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

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Thu Sep 01, 2016 9:46 pm

The NZ passenger statistics are not as transparent as those that BITRE produces. The Bitre figures tend to support an assertion that there is liittle or no growth in the Aus. S.Africa passenger market. If SAA were to retire the A343 I wonder whether they would go after EDTO> 180 on their A332's just serve PER.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 02, 2016 12:58 am

[quote="sunrisevalley"][quote="Zkpilot"]This would of course open the door to NZ operating PER-JNB (which is preferable to MEL-JNB due to EDTO restrictions).] . There is something like a 400nm fly around PER-JNB on EDTO-240 .

Mea culpa. It is probably less than 100nm. I used an incorrect one engine inoperative cruise value.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1497
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 02, 2016 3:16 pm

“Cathay Pacific moves forward A350 Auckland debut in Oct 2016”

Cathay Pacific has moved forward planned Airbus A350-900XWB service introductory on Hong Kong – Auckland route, currently scheduled to depart Hong Kong on 27OCT16, instead of 30OCT16. The A350-900XWB will operate this route 7 weekly, and increases to 10 weekly for the month of March 2017.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -oct-2016/
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sat Sep 03, 2016 12:34 am

Over the last few years I've been unhappy with NZ's long haul offering and Airpoints. Yesterday I returned from the USA on a QF booking with a transfer in SYD and AA connections in DFW.

Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.

NZ IMHO have some serious thinking to do. Yes they have won awards but their FF programme isn't worth it and when your able to fly on an A380 which doesn't feel cramped like NZs 77W fleet does then more customers will jump ship now that QF/AA offer AKL-LAX.
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
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4347
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sat Sep 03, 2016 12:48 am

777ER wrote:
Over the last few years I've been unhappy with NZ's long haul offering and Airpoints. Yesterday I returned from the USA on a QF booking with a transfer in SYD and AA connections in DFW.

Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.

NZ IMHO have some serious thinking to do. Yes they have won awards but their FF programme isn't worth it and when your able to fly on an A380 which doesn't feel cramped like NZs 77W fleet does then more customers will jump ship now that QF/AA offer AKL-LAX.

Except that you have to fly via Australia to get that which adds 5 hours flying time and about 7 hours in total to the trip. I'd rather take a single 12 hour flight than a 3+15 trip. QF FF isn't overly easy to redeem either. With AA on the direct route now that still doesn't off the A380...
That said if you are in WLG then that changes things as you don't have a non-stop option anyway.
59 types. 42 countries. 24 airlines.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:45 am

Looks like -MVA had a main wheel issue on the taxi way at WLG blocking some international gates today.

Zkpilot wrote:
777ER wrote:
Over the last few years I've been unhappy with NZ's long haul offering and Airpoints. Yesterday I returned from the USA on a QF booking with a transfer in SYD and AA connections in DFW.

Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.

NZ IMHO have some serious thinking to do. Yes they have won awards but their FF programme isn't worth it and when your able to fly on an A380 which doesn't feel cramped like NZs 77W fleet does then more customers will jump ship now that QF/AA offer AKL-LAX.

Except that you have to fly via Australia to get that which adds 5 hours flying time and about 7 hours in total to the trip. I'd rather take a single 12 hour flight than a 3+15 trip. QF FF isn't overly easy to redeem either. With AA on the direct route now that still doesn't off the A380...
That said if you are in WLG then that changes things as you don't have a non-stop option anyway.

Yes flying via Australia is a down side.
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
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:46 pm

[[quote="777ER"]Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.NZ IMHO have some serious thinking to do. ]]

If cost is a NZ excuse for a lesser level of service it does not hold up. QF CASK is close to 20% less than NZ's. Put another way QF is able to provide allegedly better service for less cost. NZ need to figure out what their problem is. I think there is a cabin crew "culture" element in part of this. I think NZ would face quite a challenge upgrading their cabin crew attitudes to the said to be higher standard of the QF cabin crews. Would seem to me that improving NZ's FF program is the easy part. They just make it competitive to the carriers they are competing against. The A380 flight experience in terms of space is difficult to replicate with most other aircraft types. They could start by improving Y seat pitch to what they had in the 744's. Catering is something that can be improved at little expense. I have commented more than once in these treads that the ability to order a J class meal at a higher cost should be available to all Y passengers. UA and AA both offer economy plus which provides 35" seat pitch for a moderate pricing upcharge of ~$280 round trip SFO-AKL-SFO. No doubt AA is similar out of LAX. Their are things that can be done to raise the level of value to the passenger which I believe they have to do.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:44 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
If there's a possibility of further hubbing up AKL for additional North American flights, it's worth also looking again at what the present market might support for addition spoke on the Australian side.....there's no immediate prospect in my view apart from CBR and HBA. Perhaps the most likely of them would be a seasonal HBA service, but I'm not holding my breath.

As an "end of line" carrier, NZ has very few natural geographic advantages. Developing AKL as the hub for Australia-Americas traffic and Asia-South America traffic is about the best that can be conjured up. I'd really like to see the opportunities that this offers grabbed with both hands and used to define the carrier in an increasingly competitive market.


Image

In view of all the discussion about LHR and Europe I did a little digging and found this, the CEO outlining the strategy at the end of 2014:

https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalkin ... -doctrine/

"Air NZ CEO Luxon pits Middle Earth against Middle East with Pacific Rim focus

“We are not at the end of the world” Mr Luxon told the National Aviation Press Club in Sydney today. “We are at a focal point in the Pacific Rim."

Jakarta, Taipei, Nagoya, Vancouver, Portland, Santiago? Mr Luxon wasn’t letting on but with expanded or pending alliance deals with the like of Singapore Airlines and a PRC partner, there was much to consider in place of hand wringing from other quarters about the cruelty of geography and sovereign owned carriers, apart from Emirates in relation to Qantas of course.

He said Air New Zealand no longer thought of itself as a competitor for Europe flights. That was something best left to others (such as the Middle East carriers). He described the decision to focus on the Pacific Rim opportunities, and let Europe go when it ended the flights through Hong Kong, as involving a major rewiring of the Air New Zealand corporate mind."


I assume the suggested cities are guesses by the writer, Ben Sandilands, rather than suggestions by Mr. Luxon - I'd put Seattle well ahead of Portland, and even SEA is dodgy - and we already know some of the reality, EZE instead of SCL, eg.

The important thing is the "re-wiring" of the corporate mind after the end of HKG-LHR and I doubt that'd rewire it back to include Europe ("Air New Zealand no longer thought of itself as a competitor for Europe flights"). So it's this AKL hub that intrigues me. It's not quite there yet, it's a work in progress, but if they can eventually get EZE to 5 or 6 times a week, that might encourage them to consider adding another Central or South American city - MEX or LIM perhaps.

On the western side, I agree with you about CBR and HBA. Sooner or later, the AKL hub must be attractive to Tasmanians - even if one-stop to the Americas were only part of that surely the South Pacific islands, at least in winter, would get some flow?

There is one odd-ball I wonder about - Papua New Guinea. There were rumours a while ago that Air Niugini was thinking of starting POM-AKL and although that hasn't transpired I wonder if it would be viable, 2 or 3 times a week?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ZKOAB
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:59 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:05 am

PA515 wrote:
Air NZ Q300 ZK-NEB departed AKL this morning for NLK, BNE and TSV for it's repaint, while ZK-NEA is due back in AKL late tomorrow evening from TSV, BNE and NLK having been away since 20 August for it's repaint. At 12 days for each aircraft it will be about mid January 2017 before the rest are done (NEC, NED, NEE, NEF, NEG, NEH, NEJ, NEK, NEM and NEO).

Also, 1900D ZK-EAC had a 35 min test flight HLZ to HLZ yesterday, so could be about to head overseas.

PA515


Great info. Was wondering when they were going to finish off the repaints for the remaining Q300's.
Ties in nicely to my post earlier in this thread about keeping the Q300's until 2021 at least: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1340017&start=50#p19051163
Do you know when the last 3x 72-500's are getting done? After the Q300's?

Do you know when 77W OKP comes back? It disappeared to OPQ for its assumed repaint on August 15 and I figure it would be back by now since it's been over 2 weeks.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3298
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:23 am

ZKOAB wrote:
Do you know when the last 3x 72-500's are getting done? After the Q300's?


The remaining unpainted 72-500's wont be getting repainted, will be the first 3 that will be replaced by 72-600's next year.
 
ZKOAB
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:59 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 6:04 am

zkncj wrote:
ZKOAB wrote:
Do you know when the last 3x 72-500's are getting done? After the Q300's?


The remaining unpainted 72-500's wont be getting repainted, will be the first 3 that will be replaced by 72-600's next year.


It sort of makes sense, yes from a financial point of view to not waste money on a repaint if they are to be retired soon.
As per your comment, delivery/timing logic of MVP and MVQ next July/August to replace MCW and MCX does make sense.

The part that doesn't make sense is the logic if you were to go by age. MCA-MCY delivery dates vary from 1999 to 2004.
They've repainted 8, most of which had 1999 delivery dates whilst the 3 not being repainted are 2000 (MCW), 2002 (MCX) and 2003 (MCY).
My approach would have been the opposite - repainted the younger ones first and retire the frames delivered in 1999 with the 2017 replacements.
 
CHCalfonzo
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 6:21 am

ZKOAB wrote:
My approach would have been the opposite - repainted the younger ones first and retire the frames delivered in 1999 with the 2017 replacements.


Age isn't the defining factor when deciding which aircraft to retire first, there are far more important considerations like where the aircraft is in it's maintenance cycle, whether it's owned or leased, when the lease expires, resale value and so on.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 7:27 am

sunrisevalley wrote:
[
777ER wrote:
Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.NZ IMHO have some serious thinking to do. ]]

If cost is a NZ excuse for a lesser level of service it does not hold up. QF CASK is close to 20% less than NZ's. Put another way QF is able to provide allegedly better service for less cost. NZ need to figure out what their problem is. I think there is a cabin crew "culture" element in part of this. I think NZ would face quite a challenge upgrading their cabin crew attitudes to the said to be higher standard of the QF cabin crews. Would seem to me that improving NZ's FF program is the easy part. They just make it competitive to the carriers they are competing against. The A380 flight experience in terms of space is difficult to replicate with most other aircraft types. They could start by improving Y seat pitch to what they had in the 744's. Catering is something that can be improved at little expense. I have commented more than once in these treads that the ability to order a J class meal at a higher cost should be available to all Y passengers. UA and AA both offer economy plus which provides 35" seat pitch for a moderate pricing upcharge of ~$280 round trip SFO-AKL-SFO. No doubt AA is similar out of LAX. Their are things that can be done to raise the level of value to the passenger which I believe they have to do.

If NZ can't offer the same level of service Trans-Tasman as QF for even the basic fare due to costs in terms of meals, then NZ needs to seriously look at its operations. NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF. QF is basically in a league of its own out of WLG and ZQN and some CHC routes. In terms of the A380 is basically hard to match the comfort levels unless you remove a seat in each row and increase pitch which we all know NZ won't do

NZ has basically made being an Airpoints member harder with the downgrading of earning airpoints and most recently with the removal of fly buys earning announcement. To get to silver now is basically double the earning compared to Qantas unless you have a status earning credit card. I've got a Kiwibank status earning credit card which I'm considering either keeping, switching to another Kiwibank airpoints card or applying for an ANZ Qantas card and cancelling my Kiwibank one. Yes redeeming with Qantas is harder but not everyone is interested in redeeming for flights. Others like me enjoy using points for upgrades.
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
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 11:36 am

ZKOAB wrote:
Do you know when 77W OKP comes back? It disappeared to OPQ for its assumed repaint on August 15 and I figure it would be back by now since it's been over 2 weeks.

My guess is ZK-OKP will return from QPG after 26 days on Sat 10 Sep. Maintenance appears to be about 15 days and a repaint 26 days. ZK-OKP had 15 days of maintenance at QPG in Mar, so just the repaint to be done. Earlier this year ZK-OKM was at QPG for 40 days (maintenance and repaint) and later ZK-OKQ for 41 days (maintenance and repaint).

Also, for some reason ZK-NEA did not depart TSV at 0900 AEST on Fri 02 Sep and is now due to depart Mon 05 Sep at 0900 AEST.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/SXI1652

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 3298
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 6:51 pm

ZKOAB wrote:
The part that doesn't make sense is the logic if you were to go by age. MCA-MCY delivery dates vary from 1999 to 2004.
They've repainted 8, most of which had 1999 delivery dates whilst the 3 not being repainted are 2000 (MCW), 2002 (MCX) and 2003 (MCY).
My approach would have been the opposite - repainted the younger ones first and retire the frames delivered in 1999 with the 2017 replacements.


Same thing has happened with the 763 fleet the oldest 3x are still in service, while the newest two left the fleet first. Bare in mind the resale value on the 'newer' 72-500 would likely be higher and they would be more appealing. The 1999 builds are likely to either sit around for an while, and some budget airline picks them up or they will get scrapped.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3298
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 6:56 pm

777ER wrote:
If NZ can't offer the same level of service Trans-Tasman as QF for even the basic fare due to costs in terms of meals, then NZ needs to seriously look at its operations. NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF. QF is basically in a league of its own out of WLG and ZQN and some CHC routes. In terms of the A380 is basically hard to match the comfort levels unless you remove a seat in each row and increase pitch which we all know NZ won't do


Find that pretty hard to believe that the lack of an meal has forced people to choose Qantas on the Tasman? If anything ex-AKL Seat2Suits has been an massive win for NZ, and even the majority of the Gold/Elite passengers embrace it an travel Seat Only on the Tasman.

On the Tasman ex-AKL is doing pretty well AKL-SYD is now upto 4x wide-body services a daily, with AKL-MEL/BNE getting 2-3x daily wide-body services and they are close to fill every time. Yet Qantas is only a couple of times daily with an 738.

What probably helps is ex-AKL,BNE,SYD (Soon MEL), NZ provides an decent Lounge Option which helps with Gold,Elite not carrying about onboard food.
 
Seat1K
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 4:11 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:12 pm

You will have to speak for yourself on this one, ZKNCJ.
This gold elite flyer of 7 years avoids the lousy seats-to-suit product on all my Tasman flying unless I want to burn my upgrade vouchers. When I do, I have to make a detour to AKL from CHC to experience the premium product on the widebodies. Here in CHC we get the Virgin seats-to-suit which means using your own device, using the Virgin app and no recharge USB port in the seats. And the seats-to-suit catering must cost all of $3 for a $50 upgrade to the Works.
Yes, the QF product is pretty competitive and I get to enjoy their F-lounges in MEL/SYD/BNE and they are every bit as good as the NZ lounges. And that is what works for me.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 11:27 pm

zkncj wrote:
777ER wrote:
If NZ can't offer the same level of service Trans-Tasman as QF for even the basic fare due to costs in terms of meals, then NZ needs to seriously look at its operations. NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF. QF is basically in a league of its own out of WLG and ZQN and some CHC routes. In terms of the A380 is basically hard to match the comfort levels unless you remove a seat in each row and increase pitch which we all know NZ won't do


Find that pretty hard to believe that the lack of an meal has forced people to choose Qantas on the Tasman? If anything ex-AKL Seat2Suits has been an massive win for NZ, and even the majority of the Gold/Elite passengers embrace it an travel Seat Only on the Tasman.

On the Tasman ex-AKL is doing pretty well AKL-SYD is now upto 4x wide-body services a daily, with AKL-MEL/BNE getting 2-3x daily wide-body services and they are close to fill every time. Yet Qantas is only a couple of times daily with an 738.

What probably helps is ex-AKL,BNE,SYD (Soon MEL), NZ provides an decent Lounge Option which helps with Gold,Elite not carrying about onboard food.

Do you really believe/think that NZs product offering is winning and in turn enabling bigger aircraft on Tasman use?

NZ uses bigger aircraft to enable its long haul passengers to have the same product offering. With the B763 being removed from service (while still being used on other routes), what other aircraft is NZ going to use/be able to use? The A320 fleet is pretty tied up so that just leaves the B777s to pick up the slack instead of being parked up during the day. Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s. Its also wasteful of an aircraft like a B777 to have it simply parked up all day at AKL in between long haul sectors as its not making money for NZ

B763s on Tasman routes will be replaced by A321s but before they enter service the B777/787 is the only aircraft possible to replace the lost capacity.

WLG has an excellent International Koru lounge also. If you had the option of flying NZ on a basic fare and only get tea/coffee/water, no luggage with basic TV options or fly QF with full service (meal, drinks, entertainment, luggage), who would you choose? Everytime I've needed to take a bag, I've struggled to justify spending more with NZ when I could have had it all with QF for the same basic fare. A meal isn't always required on a 3 hour sector, but it is nice and it means I've eaten before arriving in Australia and not forced to buy an over priced airport meal.
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
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Sun Sep 04, 2016 11:28 pm

zkncj wrote:
777ER wrote:
If NZ can't offer the same level of service Trans-Tasman as QF for even the basic fare due to costs in terms of meals, then NZ needs to seriously look at its operations. NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF. QF is basically in a league of its own out of WLG and ZQN and some CHC routes. In terms of the A380 is basically hard to match the comfort levels unless you remove a seat in each row and increase pitch which we all know NZ won't do


Find that pretty hard to believe that the lack of an meal has forced people to choose Qantas on the Tasman? If anything ex-AKL Seat2Suits has been an massive win for NZ, and even the majority of the Gold/Elite passengers embrace it an travel Seat Only on the Tasman.

On the Tasman ex-AKL is doing pretty well AKL-SYD is now upto 4x wide-body services a daily, with AKL-MEL/BNE getting 2-3x daily wide-body services and they are close to fill every time. Yet Qantas is only a couple of times daily with an 738.

What probably helps is ex-AKL,BNE,SYD (Soon MEL), NZ provides an decent Lounge Option which helps with Gold,Elite not carrying about onboard food.

Do you really believe/think that NZs product offering is winning and in turn enabling bigger aircraft on Tasman use?

NZ uses bigger aircraft to enable its long haul passengers to have the same product offering. With the B763 being removed from service (while still being used on other routes), what other aircraft is NZ going to use/be able to use? The A320 fleet is pretty tied up so that just leaves the B777s to pick up the slack instead of being parked up during the day. Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s. Its also wasteful of an aircraft like a B777 to have it simply parked up all day at AKL in between long haul sectors as its not making money for NZ

B763s on Tasman routes will be replaced by A321s but before they enter service the B777/787 is the only aircraft possible to replace the lost capacity.

WLG has an excellent International Koru lounge also. If you had the option of flying NZ on a basic fare and only get tea/coffee/water, no luggage with basic TV options or fly QF with full service (meal, drinks, entertainment, luggage), who would you choose? Everytime I've needed to take a bag, I've struggled to justify spending more with NZ when I could have had it all with QF for the same basic fare. A meal isn't always required on a 3 hour sector, but it is nice and it means I've eaten before arriving in Australia and not forced to buy an over priced airport meal.
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
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 1:01 am

777ER wrote:
NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF.


Perhaps some may have switched to Qantas, but I think it's a sweeping generalisation. For me, S2S is what makes Air NZ my default airline for TT on those occasions when Emirates wants too much to fly on the A380, which sometimes happens.

As to the A380, it's long been my favourite aircraft to fly, I'll go out of my way to choose it, and I don't think just taking out a row of seats can replicate that sense of space, Reality bites, though - very few airlines have the aircraft, so the opportunities are limited unless (a) you're flying Emirates and/or (b) you're flying on a few main trunk routes, or (c) in the case of the US you're prepared to go through Oz.

No one flies the A380 to Vietnam, where I'm going, nor, coming back, from EZE.

I think it's terrific that you have this zeal for Qantas - (my nationality is Australian - LOL) - but my own experiences have been mixed. Never less than good, but not always this pinnacle of flying that you seem to get.

777ER wrote:
Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s.


I like the A321. Image

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1474
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 1:35 am

[Quoting 777ER]
Do you really believe/think that NZs product offering is winning and in turn enabling bigger aircraft on Tasman use?

NZ uses bigger aircraft to enable its long haul passengers to have the same product offering. With the B763 being removed from service (while still being used on other routes), what other aircraft is NZ going to use/be able to use? The A320 fleet is pretty tied up so that just leaves the B777s to pick up the slack instead of being parked up during the day. Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s. Its also wasteful of an aircraft like a B777 to have it simply parked up all day at AKL in between long haul sectors as its not making money for NZ

B763s on Tasman routes will be replaced by A321s but before they enter service the B777/787 is the only aircraft possible to replace the lost capacity.
_________________________

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Even now, NZ doesn't have to park up its WBs during the day if it doesn't want to - it could use them on Asian routes, for example, with mid-am departures and afternoon arrivals back in time for American routes in the early evening. That it uses them on the Tasman instead - up to 4x daily on SYD alone - suggests to me that they choose to use them because they need the capacity on the Tasman, not that they're a "might as well use them" aircraft.

I agree some of the 777s could be taken off the Tasman and used on such Asian services when the A321s arrive - this especially if the airline is serious about feeding South American services with flights from Asia. If that happened, though, I wouldn't mind betting that there will be an increase in frequency on SYD services to make up for the lost capacity. I don't think any airline that's making good money would willingly concede a large chunk of its capacity to the opposition.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
aerohottie
Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:04 am

DavidByrne wrote:
[Quoting 777ER]
Do you really believe/think that NZs product offering is winning and in turn enabling bigger aircraft on Tasman use?

NZ uses bigger aircraft to enable its long haul passengers to have the same product offering. With the B763 being removed from service (while still being used on other routes), what other aircraft is NZ going to use/be able to use? The A320 fleet is pretty tied up so that just leaves the B777s to pick up the slack instead of being parked up during the day. Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s. Its also wasteful of an aircraft like a B777 to have it simply parked up all day at AKL in between long haul sectors as its not making money for NZ

B763s on Tasman routes will be replaced by A321s but before they enter service the B777/787 is the only aircraft possible to replace the lost capacity.
_________________________

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Even now, NZ doesn't have to park up its WBs during the day if it doesn't want to - it could use them on Asian routes, for example, with mid-am departures and afternoon arrivals back in time for American routes in the early evening. That it uses them on the Tasman instead - up to 4x daily on SYD alone - suggests to me that they choose to use them because they need the capacity on the Tasman, not that they're a "might as well use them" aircraft.

I agree some of the 777s could be taken off the Tasman and used on such Asian services when the A321s arrive - this especially if the airline is serious about feeding South American services with flights from Asia. If that happened, though, I wouldn't mind betting that there will be an increase in frequency on SYD services to make up for the lost capacity. I don't think any airline that's making good money would willingly concede a large chunk of its capacity to the opposition.


Is there public information on loadfactors and/or market share on the Tasman routes? Particularly AKL-SYD/MEL/BNE
If NZ is successfully filling WB aircraft on the Tasman with higher loads than QF is filling 737's I think the numbers will speak for themselves.
What?
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1474
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:45 am

You can't split out the BITRE stats by operator AND route, but what you can see is that NZ in June carried more than twice the amount of Tasman traffic compared with QF, and still more than QF and JQ combined. Given that aircraft capacity and frequencies out of WLG, CHC, ZQN are more or less equivalent for NZ and QF, a good portion of NZ's advantage is therefore probably on AKL routes.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
smi0006
Posts: 2363
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 3:01 am

Morning guys, long time lurker on this thread. The topic ofTasman turns on widebodies got me thinking- is there any impact on the life of the aircraft. These turns whilst not domestic short do add a few extra cycles? Or insufficient for any meaningful impact.

I'm surprised NZ123 is the earliest flight into MEL, bit late from a business perspective. With the 321s arriving will this free up any more 320s for extra turns to add frequency? Maybe reduce some widebodies into MEL?
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3941
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 3:30 am

zkncj wrote:
If anything ex-AKL Seat2Suits has been an massive win for NZ, and even the majority of the Gold/Elite passengers embrace it an travel Seat Only on the Tasman.


Source please?

Zkpilot wrote:
Except that you have to fly via Australia to get that which adds 5 hours flying time and about 7 hours in total to the trip. I'd rather take a single 12 hour flight than a 3+15 trip. QF FF isn't overly easy to redeem either. With AA on the direct route now that still doesn't off the A380...

Five hours flying time is worth it for an A380. Don't know why anyone would want to subject themselves to 13 hours of AA, but I guess enough people willingly do so.

777ER wrote:
Because of the QF/AA experience I'm now switching my FF to QF. QF are miles ahead of NZ in terms of comfort and offering. The A380 comfort kicks NZs 777 fleet for comfort. The meal offering was better with a midflight snack offering like what UA offer on Australian services. The inflight snack/drinks bar at the rear of the A380 was amazing. The crew on every service including WLG-SYD-WLG were excellent and were quick to respond to requests. The meals offered were excellent even for a basic fare.

Absolutely mate. QF are much further ahead of NZ when it comes to product, passenger comfort and customer service. The FF program is probably debatable; I prefer QF's, but I really like how airpoints can be used to pay for any seat etc.

smi0006 wrote:
The topic ofTasman turns on widebodies got me thinking- is there any impact on the life of the aircraft. These turns whilst not domestic short do add a few extra cycles? Or insufficient for any meaningful impact.

I doubt it makes too much difference overall. NZ does have a few short ~3 hour TasPac routes, but the majority of the airline's 777 routes are very long; 11+ hours to SFO/LAX/IAH/HKG etc. For comparison, BA's network of 777 routes still has a plenty of those long 11+ hour routes (HND/HKG/PVG/SIN/GRU), but the airline's bread and butter routes are the ~6 hours TransAtlantic routes (JFK/BOS/IAD/YYZ/ORD). I suspect that their ratio of flight hours per cycle is actually quite similar to Air New Zealand's. Would be interesting to know for sure.
First to fly the 787-9
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1474
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 3:42 am

smi0006 wrote:
Morning guys, long time lurker on this thread. The topic ofTasman turns on widebodies got me thinking- is there any impact on the life of the aircraft. These turns whilst not domestic short do add a few extra cycles? Or insufficient for any meaningful impact.

I'm surprised NZ123 is the earliest flight into MEL, bit late from a business perspective. With the 321s arriving will this free up any more 320s for extra turns to add frequency? Maybe reduce some widebodies into MEL?

NZ used to operate an 0630 service to MEL, but this changed when it entered into the arrangement with VA. Currently, NZ passengers who want to get from AKL to MEL early can use the NZ codeshare on this VA service.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4347
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 3:54 am

smi0006 wrote:
Morning guys, long time lurker on this thread. The topic ofTasman turns on widebodies got me thinking- is there any impact on the life of the aircraft. These turns whilst not domestic short do add a few extra cycles? Or insufficient for any meaningful impact.

I'm surprised NZ123 is the earliest flight into MEL, bit late from a business perspective. With the 321s arriving will this free up any more 320s for extra turns to add frequency? Maybe reduce some widebodies into MEL?

Since most of their other flights are quite long (most are 11 hours+ meaning hours but not many cycles) if anything short flights probably brings them back towards average for the type in terms of cycles.
59 types. 42 countries. 24 airlines.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1497
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 5:42 am

"Fares fall: New Zealand to Asia for under $200"

I've heard about getting "bums on seats" but this crazy.

AirAsia X has dropped fares from Auckland to Malaysia to as low as $189.

The airline - which has been warned by the Commerce Commision about its baggage policy - says internal fares from Kuala Lumpur start as low as $4 and Auckland-Gold Coast fares start at $79.

The fares are one-way, seat only and additional charges, such as selecting a seat, start at $30.

The sale fares are available for booking during the next six days and tickets would be valid for travel from February 6 next year to October 28.

Some of the more than 100 destinations on special from Auckland include:
From Auckland, fly one-way to Singapore from $215; Phuket from $217; Bangkok from $231; Hanoi from $252; Hong Kong from $260; and Kochi (India) from $267.

AirAsia X introduced a daily service between Auckland and Kuala Lumpur in March with a brief stopover on the Gold Coast, Australia.



It uses an Airbus A330 on the route.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11703852
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10061
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:31 am

mariner wrote:
777ER wrote:
NZ changing to seat2suit has forced others to ditch NZ for QF.


Perhaps some may have switched to Qantas, but I think it's a sweeping generalisation. For me, S2S is what makes Air NZ my default airline for TT on those occasions when Emirates wants too much to fly on the A380, which sometimes happens.

As to the A380, it's long been my favourite aircraft to fly, I'll go out of my way to choose it, and I don't think just taking out a row of seats can replicate that sense of space, Reality bites, though - very few airlines have the aircraft, so the opportunities are limited unless (a) you're flying Emirates and/or (b) you're flying on a few main trunk routes, or (c) in the case of the US you're prepared to go through Oz.

No one flies the A380 to Vietnam, where I'm going, nor, coming back, from EZE.

I think it's terrific that you have this zeal for Qantas - (my nationality is Australian - LOL) - but my own experiences have been mixed. Never less than good, but not always this pinnacle of flying that you seem to get.

mariner

Naturally everyone has their own opinions about service. I've flown QF over the Tasman four times over the last 5 years and everytime I've been impressed with the service/offering I've received. Felt the QF crews gave more attention then NZ crews and I've taken way more NZ Tasman flights compared to QF over the last 5 years. Flying on a B738 over an A320 feels like a downgrade now (for me to say that as a Boeing fan is hard) but I guess that is the small price I've got to pay for choosing QF over the Tasman unless I select a JQ flight or EK via AKL. The B738 is certainly louder then an A320 but thankfully my Bose headphones block out that noise. Felt weird having to look downwards on the QF and AA B738 to look outside the window. Only way for me to fly on an A380 was on a USA flight and I've avoided it in the past due to concerns over how long it could take to clear customs at the US end due to the number of passengers and how slow US Customs can be, but since I've been able to use the epassport machines at LAX/ORD its helped to speed up customs clearing.

DavidByrne wrote:
[Quoting 777ER]
Do you really believe/think that NZs product offering is winning and in turn enabling bigger aircraft on Tasman use?

NZ uses bigger aircraft to enable its long haul passengers to have the same product offering. With the B763 being removed from service (while still being used on other routes), what other aircraft is NZ going to use/be able to use? The A320 fleet is pretty tied up so that just leaves the B777s to pick up the slack instead of being parked up during the day. Once the A321s enter service, don't be surprised if some 777 flights switch to A321s. Its also wasteful of an aircraft like a B777 to have it simply parked up all day at AKL in between long haul sectors as its not making money for NZ

B763s on Tasman routes will be replaced by A321s but before they enter service the B777/787 is the only aircraft possible to replace the lost capacity.
_________________________

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Even now, NZ doesn't have to park up its WBs during the day if it doesn't want to - it could use them on Asian routes, for example, with mid-am departures and afternoon arrivals back in time for American routes in the early evening. That it uses them on the Tasman instead - up to 4x daily on SYD alone - suggests to me that they choose to use them because they need the capacity on the Tasman, not that they're a "might as well use them" aircraft.

I agree some of the 777s could be taken off the Tasman and used on such Asian services when the A321s arrive - this especially if the airline is serious about feeding South American services with flights from Asia. If that happened, though, I wouldn't mind betting that there will be an increase in frequency on SYD services to make up for the lost capacity. I don't think any airline that's making good money would willingly concede a large chunk of its capacity to the opposition.

What other aircraft currently in NZs fleet is able to match the lost capacity of the B763s? The A320 fleet is pretty much fully used and even if there was a spare A320 or two that could be used, it would need another flight added to fully match the lost numbers. The 777/787 fleet is currently the only fleet spare during the day thanks to in between over night long hauls that can easily match the lost capacity.

The AKL market is a totally different market compard to NZ/QF ops from WLG/CHC, so its not really comparing apples with apples. I was talking about the QF/NZ offering from WLG which is the same as CHC but different to AKL as two different type crews (A320 and B777/787) operate from AKL
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
 
A330NZ
Posts: 175
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 2:23 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Mon Sep 05, 2016 11:35 pm

http://www.christchurchairport.co.nz/en ... ctober-30/

And it's confirmed!! EK is sending the A380 to CHC from October 30th, and they are also dropping the stop in BKK

The arrival and departure times will also be altered due to the more direct routing (arriving earlier and departing later) and the link alludes to this, though as the change doesn't yet appear on Emirates' booking engine or schedule - I am unable to write the exact times here. Perhaps someone with access to the GDS can enlighten us?

The press release also states:

We are working on a suitable welcome for the first A380 - so watch this space


I wonder what they could have planned?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7026
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:15 am

Article says 2pm arrival of just before with a 6.45pm departure. Same as AKL is now. Good for CHC.

AKL gets the BKK stop via SYD now so will probably change to the CHC times, will they turn an A380 in 95 mins or say use the BNE aircraft so BNE-AKL-SYD vv for each aircraft.

5 daily EK A380's to NZ plus SQ seasonal to AKL, not bad.
 
User avatar
LamboAston
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:46 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:35 am

Any idea what AT75s are left to be fitted with trackable transponders, and which ones have them?
AS350, B733/4/7/8, B744/8, B762/3, B77E/L/W, B789, A319, A320, A321, A332, A346, A380, AT73/5/6, Q300, Q400, CR2/7, E190, S340, B1900C/D, E110 (E for epic)
NZ, EK, QF, SQ, UA, US, CO, FZ, FR, U2, BA, VA, VS, MH, EI, EY, LH, EN, NM, TG, GZ
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:55 am

LamboAston wrote:
Any idea what AT75s are left to be fitted with trackable transponders, and which ones have them?


Air NZ's ATR72-500s and Q300s don't have ADS-B transponders but are tracked by the flightradar24 MLAT3 system. I don't think there's MLAT3 coverage in the southern part of the South Island yet. More info available on http://www.flightradar24.com/how-it-works

Just checked and there's MLAT3 coverage to IVC and DUD, but it doesn't function at the lower altitudes of climb and descent.

PA515
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 9123
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:41 am

EK412/413 will now operate DXB-SYD-CHC instead of DXB-SYD-AKL. EK418/419 Will now operate DXB-BKK-SYD-AKL instead of DXB-BKK-SYD-CHC

EK412 DXB1015 – 0700+1SYD0845+1 – 1350+1CHC 388 D
EK413 CHC1845 – 2005SYD2145 – 0515+1DXB 388 D

EK418 DXB0855 – 1805BKK1930 – 0900+1SYD1040+1 – 1555+1AKL 388 D
EK419 AKL1630 – 1815SYD1945 – 0055+1BKK0225+1 – 0605+1DXB 388 D

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... e-changes/
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
LamboAston
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:46 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 5:05 am

PA515 wrote:
LamboAston wrote:
Any idea what AT75s are left to be fitted with trackable transponders, and which ones have them?


Air NZ's ATR72-500s and Q300s don't have ADS-B transponders but are tracked by the flightradar24 MLAT3 system. I don't think there's MLAT3 coverage in the southern part of the South Island yet. More info available on http://www.flightradar24.com/how-it-works

Just checked and there's MLAT3 coverage to IVC and DUD, but it doesn't function at the lower altitudes of climb and descent.

PA515

I had an ATR72-500 overfly my house in dunedin, on the usual flightpath, that was at (my guess) 12,000ft. Other AT75s and 76s have been tracked over the same location previously, so I don't understand it.

EDIT: I just checked FR24 and found that it picked up coverage 40km south of BIDEL at 11,600 ft. Often props get picked up on that departure from 21 over 1000ft, and jets from ground level, but not ZK-MCF. On its way south to Dunedin, it lost coverage at BIDEL at 13,000 ft.
AS350, B733/4/7/8, B744/8, B762/3, B77E/L/W, B789, A319, A320, A321, A332, A346, A380, AT73/5/6, Q300, Q400, CR2/7, E190, S340, B1900C/D, E110 (E for epic)
NZ, EK, QF, SQ, UA, US, CO, FZ, FR, U2, BA, VA, VS, MH, EI, EY, LH, EN, NM, TG, GZ
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3941
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 9:25 am

Today marks a year since Air New Zealand's 737 retirement flight! Time flies when your narrowbody workhorse is the Airbus A320, eh? ;)

Right now, ZK-NGI (C-GKFA) is still sitting at Kewlona, BC waiting for a conversion slot. I had a photo of it, but can't find that right now.

Edit: P.S. If you haven't already, you should totally read my trip report on the flight. :)
Last edited by zkojq on Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
First to fly the 787-9
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 9:55 am

zkojq wrote:
Today marks a year since Air New Zealand's 737 retirement flight! Time flies when your narrowbody workhorse is the Airbus A320, eh? ;)

Right now, ZK-NGI (C-GKFA) is still sitting at Kewlona, BC waiting for a conversion slot. I had a photo of it, but can't find that right now.


Seriously? WOW! I would have thought it was some time earlier this year. Time flies indeed, and I really miss them. I generally prefer the A320 over the B737, but somehow I got to love the NZ B733s more than the A320s. Nostalgia, perhaps?
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3941
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:04 pm

zkeoj wrote:
I generally prefer the A320 over the B737, but somehow I got to love the NZ B733s more than the A320s. Nostalgia, perhaps?

Probably the cool green seats in the 737s! As nice as the cabin of the domestic A320s is, it's rather bland and a bit impersonal. Nothing to distinguish the interior from that of any other A320 operator. I guess the mood lighting makes up for this somewhat. Thankfully the International A320s and 767s still have the nice green seats.
First to fly the 787-9
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:49 pm

LamboAston wrote:
I had an ATR72-500 overfly my house in dunedin, on the usual flightpath, that was at (my guess) 12,000ft. Other AT75s and 76s have been tracked over the same location previously, so I don't understand it.

EDIT: I just checked FR24 and found that it picked up coverage 40km south of BIDEL at 11,600 ft. Often props get picked up on that departure from 21 over 1000ft, and jets from ground level, but not ZK-MCF. On its way south to Dunedin, it lost coverage at BIDEL at 13,000 ft.


Flightradar24 has a forum that discusses radar issues and 'New Zealand Radar' is one of the threads.

At the top of the http://www.flightradar24.com screen click 'Social', then click 'Forum', then click the first item 'Flightradar24 (web page and apps)'. About halfway down is 'New Zealand Radar'. Click the last page and work back for the most recent comments etc. Page 260 and pages 253 and 254 mention MLAT3 being down about 17-21 July and about 02 June 2016. The discussion can get quite technical about receivers and computer connections etc, but mostly it's quite interesting and easy to follow. There are a some active participants south of CHC.

Edit: There's a possibility NZ31 EZE-AKL tomorrow morning could take a more southerly route and head directly north from east of DUD. It's rare but it has been picked up before by IVC, ZQN, DUD and TIU receivers from about 250 kms east of DUD. You can check http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ANZ31 for the flight plan a few hours after departure from EZE. Probably off DUD about 0230.

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 3298
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Tue Sep 06, 2016 7:43 pm

zkojq wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
I generally prefer the A320 over the B737, but somehow I got to love the NZ B733s more than the A320s. Nostalgia, perhaps?

Probably the cool green seats in the 737s! As nice as the cabin of the domestic A320s is, it's rather bland and a bit impersonal. Nothing to distinguish the interior from that of any other A320 operator. I guess the mood lighting makes up for this somewhat. Thankfully the International A320s and 767s still have the nice green seats.


Most of the A320, if now all of the International ones now have black fabric seat covers that match the 777/787 fleet.

Walking onto the 763 is like traveling back to the 90s, add that the IFE doesn't work half of the time and you're pretty much back in the 90s.
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 1:01 am

Ex Air NZ 1900D ZK-EAC left AKL for OOL this morning. It's been registered to MAPTRA of Manila, same as ZK-EAJ.

And Sounds Air PC12 ZK-PLS left WLG for LDH and OOL this morning, presumably to be painted in Sounds Air colours at Redcliffe.

Also, the Air NZ website has changed today. http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 1:26 am

On the new Air NZ website 'Operating Fleet' has the ATR 72-600 as 15 in service and 15 on order for a total of 30.
The Air NZ 2016 Annual Result, Analyst Presentation had 13 in service and 16 on order for a total of 29.
So, has there been an error or has Air NZ ordered another ATR 72-600 since 30 Jun 2016?

PA515
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1177
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:03 am

zkojq wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
I generally prefer the A320 over the B737, but somehow I got to love the NZ B733s more than the A320s. Nostalgia, perhaps?

Probably the cool green seats in the 737s! As nice as the cabin of the domestic A320s is, it's rather bland and a bit impersonal. Nothing to distinguish the interior from that of any other A320 operator. I guess the mood lighting makes up for this somewhat. Thankfully the International A320s and 767s still have the nice green seats.


That might be it. And the smaller overhead lockers. The entire feel was cool. I also had the pleasure to fly on NQC, which had even smaller overhead lockers, green seats, 3/4 bulkheads. loved it: http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/ph ... 57876.html
 
nz2
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:38 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:26 am

Quoting zkncj
Walking onto the 763 is like traveling back to the 90s, add that the IFE doesn't work half of the time and you're pretty much back in the 90s.

I have flown the 763's a lot over the last few years (18 to 20 times a year) and never had an issue with the IFE, I can recall only maybe 2 or 3 times ever and that was on 777's when on vacation but has always been quickly rectified by the crew
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7026
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:48 am

smi0006 wrote:
Morning guys, long time lurker on this thread. The topic ofTasman turns on widebodies got me thinking- is there any impact on the life of the aircraft. These turns whilst not domestic short do add a few extra cycles? Or insufficient for any meaningful impact.

I'm surprised NZ123 is the earliest flight into MEL, bit late from a business perspective. With the 321s arriving will this free up any more 320s for extra turns to add frequency? Maybe reduce some widebodies into MEL?


I wonder sometimes more about the timing of NZ123 the 777 service but I guess it is also timed to pick up local traffic probably to fill it up. It has departed as early as 0730 in the past but also times to connect to the US in both directions and minimise ground time in MEL, the BNE service is the same and they probably want to pick up some domestic connections as well. Maybe they could go in winter.

AKL 0745 MEL 0950 1130 AKL 1710
AKL 0830 BNE 1010 1145 AKL 1650

Summer the LAX flights arrive later so operate a bit later, not much change to current.

AKL 0830 MEL 1035 1210 AKL 1740
AKL 0915 BNE 1000 1130 AKL 1735

As to an earlier flight I guess it's just VA scheduling of aircraft they need to depart early and return to AKL for an afternoon service to APW, TBU etc. so I'd imagine VA will keep the early MEL, BNE services.
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:13 pm

PA515 wrote:
Edit: There's a possibility NZ31 EZE-AKL tomorrow morning could take a more southerly route and head directly north from east of DUD. It's rare but it has been picked up before by IVC, ZQN, DUD and TIU receivers from about 250 kms east of DUD. You can check http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ANZ31 for the flight plan a few hours after departure from EZE. Probably off DUD about 0230.

Not happening. Tracking up over PMR to AKL.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 09, 2016 4:03 am

According to http://nyc787.blogspot.com '787 Full Production Table' the delivery date for Air NZ 789 ZK-NZJ has changed from 15 Sep to 09 Sep.

PA515
 
User avatar
LamboAston
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:46 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:46 am

PA515 wrote:
According to http://nyc787.blogspot.com '787 Full Production Table' the delivery date for Air NZ 789 ZK-NZJ has changed from 15 Sep to 09 Sep.

PA515

That means leaving tomorrow in NZ time
AS350, B733/4/7/8, B744/8, B762/3, B77E/L/W, B789, A319, A320, A321, A332, A346, A380, AT73/5/6, Q300, Q400, CR2/7, E190, S340, B1900C/D, E110 (E for epic)
NZ, EK, QF, SQ, UA, US, CO, FZ, FR, U2, BA, VA, VS, MH, EI, EY, LH, EN, NM, TG, GZ
 
aotearoa
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 1:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:30 am

LamboAston wrote:
PA515 wrote:
According to http://nyc787.blogspot.com '787 Full Production Table' the delivery date for Air NZ 789 ZK-NZJ has changed from 15 Sep to 09 Sep.

PA515

That means leaving tomorrow in NZ time


ZK-NZJ is scheduled to depart KPAE at 1000 local on Saturday the 10th, arriving NZAA at 1800 on Sunday the 11th. Nice time to catch a pic of its first touchdown in NZ.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1110
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 181

Fri Sep 09, 2016 8:37 pm

Does anybody know what the issue was with the CX A340 which was in the NZ hangar at AKL for several days until Thursday this week? When I flew in from Wellington last Saturday it was clearly evident outside the hangar and it was still in the hangar when I left again for Wellington on Wednesday.
Plane mad!

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