zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:19 am

Looks like AirAisaX is back on the AKL-OOL sales again, this time its even cheaper at $68/ow. Seems like they have allot of spare seats that they need to dump in early 2017?

Funny when the cheapest baggage option $39 for 20kg, at-least the meals are only $6.

Fares 5.00 NZD
Airport Tax 32.00 NZD
Arrival Tax 27.00 NZD
Border Clearance Levy 4.00 NZD
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:47 am

zkncj wrote:
Border Clearance Levy 4.00 NZD


Dumb question, perhaps, I've never known what the Border Clearance Levy is for?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:53 am

mariner wrote:
zkncj wrote:
Border Clearance Levy 4.00 NZD


Dumb question, perhaps, I've never known what the Border Clearance Levy is for?

mariner


https://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/consultations/border-clearance-levy/

I think this is it? but its meant to be $21.58?

To make it more weird the taxes on D7 add up to $63, yet only $50 on NZ?
NZ:
F1 Border Clearance Levy $3.37
IA Passenger Security Charge $12.08
KK Passenger Service Charge $18.50
WG Safety and Security Charge $4.80
WY Passenger Service Charge International $11.80
Total $50.55
Last edited by zkncj on Tue Jul 19, 2016 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 8:00 am

zkncj wrote:
I think this is it? but its meant to be $21.58?


Thanks. It certainly seems to be it, but unless it means the cost of passport control I suppose I'm not sure why it is charged for outgoing passengers, who cease to be any threat to NZ. Then again, it's always been a slight puzzle to me that both NZ and Australia, among others, have passport control for outgoing pax.

Hey ho - the ways of bureaucracy, I suppose.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 8:03 am

mariner wrote:
zkncj wrote:
I think this is it? but its meant to be $21.58?


Thanks. It certainly seems to be it, but unless it means the cost of passport control I suppose I'm not sure why it is charged for outgoing passengers, who cease to be any threat to NZ. Then again, it's always been a slight puzzle to me that both NZ and Australia, among others, have passport control for outgoing pax.

Hey ho - the ways of bureaucracy, I suppose.

mariner


Yet NZ only charges $3.37 for the same fee, looks like D7 is up to make every cent.

Find it pretty pricy for the Tasman we're most passengers are NZ/AU Passport Holders and use SmartGate.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 9:33 am

"Air NZ allows Bluetooth on flights"

Air New Zealand will allow passengers to use Bluetooth devices "gate to gate'' across its entire fleet.

From this Thursday customers flying on any domestic or international flight will be able to operate Bluetooth devices from the departure gate to the arrival gate, provided their devices are set to flight mode.

This means customers can remain connected with their wearable Bluetooth tech such as Fitbit devices, Apple watches and Bluetooth headsets, as well as operate a wireless mouse and wireless keyboard during cruise.

Air New Zealand's general manager customer experience, Carrie Hurihanganui said it was a way of meeting customer demand


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11677350
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 10:01 am

"Air New Zealand NW16 Dreamliner Pacific Islands Operation"

for Northern winter 2016/17 season. Effective 30OCT16, updated Dreamliner operation for South Pacific Islands as follow.

Auckland – Apia
05NOV16 – 07DEC16 Day 6
08DEC16 – 22DEC16 Day 246
23DEC16 – 04FEB17 Day 6
Boeing 787-9 also scheduled to operate on 09DEC16, 23DEC16, 03JAN17, 25MAR17

Auckland – Nadi
30OCT16 – 20NOV16 Day x24
23NOV16 – 04DEC16 Day x124
05DEC16 – 11DEC16 Day x35
13DEC16 – 19DEC16 Day 125
22DEC16 – 27DEC16 Day 124
02JAN17 – 10JAN17 Day 12
12JAN17 – 02FEB17 Day x356 (Except selected dates)
11FEB17 – 24MAR17 Day 56

also in the mix is -

Auckland – Nuku’Alofa
Auckland – Papeete
Auckland – Rarotonga

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... operation/
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
NZ1
Head Moderator
Posts: 1794
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 10:52 am

zkncj wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
zkncj & bonzolab: Thanks, guys. I am doing AKL-TRG, NPL and PMR, so no ZQN. Just gotta be lucky I guess... I did my first -600 flight on SK in May, and it was pretty nice and sleek looking inside. You noticed the difference right away.


Recently did an AKL-NPE on the -500, then NPE-AKL on the -600. The -600 out did any of the -500 flights, it seems quieter too?


That's interesting; as the engines on the -500/-600 are identical; as is most of the airframe and wing.
--
NZ1
Head Forum Moderator
 
Andrensn
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 1:18 pm

NZ1 wrote:
That's interesting; as the engines on the -500/-600 are identical; as is most of the airframe and wing.

Then what makes the two frames different enough for ATR to market them as two separate variations if the majority of key structural components are identical?
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 7:48 pm

Andrensn wrote:
Then what makes the two frames different enough for ATR to market them as two separate variations if the majority of key structural components are identical?

500/600 are just marketing names as you say, of the ATR 72-212A. The 600 got updated Thales avionics and a refreshed passenger cabin. The avionics are a significant upgrade over those on the 500.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Tue Jul 19, 2016 8:25 pm

zkncj wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
zkncj & bonzolab: Thanks, guys. I am doing AKL-TRG, NPL and PMR, so no ZQN. Just gotta be lucky I guess... I did my first -600 flight on SK in May, and it was pretty nice and sleek looking inside. You noticed the difference right away.


Recently did an AKL-NPE on the -500, then NPE-AKL on the -600. The -600 out did any of the -500 flights, it seems quieter too?


I didn't have a direct comparison, so I am hoping I'll get a -500 one way, and a -600 the other ;-)
 
wstakl
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Wed Jul 20, 2016 5:45 am

What a shame emergency aircraft are included in the no fly zone introduced for Joe Biden's visit. Disgraceful that the CAA and the NZ Govt aren't putting the needs and lives of New Zealanders first. Shit, they would probably enforce a 'stay at home' policy if the top dog decides to visit.
 
haggis73
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Wed Jul 20, 2016 6:33 am

wstakl wrote:
What a shame emergency aircraft are included in the no fly zone introduced for Joe Biden's visit. Disgraceful that the CAA and the NZ Govt aren't putting the needs and lives of New Zealanders first. Shit, they would probably enforce a 'stay at home' policy if the top dog decides to visit.

Which emergency aircraft?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:16 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6El8XiODwE

Latest NZ Safety Video is out - note they say "WIFI isn't available on this aircraft" make it sound like they are pretty close to Wifi on part of the fleet?
 
CHCalfonzo
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:45 am

Reported on Airline Route, more good news for CHC. AKL will also be getting a CZ 77W again this summer.

Guangzhou – Christchurch 12DEC16 – 27FEB17 Increase from 3 to 5 weekly
CZ617 CAN0050 – 1710CHC 787 x26
CZ618 CHC2230 – 0530+1CAN 787 x26

Guangzhou – Auckland Operational aircraft changes, CZ305/306 operated by 777-300ER, CZ335/336 by 787-8 (Schedule updated around Late-June/Early-July)
CZ305 CAN0030 – 1700AKL 77W D
CZ335 CAN1430 – 0700+1AKL 787 D
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3952
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:10 am

Introducing ZK-NZI which has now been painted:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sabian404/28269584221

and ZK-NZJ which just rolled out of the factory a few days ago:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/woodysaer ... 8392795466

NZ1 wrote:
That's interesting; as the engines on the -500/-600 are identical

PW127F vs PW127M?
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:51 am

zkojq wrote:
Introducing ZK-NZI which has now been painted:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sabian404/28269584221

and ZK-NZJ which just rolled out of the factory a few days ago:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/woodysaer ... 8392795466

NZ1 wrote:
That's interesting; as the engines on the -500/-600 are identical

PW127F vs PW127M?


Both of those 787's are due in the next month or so right?
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 9245
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:56 am

SQ to increase CHC from daily to 10 weekly between 13 November 2016 and 5 February 2017

http://www.singaporeair.com/en_UK/gb/me ... 116-160721
Forum Moderator
 
PA515
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 2:44 pm

zkojq wrote:
and ZK-NZJ which just rolled out of the factory a few days ago:

ZK-NZJ rolled out of final assembly on 08 July but went to the 40-24 for a week for additional work. Similar thing happened to ZK-NZI which went to the EMC Paint Hangar for a week but not to get painted. Could be planned finishing work, or final assembly has slipped a week behind and this is how they maintain the roll out schedule. This has happened in the past.
77west wrote:
Both of those 787's are due in the next month or so right?

ZK-NZI is now due for delivery at Paine on 28 July (was 15 July), so AKL on 29 or 30 July.
ZK-NZJ is still showing as due for delivery at Paine on 16 August, so AKL on 17 or 18 August.
ZK-NZK is still showing as due for delivery at Paine on 21 October, so AKL on 22 or 23 October.

PA515
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:12 pm

The $64 question is how the unallocated time for -NZK is going to be used. I believe there has to be some schedule changes still to be announced. How do you find out the number of unsold seats per class on the day of departure?
 
PA515
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Fri Jul 22, 2016 6:34 pm

sunrisevalley wrote:
The $64 question is how the unallocated time for -NZK is going to be used. I believe there has to be some schedule changes still to be announced.

Well, the mystery deepens with the latest schedule change to the AKL-PVG flights.
The increase to 10 weekly is now effective 10 Jan instead of 17 Dec. And the three additional flights are now AKL-PVG 1755/0110 Tu Th Sa and PVG-AKL 0245/1910 We Fr Su, instead of AKL-PVG 1015/1720 Tu Sa Su and PVG-AKL 2355/1620 Tu Sa Su.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -increase/

PA515
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 12:03 am

Napier,Nelson and Wellington-Christchurch etc get an even mix on -500/-600s. I have flown both on all those routes. Generally the -600s now do flights like ROT-CHC etc now too. If the flight time is upward of 1h20 then it seems -600s are the usual. so Christchurch-Dunedin and Christchurch-Invercargill and Dunedin-Wellington seem highly likely to get -600s and ZQN -600s for obvious reasons.. I like the ATRs but I can't say I notice much difference since the -500 retrofit.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 12:47 am

aerorobnz wrote:
I like the ATRs but I can't say I notice much difference since the -500 retrofit.


The cabin appearance is much nicer on the -600, e.g. LED Lighting, lighter wall colours and more detailing to the overhead lockers.

I really wish when they re-fitted the -500 with the new seats, that they would have recovered the forward bulkhead wall to match the -600s.

Anyone know what the -500 got new seats, yet the Q300s just got replacement seat covers?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:47 am

zkncj wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
I like the ATRs but I can't say I notice much difference since the -500 retrofit.


The cabin appearance is much nicer on the -600, e.g. LED Lighting, lighter wall colours and more detailing to the overhead lockers.

I really wish when they re-fitted the -500 with the new seats, that they would have recovered the forward bulkhead wall to match the -600s.

Anyone know what the -500 got new seats, yet the Q300s just got replacement seat covers?

In the case of the Q300s it's probably just a matter of time before they go as well and they saw no monetary value in doing so whereas the older ATRs offer extra capacity and growth opportunity for existing markets so were worth more to invest in. The ATRS were all about standardising the ATR fleets as much as possible (being all one airline). Eventually Air Nelson will probably close as Eagle has when the Q300s retire.

I'm not sold on Neon lights and the other stuff anyway, as long as the overheads take the same sized carryon then that's the main thing. Same with all the gimmickry on 787s. it looks fancy but it adds nothing to the experience. Like sugarcoating a dog poo, if the physical seat and overhead locker is no good then the aircraft is no good and no amount of LED lights and cosmetics can change how unpleasant it is. It's better to invest less and get more than spend more on frippery. How I wish for an A350 order for NZ, they are far superior in cabin ergonomics to the 787 and have windowshades which don't get blacked out from takeoff to touchdown by overzealous crew .
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:53 am

aerorobnz wrote:
In the case of the Q300s it's probably just a matter of time before they go as well and they saw no monetary value in doing so whereas the older ATRs offer extra capacity and growth opportunity for existing markets so were worth more to invest in. The ATRS were all about standardising the ATR fleets as much as possible (being all one airline). Eventually Air Nelson will probably close as Eagle has when the Q300s retire.


According to this ATR Spec Sheet - the new cabin, has bins that increase the volume by 10%.

http://www.atraircraft.com/products_app/media/pdf/Armonia_Cabin-nov2014-light.pdf
Increased volume by about 10%
About 30% more roller bags stowage with 66%
of passengers able to stow a standard bag
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 6:23 am

PA515 wrote:
sunrisevalley wrote:
The $64 question is how the unallocated time for -NZK is going to be used. I believe there has to be some schedule changes still to be announced.

Well, the mystery deepens with the latest schedule change to the AKL-PVG flights.
The increase to 10 weekly is now effective 10 Jan instead of 17 Dec. And the three additional flights are now AKL-PVG 1755/0110 Tu Th Sa and PVG-AKL 0245/1910 We Fr Su, instead of AKL-PVG 1015/1720 Tu Sa Su and PVG-AKL 2355/1620 Tu Sa Su.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -increase/

PA515


Thinking about it wonder if the PVG has be differed to allow the 789 to enable additional short-haul upgrades between 17 December to 10 January?

For example this has been allot of additional 789 Pacific Island flights been put in over this period recently, freeing up some A320s maybe?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7046
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:35 am

zkncj wrote:
PA515 wrote:
sunrisevalley wrote:
The $64 question is how the unallocated time for -NZK is going to be used. I believe there has to be some schedule changes still to be announced.

Well, the mystery deepens with the latest schedule change to the AKL-PVG flights.
The increase to 10 weekly is now effective 10 Jan instead of 17 Dec. And the three additional flights are now AKL-PVG 1755/0110 Tu Th Sa and PVG-AKL <a href="tel:0245/1910">0245/1910</a> We Fr Su, instead of AKL-PVG 1015/1720 Tu Sa Su and PVG-AKL 2355/1620 Tu Sa Su.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -increase/

PA515


Thinking about it wonder if the PVG has be differed to allow the 789 to enable additional short-haul upgrades between 17 December to 10 January?

For example this has been allot of additional 789 Pacific Island flights been put in over this period recently, freeing up some A320s maybe?


While I'm sure they will put the 789's to good use during this time there is absolutely no way they would delay long haul expansion to cover a few short haul routes IMO. Has to be slots at PVG or something. Terrible timings to. This flight was meant to offer shorter connections to EZE which it does and has a minimum 55 min connection PVG-AKL-EZE probably almost due to luck more than anything.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 6:25 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
zkncj wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
I like the ATRs but I can't say I notice much difference since the -500 retrofit.


The cabin appearance is much nicer on the -600, e.g. LED Lighting, lighter wall colours and more detailing to the overhead lockers.

I really wish when they re-fitted the -500 with the new seats, that they would have recovered the forward bulkhead wall to match the -600s.

Anyone know what the -500 got new seats, yet the Q300s just got replacement seat covers?

In the case of the Q300s it's probably just a matter of time before they go as well and they saw no monetary value in doing so whereas the older ATRs offer extra capacity and growth opportunity for existing markets so were worth more to invest in. The ATRS were all about standardising the ATR fleets as much as possible (being all one airline). Eventually Air Nelson will probably close as Eagle has when the Q300s retire.

I'm not sold on Neon lights and the other stuff anyway, as long as the overheads take the same sized carryon then that's the main thing. Same with all the gimmickry on 787s. it looks fancy but it adds nothing to the experience. Like sugarcoating a dog poo, if the physical seat and overhead locker is no good then the aircraft is no good and no amount of LED lights and cosmetics can change how unpleasant it is. It's better to invest less and get more than spend more on frippery. How I wish for an A350 order for NZ, they are far superior in cabin ergonomics to the 787 and have windowshades which don't get blacked out from takeoff to touchdown by overzealous crew .

I don't see how NZ could justify removing the 50 seat from the fleet. When the time comes I see NZ ordering the 42-600 with operation by Mt Cook.

If NZ fully removed the 50 seater from its fleet then more routes will be axed like AKL-TUO, WLG-TIU and NZ would simply become a joke on regional services while enabling JQ to expand more with Q300s. Air Chathams and Sounds Air would scramble to find more aircraft if they've already done their home work on the route and decided to take it on.
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 6:50 pm

777ER wrote:
If NZ fully removed the 50 seater from its fleet then more routes will be axed like AKL-TUO, WLG-TIU and NZ would simply become a joke on regional services while enabling JQ to expand more with Q300s. Air Chathams and Sounds Air would scramble to find more aircraft if they've already done their home work on the route and decided to take it on.


Are routes like AKL-TUO/WLG-TIU worth operating to NZ is the question? If they are pretty weak as it is they might decide its worth dropping them and letting someone like Air Chathams take the route over.

Isn't the 72-600 operating costs meant to be lower than the Q300? maybe that could off-set the additional seats into the market.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:35 pm

I see no reason to diversify the fleet. the ATR42 hasn't had new orders in ages because the costs are so similar to the ATR72. May as well have the larger frame and really compete against JQ into a market to try and keep those whinging people who live in the sticks quieter. A larger aircraft ALWAYS results in lower fares overall.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:59 pm

777ER wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
zkncj wrote:


If NZ fully removed the 50 seater from its fleet then more routes will be axed like AKL-TUO, WLG-TIU and NZ would simply become a joke on regional services while enabling JQ to expand more with Q300s. Air Chathams and Sounds Air would scramble to find more aircraft if they've already done their home work on the route and decided to take it on.
]

Which city pairs would be in danger if the 50-seaters were to go? This could only happen over an extended period, sort of like the phase out of the Beech airplanes.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sat Jul 23, 2016 11:28 pm

sunrisevalley wrote:
Which city pairs would be in danger if the 50-seaters were to go? This could only happen over an extended period, sort of like the phase out of the Beech airplanes.


PMR-WLG
AKL-TUO

AKL-WAG recently got cut with only 3 months notice, as it couldn't support the upgrade to an the Q300 as planned. NZ seems to be very bold with making cuts to regional routes that don't make any money, its been the negative side of Jetstar starting its regional operations - basically has got them to review all there cost and cut anything that doesn't make money.

Within the next 5 years I could see the NZ Regional Network reduced to:
AKL
- KKE
- WRE
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- PMR
- PPQ
- NPL
- NSN

WLG
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- NPL
- NSN
- CHC
- IVC
- DUD

CHC
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- NPL
- NSN
- CHC
- IVC
- ZQN
- DUD
 
Sylus
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:41 am

zkncj wrote:
sunrisevalley wrote:
Which city pairs would be in danger if the 50-seaters were to go? This could only happen over an extended period, sort of like the phase out of the Beech airplanes.


PMR-WLG
AKL-TUO

AKL-WAG recently got cut with only 3 months notice, as it couldn't support the upgrade to an the Q300 as planned. NZ seems to be very bold with making cuts to regional routes that don't make any money, its been the negative side of Jetstar starting its regional operations - basically has got them to review all there cost and cut anything that doesn't make money.

Within the next 5 years I could see the NZ Regional Network reduced to:
AKL
- KKE
- WRE
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- PMR
- PPQ
- NPL
- NSN

WLG
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- NPL
- NSN
- CHC
- IVC
- DUD

CHC
- TRG
- GIS
- NPE
- NPL
- NSN
- CHC
- IVC
- ZQN
- DUD



Have you forgotten about ROT and HLZ or are you suggesting they could be cut in the future?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:45 am

Sylus wrote:

Have you forgotten about ROT and HLZ or are you suggesting they could be cut in the future?


My bad had completely forgotten about HLZ,ROT I recon they both will have some chance to stay.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:05 am

zkncj wrote:
Sylus wrote:

Have you forgotten about ROT and HLZ or are you suggesting they could be cut in the future?


My bad had completely forgotten about HLZ,ROT I recon they both will have some chance to stay.

Both HLZ and ROT are dead certs to remain in the network. ROT is NZ's second tourist destination, way ahead of KKE which you've no hesitation in including on your "retain" list, and HLZ is the fourth largest urban centre in the country.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:17 am

DavidByrne wrote:
Both HLZ and ROT are dead certs to remain in the network. ROT is NZ's second tourist destination, way ahead of KKE which you've no hesitation in including on your "retain" list, and HLZ is the fourth largest urban centre in the country.


HLZ saving grace will also be the Auckland Housing market growing closer and closer to HLZ, if anything maybe by 2030 HLZ could have Tasman Services again and maybe peak hour WLG/CHC jet services.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 9245
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:42 am

Queenstown airport has partially been evacuated after a cleaner found a note on board a QF aircraft alluding to a bomb on board

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-up ... 6bc16072b4
Forum Moderator
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:03 am

zkncj wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Both HLZ and ROT are dead certs to remain in the network. ROT is NZ's second tourist destination, way ahead of KKE which you've no hesitation in including on your "retain" list, and HLZ is the fourth largest urban centre in the country.


HLZ saving grace will also be the Auckland Housing market growing closer and closer to HLZ, if anything maybe by 2030 HLZ could have Tasman Services again and maybe peak hour WLG/CHC jet services.


HLZ doesn't need a "saving grace" to stay in the network! Though I admit it only has 40 times the population of KKE.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:58 am

zkncj wrote:
Within the next 5 years I could see the NZ Regional Network reduced to:


I think the political cost of your list would make it untenable (as well as the economic, social and cultural costs). Yes, Air NZ should be run a a business enterprise - use it or lose it - but it is not that in the hearts and minds of many Kiwis, certainly in the regions., and it is still, conceptually, the national airline.

I agree that we may see a wee bitty more rationalisation of the regional routes, but it's a heck of a tightrope because it is a matter of cumulative effect - too many cuts and there will be uproar. That is obviously mitigated somewhat if the small fry step in - Air Chats and/or Sounds - but they have their own huge limitations, such as lack of capital or even access to capital, which leads to lack of equipment and staff.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:56 pm

I have been casually watching AA83 on Flightradar24. Everyday I have checked it is running late to very late. At this moment it is 2hrs 25 min late. This tail did ORD-MAN-ORD-LAX-AKL. It was into ORD at 15.27 out at 20.03 into LAX at 21.38 which only left it one hour for turn around to AKL. But it took until 01.23 before it was out. I wonder why the 4 1/2 hour turn around at ORD and almost 4 hrs. at LAX.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3305
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:01 pm

sunrisevalley wrote:
I have been casually watching AA83 on Flightradar24. Everyday I have checked it is running late to very late. At this moment it is 2hrs 25 min late. This tail did ORD-MAN-ORD-LAX-AKL. It was into ORD at 15.27 out at 20.03 into LAX at 21.38 which only left it one hour for turn around to AKL. But it took until 01.23 before it was out. I wonder why the 4 1/2 hour turn around at ORD and almost 4 hrs. at LAX.


I've noticed that too - I'm wondering if they have been holding it back at LAX, due to gate spare in AKL? Its pretty much 2 hours or more late every day. Maybe they we're disliking using stairs/buses to deboard in AKL during the winter months?

At-least by 9am you have an few gates freed-ed up by NZ123 (77W) and NZ103 (789/772) both leaving, before that the terminal is pretty full.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5264
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:09 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
A larger aircraft ALWAYS results in lower fares overall.

That's only true if the average cost per seat sold works out better than on a smaller aircraft. Otherwise by the "larger always equals lower fares" logic, we'd have A380s flying Auckland-Whakatane.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:58 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
That's only true if the average cost per seat sold works out better than on a smaller aircraft. Otherwise by the "larger always equals lower fares" logic, we'd have A380s flying Auckland-Whakatane.


But it is the reason Airbus has sold some 4000 x A320Neo/A321Neo against 58 x A319Neo.

There is always the question of how many seats the airline actually sell on a specific route, which is you won't see the A380 on Auckland-Whakatane, and it is is why the mid-capacity, thus less-risk, A320Neo will be the workhorse of the family, but the fact remains that the CASK of the (higher capacity) A321Neo will be lower than the CASK of the (mid-capacity) A320Neo, just as the A320Neo has a lower CASK than the (less capacity) A319Neo, although the trip costs of the three types are very roughly similar.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
PA515
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:59 pm

Was checking Air NZ 789 ZK-NZI on flightradar24 and the delivery flight is NZ6094 departing PAE at 1110 PDT on Tue 26 Jul. So, arriving AKL about 2000 on Wed 27 Jul.

PA515
Last edited by PA515 on Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4354
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:13 am

mariner wrote:
zkncj wrote:
Within the next 5 years I could see the NZ Regional Network reduced to:


I think the political cost of your list would make it untenable (as well as the economic, social and cultural costs). Yes, Air NZ should be run a a business enterprise - use it or lose it - but it is not that in the hearts and minds of many Kiwis, certainly in the regions., and it is still, conceptually, the national airline.

I agree that we may see a wee bitty more rationalisation of the regional routes, but it's a heck of a tightrope because it is a matter of cumulative effect - too many cuts and there will be uproar. That is obviously mitigated somewhat if the small fry step in - Air Chats and/or Sounds - but they have their own huge limitations, such as lack of capital or even access to capital, which leads to lack of equipment and staff.

mariner


Of course what perhaps should be done that would be a win/win/win would be for NZ to either code-share on those smaller flights or to at least work out some through-check arrangement.
Win for the small airline - extra business (and since passengers will feel safer about booking them more business)
Win for NZ - can serve more destinations without having to use their own metal
Win for the passenger - gets to have the domestic flight as an add-on to their international ticket, also gets the peace of mind knowing that if the small airline goes belly up that NZ will look after them/at the very least allow them to make changes to their other tickets for free/mis-connections don't become a costly issue.
64 types. 42 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 3:09 am

Zkpilot wrote:
Of course what perhaps should be done that would be a win/win/win would be for NZ to either code-share on those smaller flights or to at least work out some through-check arrangement.
Win for the small airline - extra business (and since passengers will feel safer about booking them more business)
Win for NZ - can serve more destinations without having to use their own metal
Win for the passenger - gets to have the domestic flight as an add-on to their international ticket, also gets the peace of mind knowing that if the small airline goes belly up that NZ will look after them/at the very least allow them to make changes to their other tickets for free/mis-connections don't become a costly issue.


Oh, absolutely, that would change things and it has been discussed. But - Mr. Luxon says it would be very expensive for the small fry:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/ ... -agreement

"Air New Zealand's chief executive Christopher Luxton said he had not been approached by any of the regional airlines about setting up such an arrangement. He says that could be down to cost.

"There's highly complex systems that are big constraints for I suspect what are quite nimble and quite agile smaller airlines, for them to be able to have the IT system and infrastructure to be able to track baggage, track customers, is a massive investment."


Although the small fry (or at least Air Chats) say they could afford it:

"Air Chathams now flies in and out of Whakatane in Air New Zealand's absence, and said it could afford to set up a system to link the two airlines. Chief executive officer Craig Emeny said it had had interline agreements with Air New Zealand before.

"For us it's a case of actually how do we make it happen and there are a lot of technical issues, but it's been done before and I know of other airlines that are currently doing it, so it's something that's possible to do."


And then there's the role of government as a possible facilitator:

"However, Whakatane mayor Tony Bonne said if money was the problem and no agreement could be reached, the Government could pull strings as a major shareholder.

But beyond that interlining, the point remains that any big expansion by the small fry would require large amounts of capital, for additional aircraft, infrastructure and staff.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12379
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:22 am

mariner wrote:
zkncj wrote:
Within the next 5 years I could see the NZ Regional Network reduced to:


I think the political cost of your list would make it untenable (as well as the economic, social and cultural costs). Yes, Air NZ should be run a a business enterprise - use it or lose it - but it is not that in the hearts and minds of many Kiwis, certainly in the regions., and it is still, conceptually, the national airline.

I agree that we may see a wee bitty more rationalisation of the regional routes, but it's a heck of a tightrope because it is a matter of cumulative effect - too many cuts and there will be uproar. That is obviously mitigated somewhat if the small fry step in - Air Chats and/or Sounds - but they have their own huge limitations, such as lack of capital or even access to capital, which leads to lack of equipment and staff.

mariner


If routes need to remain for political and social purposes then there is no other option except for the govt to subsidise the route, it's what happens in Norway, public service obligation routes are bid on by airlines and the govt picks up the tab.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:56 am

Kiwirob wrote:
If routes need to remain for political and social purposes then there is no other option except for the govt to subsidise the route, it's what happens in Norway, public service obligation routes are bid on by airlines and the govt picks up the tab.


Not in my book.

I said I agree that Air NZ should be run as a commercial organisation - use it or lose it - but it isn't owned as a free market corporation and a very real part of its success, good times and bad, is maintaining the goodwill of the market, "goodwill" being a quantifiable element of any successful company's balance sheet.

Part of that goodwill is vested in the bailout after Ansett, and part of it is vested in the idea that we - tax-paying Kiwis - own the airline, which we do. Kiwis will bear some regional cuts - they'll make a noise about 'em, as happened but they'll likely eventually come to terms with them. If the airline cuts too hard, though, there will be a much more aggressive noise and surely a loss of goodwill.

Nor is it just the routes themselves that are the issue. They may lose money, but what has to be considered is the feed they provide to other flights, domestic and, importantly, international. It's one reason why Jetstar set up the regional routes - they may be barely profitable, they may even lose money, but they may be worth it to Qantas/Jetstar if they help fill planes on the international flights, or get incoming tourists easily to the non-urban parts of NZ. That's why a fair few come here and it's more than just Queenstown and Rotorua.

As I said in my earlier post, it is a balancing act, a tightrope act.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:01 am

In reply to PA515 ZK-NZI was scheduled for a C-3 (Customer Acceptance) flight on 24 Jul which has been pushed back to 25 Jul.
All things 787 is showing departure from Paine on 28 Jul (and they're usually very accurate) so surprised to see departure on FR24 as 26 Jul!!
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation thread part 180

Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:02 am

zkncj wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Both HLZ and ROT are dead certs to remain in the network. ROT is NZ's second tourist destination, way ahead of KKE which you've no hesitation in including on your "retain" list, and HLZ is the fourth largest urban centre in the country.


HLZ saving grace will also be the Auckland Housing market growing closer and closer to HLZ, if anything maybe by 2030 HLZ could have Tasman Services again and maybe peak hour WLG/CHC jet services.
I fly out of HLZ a fair bit and most flights are almost full. I would love to see jet flights to at least CHC at some point. 2hr on the ATR is annoying when AKL-CHC is only 1.15
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos