 21 will mark the end of the route

[Edited 2014-03-19 15:10:45]
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9858
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:59 pm

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 18):
The PAC 750 XL traces its lineage directly back to the Fletcher of 1953

The 737 traces its lineage directly back to the 707, your point is?
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:20 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
The 737 traces its lineage directly back to the 707, your point is?

It is also limited by its history having a short landing gear and a smaller cabin width etc.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:56 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 19):
So word is being said about JQ finally giving up on AKL-SIN from July.. Guess we won't be seeing a long haul 787 route from them for a little while then. But when you only have a 3-4 weekly schedule, who would really want to fly with you?

EDIT: Got a source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...23039

Interesting.... I wonder whether this will work for or against the NZ/SQ tie up, or make no difference.

If they had stayed on the route, but continued to struggle, I can imagine using this as an argument against allowing the tie up as it would be likely to make it harder for Jetstar to survive on the route.

However, with them withdrawing from the route without the tieup even being approved this reduces available capacity and returns direct services to a monopoly. The proposed NZ/SQ services would actually restore capacity and frequency to the route so this may work in NZ/SQ favour.

Any other thoughts on this ?
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:18 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 22):

Yeah, my thinking was on the same lines. Except the fact that JQ has been struggling on this route for a while suggests that you'd have to be silly to rule solely on their plight; as it's also partly down to their own doings such as reducing frequency and the likes. The NZ/SQ partnership will do more than just restore capacity I think.. Depends on how they schedule the A380 too.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2615
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:29 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 22):
However, with them withdrawing from the route without the tieup even being approved this reduces available capacity and returns direct services to a monopoly. The proposed NZ/SQ services would actually restore capacity and frequency to the route so this may work in NZ/SQ favour.

Any other thoughts on this ?

if there is a market there, why doesn't EK operate DXB-SIN-AKL rather than going through Australia.

EK operating the sector would be much better than JQ.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:59 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 22):
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 23):

I think it shows the market for 10 hour long haul LCC service isn't there.

I never noticed an impact on the pricing of SQ flights, and certainly never entertained looking at JetStar's prices.

Supposedly SQ285/286 will go A380 over the peak summer season. There is a huge amount of capacity being added given the A380 (assuming original configuration) adds 193 daily seats. NZ using a 77E to replace SQ281/282 potentially adds another 51 seats per service.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:57 am

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 25):

I never noticed an impact on the pricing of SQ flights, and certainly never entertained looking at JetStar's prices.

I think SQ has known all along that they don't need to do anything - those who fly with SQ are likely to stick with them for the service etc. Not only that but for the onward connections too. I wonder how much is actually O&D AKL-SIN.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:12 am

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 25):
I think it shows the market for 10 hour long haul LCC service isn't there.

I never noticed an impact on the pricing of SQ flights, and certainly never entertained looking at JetStar's prices.

I feel that the main reason JetStar's Singapore route failed was because Singapore was mainly used by New Zealanders to get SQ's seamless connections to Continental Europe and also Southeast Asia (I always found that I could get good prices on SQ to Europe AND Asia). At the end of the day, SQ has a virtually unrivalled product and unrivalled connections to Europe as well as their Asian network, they realistically never stood a chance. JetStar's poor reputation IMO didn't help their case. Another reputable airline (NZ) signing onto the route really put a nail in JetStar's Singapore coffin.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:06 am

''Jetstar cut a $70m blow: for Auckland Airport''

Jetstar's withdrawal from the Auckland-Singapore route will cost the tourism industry $70 million a year and highlights the potential detrimental effects of the proposed Air New Zealand-Singapore Airlines alliance, Auckland Airport says.

Jetstar will stop flying from Auckland to Singapore from July 21, saying the route is not performing as well as it had hoped and in the face of looming competition from a powerful Air New Zealand-Singapore Airlines strategic alliance.

Glenn Wedlock, said the alliance - which needs government approval - was a factor for other airlines considering flying from Southeast Asia to the country.

He said the airport was talking to a number of Southeast Asian and North Asian carriers about flying here.

Shall we play the guessing game?? mine would be a mix of Lcc's and full service airlines. JAL, CHINA EASTERN, AIR CHINA, UNITED,AA,AIR CANADA, GARUDA, ROYAL BRUNEI (make a return) AIR ASIA, TIGER, LION AIR, CEBU PACIFIC,

Don't think AKL can handle a mass invasion of airlines from Asia.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11223288
Vietnam time..
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Fri Mar 21, 2014 6:42 am

GA signed a memorandum of understanding I think it was with AIA to say they would start Indonesia-Auckland flights by the end of 2014.

With the reconfiguration of their Amsterdam flights to direct with the 77W over a 1-stop in Abu Dhabi with the A330 and more A330's on the way that should free up capacity for CGK-AKL or DPS-AKL as has been more latterly rumoured.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:19 am

One airline that you do not mention is Scoot, which is run by a Kiwi. Tiger is short haul, whereas Scoot is long haul, and they will be using 789s in high density configuration. They have shown they are quite happy to go into markets already being served by SQ - SYD PER, and they offer joint fares between Australian cities and Thai resorts. If you are flying to Europe you fly SQ = if you are flying to Phuket you fly Scoot/Tiger Asia. Scoot is quite capable of doing far better than Jetstar.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:43 am

I did think of Scoot to add, but with SQ on the route and (if) NZ get the green light.. then you will have an A380 and a 772 offering plenty of seats plus the agreement with silk air seems pretty much covered. Could Scoot fly to WLG? with the 787? WLG after all wants a route to SIN if they get a longer runway. !
Vietnam time..
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4951
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:24 pm

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 31):
Could Scoot fly to WLG? with the 787? WLG after all wants a route to SIN if they get a longer runway. !

With a 242 seat config. a 788 would be good for about 8-hours out of WLG. TOW would be limited to about 185t This assumes the 6350ft runway still applies. Not good enough for SIN which probably needs about 10-hours.
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 129
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:11 am

In all fairness to Jetstar, why would they want to continue AKL-SIN if the support from the public is not there. You have to remember that the whole of NZ only has a population roughly the same as Melbourne (c. 4 Million) so JQ couldn't hope to compete with the number of seats a year that SQ/NZ will now be offering between the 2 cities.

The other thing to think about, is due to the QF issues at present, 3 of JQ's new 787s have been deferred which means they just HAVE to divert their resources to routes that will make money. Jetstar made a profit every year until this year, and IMHO I think that the current result has been caused by over-ambitious expansion in Asia/Japan - but they obviously do something right! After all, they've carried way over 100 million passengers since start up 9 years and 9 months ago - a pretty good testament to their operation. They've won many Skytrax/CAPA awards and their fares have enabled a huge number of Australians in particular, who had previously flown very infrequently, the opportunity to fly more often.

I get a little tired of reading posts by people who openly say they have never flown JQ, but are happy to knock what JQ does or does not do. They're an integral part of the QF Group and while their parent is going through hard times, it will not be easy for JQ to expand, especially in a relatively small market.
 
PA515
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:46 am

Someone has put a flightradar24 receiver 1900 metres up the Benmore Range next to Lake Benmore. The radar code is NZGT1 (Glentanner) giving better coverage into the Tasman for the ZQN/DUD/CHC flights.

Earlier today NZNV1 (airliners.net member) tracked RAAF Beech Super King Air A32-372 until about 340 kms west of IVC. And there's now NZRO1 covering down to ground level at Rotorua Airport.

PA515
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:54 am

Quoting Jetstar315 (Reply 33):
In all fairness to Jetstar, why would they want to continue AKL-SIN if the support from the public is not there.

  

Further to that, it has to be remembered that Air NZ could not make AKL-SIN work on its own and dropped the route.

This suggests that the O&D traffic AKL-SIN is not particularly strong and that the route might be reliant on onward connections, at SIN, probably to India and Europe - maybe some to other Asia - thus it makes sense for Air NZ to tie up with SQ, which can provide those onward connections.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:33 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 35):
Further to that, it has to be remembered that Air NZ could not make AKL-SIN work on its own and dropped the route.

NZ used 763 (old config) on it for too long so that by the time they put the 772 onto it it was too late - they had lost their customers to SQ. Having SQ code sharing will however make a big difference.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:36 am

Quoting Jetstar315 (Reply 33):

I've flown on JetStar when my company has booked me CGK-SIN-CGK. The condition of the aircraft interior left a lot to be desired, as did the professionalism of the cabin crew. I would never pay my own money to fly with them. I have certainly heard an abundance of complaints about their services from friends and colleagues.

JetStar obviously has a fairly significant network with JetStar Asia (now 100% controlled by the Qantas group) and certainly the idea behind the AKL-SIN service was to feed into that network just as SQ and soon NZ will do with the SQ and MI networks.

The reality is JetStar has been a distraction for the Qantas group where they now find themselves becoming increasingly irrelevant and poorly managed. As the recent JetStar results within group financials have shown the cannibalisation of mainline Qantas is now beginning to affect the financials of the JetStar itself - a strong Qantas was needed to support JetStar.

Quoting mariner (Reply 35):
Further to that, it has to be remembered that Air NZ could not make AKL-SIN work on its own and dropped the route.

Indeed, and a number of factors contributed to this. Like JetStar at the time they had a product that was not meeting the expectations of the market. The fallout from the Ansett debacle also meant next to no effective relationship with Star Alliance partner SQ.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:49 am

Not sure about outbound demand, but a reasonable number of Singaoreans visit NZ. It also appears to be a growth market, annual visitor numbers were 43,056 YE Jan 2014 up from 29,468 in 2010. It can also be noted that JQs entrance on the SIN-AKL route did lead to a significant increase in visitor numbers from May 2011.

Visitor arrivals per day (based on country of residence - Year end Jan 2014).

Australia 3360
China PRC 658
USA 550
UK 533
Japan 204
Canada 132
Singapore 118
India 86
Hong Kong 81
Malaysia 81
France 76
Taiwan 61
Netherlands 59
Thailand 57
Switzerland 46
Samoa 46
South Africa 42
Indonesia 37
Phillipines 28

Source: Statistics NZ
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:00 am

Quoting unclekoru (Reply 38):
Not sure about outbound demand, but a reasonable number of Singaoreans visit NZ. It also appears to be a growth market, annual visitor numbers were 43,056 YE Jan 2014 up from 29,468 in 2010. It can also be noted that JQs entrance on the SIN-AKL route did lead to a significant increase in visitor numbers from May 2011.

Even so, it has been shown - twice - that the market can't support two airlines operating independently of each other, unless something gives. Which it has.

Air NZ is "taking over" half the flights from Singapore Airlines:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11187525

"While Air New Zealand will take over half of the flights currently operated by Singapore Airlines to this country, the Singaporean carrier will also upgrade its services, moving towards flying its A380 on a seasonal basis to this country for the first time.

Air New Zealand says the deal could boost capacity between New Zealand and Singapore by up to 30 per cent year round over time."


So Singapore is effectively "giving" half its flights to Air NZ meaning very little change in capacity. The boost in capacity will come if and when the A380 is deployed on the route.

The Jetstar pax become a bonus.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
xiaotung
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:43 am

Quoting unclekoru (Reply 38):
Not sure about outbound demand, but a reasonable number of Singaoreans visit NZ. It also appears to be a growth market, annual visitor numbers were 43,056 YE Jan 2014 up from 29,468 in 2010. It can also be noted that JQs entrance on the SIN-AKL route did lead to a significant increase in visitor numbers from May 2011.

NZ's intention has been no doubt the connections to all the Southeast Asia market served by SQ/MI which has a huge growth potential. This perhaps also eliminates the need to operate a route to India.

What SQ gains perhaps are the pax to Europe who are unwilling to go via North America and of course the importance of a relationship with NZ so they are in a better position to control the future direction of VA.

I think the best decision NZ made in recent years was the VA investment. I don't think SQ would have entertained to the idea of an NZ alliance if it wasn't for VA.
 
zkncj
Posts: 1910
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:52 am

How much value are the budget Jetstar passengers on SIN-AKL? surely they would contribute that much to the economy. After all its target market is the budget package traveler, that aren't going to stay in pricey hotels, spends large amounts on food/wine.

One could agrue that the NZ/SQ deal is better for the economy on the long run
 
nascarnut
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:43 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:58 am

I think Air NZ has been incredibly smart in how the approach the NZ aviation market. NZ is a small markets in world terms but Air NZ has been able to capatilize on it. Look at how it operates.
AKL-VLI - Codeshare with Air Vanuatu
AKL-NOU - Codeshare with Air Caledonie
AKL-PPT - Codeshare with Air Tahiti Nui
AKL-HKG - Codeshare with Cathay
AKL-NRT - Codeshare with ANA
AKL-PVG - Codeshare with Air China
NZ-Australia - Codeshare with Virgin Australia
AKL-USA - Codeshare with United Airlines
AKL-YVR - Codeshare with Air Canade
Throw in all the Star Alliance airlines.
The only market they do not codeshare with the local airlines are Fiji/Tonga/Samoa/Cook Islands.
and now AKL-SIN - Codeshare with Singapore Airlines
That is how they protect the market they operate in
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:10 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 41):
One could agrue that the NZ/SQ deal is better for the economy on the long run

I guess one could, but I wouldn't. I have enormous respect for the LCC market. Some of the most continuously profitable airlines in the world cater exclusively to that market.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
xiaotung
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:18 am

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 42):
The only market they do not codeshare with the local airlines are Fiji/Tonga/Samoa/Cook Islands.

Apparently they do with Fiji Airways.

http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/co-operation-fiji-airways
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:27 am

^ NZ codeshare with FJ, but only on NAN-LAX, not on the local market between New Zealand and Fiji.
 
deconz
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:14 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:29 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 34):
Someone has put a flightradar24 receiver 1900 metres up the Benmore Range next to Lake Benmore. The radar code is NZGT1 (Glentanner) giving better coverage into the Tasman for the ZQN/DUD/CHC flights.

Earlier today NZNV1 (airliners.net member) tracked RAAF Beech Super King Air A32-372 until about 340 kms west of IVC. And there's now NZRO1 covering down to ground level at Rotorua Airport.

PA515

That's great to see even better coverage of the deep south on FR24. I'm NZNV1 by the way  
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:52 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 39):
Even so, it has been shown - twice - that the market can't support two airlines operating independently of each other, unless something gives. Which it has.

Air NZ is "taking over" half the flights from Singapore Airlines:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...e.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11187525

"While Air New Zealand will take over half of the flights currently operated by Singapore Airlines to this country, the Singaporean carrier will also upgrade its services, moving towards flying its A380 on a seasonal basis to this country for the first time.

Air New Zealand says the deal could boost capacity between New Zealand and Singapore by up to 30 per cent year round over time."

So Singapore is effectively "giving" half its flights to Air NZ meaning very little change in capacity. The boost in capacity will come if and when the A380 is deployed on the route.

The Jetstar pax become a bonus.

I realise that, and agree. I was simply pointing out that 1) there was an increase in O&D travelers when Jetstar entered the market and that 2) the O & D market ex SIN has in fact grown and that it is not quite as small as I had assumed. It may well contract again once JQ leave the market, but that remains to be seen.

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 40):
NZ's intention has been no doubt the connections to all the Southeast Asia market served by SQ/MI which has a huge growth potential. This perhaps also eliminates the need to operate a route to India.

What SQ gains perhaps are the pax to Europe who are unwilling to go via North America and of course the importance of a relationship with NZ so they are in a better position to control the future direction of VA.

I think the best decision NZ made in recent years was the VA investment. I don't think SQ would have entertained to the idea of an NZ alliance if it wasn't for VA.

I think this joint venture is one of a series of moves being made by SQ that is part of a strategy to shore up feed in an attempt to stop further inroads being made by the ME3, with the Silk air feed being a bonus. The advantages for Air NZ are somewhat different as you infer. I'm not sure that the investment in VA was necessarily a key factor behind the link up though.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 41):
How much value are the budget Jetstar passengers on SIN-AKL? surely they would contribute that much to the economy. After all its target market is the budget package traveler, that aren't going to stay in pricey hotels, spends large amounts on food/wine.

One could agrue that the NZ/SQ deal is better for the economy on the long run

Who knows. That segment of the market may disappear when confronted with the fares that SQ/NZ will charge once JQ is gone, shrinking the market - even if it is the bottom end.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18103
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 6:00 am

Quoting unclekoru (Reply 47):
It may well contract again once JQ leave the market, but that remains to be seen.

Sure, it may shrink some - it will be interesting to see.

There are quite a few LCC pax who will pay higher fares but don't see the point in doing so if a lower fare is available - it's just a seat on a plane.

If that low fare becomes unavailable, they'll still fly - although they may grumble about the price.  

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Part 141

Sat Mar 22, 2014 6:03 am

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 2):
Quoting unclekoru (Reply 1):
I believe a similar pattern is occurring in Christchurch. The Emirates tie up may not be working for Qantas at large, but it has certainly helped them in NZ.

Indeed, for my own purposes I travel across the tasman on a weekly basis, and where previously I was exclusively AirNZ/Virgin. I now use EK's A380 services on a fairly frequent basis, and QF whenever the schedule is more suitable.
I still use NZ/VA 70-75% of the time from what was 100%

I have a similar story although I traveled NZ due to staff travel privileges and just continued to do so after I left without much thought, that was until I discovered the big wide world!

I still use Air NZ from time to time, and I appreciate their high operational standards, but the QF/EK network blows NZ away, as does their product.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AC853, airjamaica, AirportRival, Baidu [Spider], chiad, csturdiv, dlflynhayn, dolphinflyer, FWAERJ, Google Adsense [Bot], kimshep, MAH4546, N62NA, nws2002, NYCInflight, qf789, rhuns, rj968, Spacepope, SXDFC, timberwolf24, Yahoo [Bot] and 297 guests