• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 4:14 am

I have relatives in the Kapiti Coast, two of whom are regular users of the service to Auckland. They advise the first flight is consistently full - the others not so much.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 4:26 am

NZ6 wrote:
Again you’re quoting media outlets as fact and don’t know the full story ...

It's a quote from Ian Collier (in charge of NZ regional). If we don't know the full story, perhaps another NZ insider could assist. Oh, wait ...

NZ6 wrote:
“Happy” can mean anything ...

Content? Satisfied? Untroubled? Sure, but its totally inconsistent with you saying "hardly anyone is using it" and "that's the entire issue."

NZ6 wrote:
How is NZ at fault if residents prefer to commute and save money ...

Because many residents were being spurred by NZ's various failings at PPQ - there are a whole host of examples, and one is reliability:

"Air New Zealand regional manager Ian Collier said the company accepted the criticism of many people who had said they couldn't rely on the local service."

See: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/kapiti-news/n ... d=11896317.

Cheers,

C.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4782
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 5:52 am

From NZ 6 reply 198: "b) A platform levi on your rail ticket - probably called a 'development tax' or similar. SYD did this and I think still do"

Not quite right. All the stations on the "airport line" were built & operated by a private company who charged the levey to recover their costs. The NSW government built the actual rail line. There are 4 stations on the line: Greens Square, Mascot, Domestic & International, all underground. They all still have the levey even though the company went broke and the government took over the stations. I'm not sure who built/paid for the last station "Wolli Creek" the interchange with the rest of the suburban system.

Gemuser
 
NZ321
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:50 am

Yes Gemuser we need to get smarter about these things and paying for the infrastructure we need to keep NZ moving and viable. The Kapiti council could consider a range of options.

With regard to Planeman's comment,
"Because many residents were being spurred by NZ's various failings at PPQ - there are a whole host of examples, and one is reliability:

"Air New Zealand regional manager Ian Collier said the company accepted the criticism of many people who had said they couldn't rely on the local service."

I agree that NZ suffered issues with reliability on this service and with one service a day this meant they didn't have viable frequency for some Kapiti travellers who needed a more dependable solution when flights were delayed / cancelled. I for one keep thinking that this service would have been a success with a smaller aircraft operating more frequency as I've said before. But that time is sadly gone for now.
Plane mad!
 
tealnz
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:42 pm

georgiabill wrote:
If NZ were to consider a top off order for 789'S do you think NZ might consider routes from AKL to MNL,CPT or JNB,CTS or KIX,DEL or BOM, GIG or GRU although I think LIM would be a great place to connect with AV'S South and Central American flight network. I could see most of those routes I asked about working 3x or 4x. Not sure about the yield or potential for premium seats sales. But perhaps freight demand might off set any lack for premium priced services.
As mentioned before NZ is unlikely to order the 788 would the proposed Boeing NMA aircraft be of interest to NZ in the future? How much of Asia could NZ operate the 787-10 without taking a payload hit?

Looks as if the 14th frame they announced recently will be their final 789. NZ management have been pretty clear that they need an aircraft with more payload/range than the 789 for their 77E replacement. Even if a 789 could technically do ORD or NYC or GRU as an interim fix it hasn't got the ULH pax/freight capacity that NZ's business model requires.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4132
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 8:52 pm

tealnz wrote:
georgiabill wrote:
If NZ were to consider a top off order for 789'S do you think NZ might consider routes from AKL to MNL,CPT or JNB,CTS or KIX,DEL or BOM, GIG or GRU although I think LIM would be a great place to connect with AV'S South and Central American flight network. I could see most of those routes I asked about working 3x or 4x. Not sure about the yield or potential for premium seats sales. But perhaps freight demand might off set any lack for premium priced services.
As mentioned before NZ is unlikely to order the 788 would the proposed Boeing NMA aircraft be of interest to NZ in the future? How much of Asia could NZ operate the 787-10 without taking a payload hit?

Looks as if the 14th frame they announced recently will be their final 789. NZ management have been pretty clear that they need an aircraft with more payload/range than the 789 for their 77E replacement. Even if a 789 could technically do ORD or NYC or GRU as an interim fix it hasn't got the ULH pax/freight capacity that NZ's business model requires.

That makes sense for now.
14x 789
14x A359/77X

Total 28x long haul aircraft which is up from 20x before the 789 started arriving.

Depending on how the A35J goes in service NZ might even consider splitting between A359 and A35J with the A35J operating the AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO.
I really do think that this is Airbus' order to lose. The A350 has a few advantages for NZ's needs:
1) Ready earlier (and proven - not that there should be any issues with derivative 777)
2) More comfortable cabin - 3-3-3 in economy for ULH has got to be a consideration vs 3-4-3 on the 777
3) Not being dependant on one manufacturer (airlines get better deals when they can play both off against each other)
4) Isn't too much plane - the general consensus out there is that while the 778 is very capable, the 779 is the better plane - but doesn't have the same ULH range as the 8. The 8 risks becoming a bit of a 77L. The 779 on the other hand is too much plane for NZ's needs except for AKL-LAX-LHR. Purchase costs for the 77X are looking to be quite high too.

For NZ the transition could go as follows: 2019 All 789 delivered. A359 start arriving to replace 77E.
2020 by the end of 2020 all 77E replaced by A359.
2021 no change
2022 77W start being replaced by A359/A35J
2023 continuing
2024 all 77W gone.
Air NZs long haul fleet average age would be sitting around 5 years old in 2025.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:41 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Again you’re quoting media outlets as fact and don’t know the full story ...

It's a quote from Ian Collier (in charge of NZ regional). If we don't know the full story, perhaps another NZ insider could assist. Oh, wait ...
C.


The quote from Ian Collier is "We have been working closely with the Chambers and Council to grow awareness for the direct Kāpiti Coast – Auckland link ... We’re looking forward to ... engaging with the community".

So, perhaps take that for what it is. Really think beyond the ink of why these comments are being made. What's the purpose, what's the agenda, think strategic and read them as a commercial business with strong commercial agenda. He must be looking to achieve something.....

If you don't you're not really going to understand whats happening.

I'll leave it with you.

planemanofnz wrote:

NZ6 wrote:
“Happy” can mean anything ...

Content? Satisfied? Untroubled? Sure, but its totally inconsistent with you saying "hardly anyone is using it" and "that's the entire issue."
C.


Is it? a few months ago NZ was "Happy" - do you think NZ is always going to be an open book and tell their competitor (Jet Star), PPQ isn't all that and we're thinking about pulling it if it doesn't improve. Feel free to have some lead time and build market presence, find the equipment and make us look super bad and pick up the route and gain strong PR in the wider WLG region.

Ever thought the route wasn't a train smash but NZ's better off putting the equipment elsewhere?

How much planning and consideration went into this withdrawal; such as; what will JQ do, how do we react if we need to from PR/Ops/Sales perspective what else can be done to save, improve or make this more viable....

Unfortunately; you're seeing this far too, two dimensional

planemanofnz wrote:

NZ6 wrote:
How is NZ at fault if residents prefer to commute and save money ...

Because many residents were being spurred by NZ's various failings at PPQ - there are a whole host of examples, and one is reliability:

"Air New Zealand regional manager Ian Collier said the company accepted the criticism of many people who had said they couldn't rely on the local service."

See: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/kapiti-news/n ... d=11896317.

Cheers,

C.


And that article is 8 months old, quoting one person saying it's improved over 6 months so some of that anxiety is over a year old.

NZ will see forward bookings against trend, they have extensive market intelligence to understand issues. While yes, these issues exist. They also exist elsewhere on regional routes. PPQ has a more reliable alternative in WLG hence customers opt to use that. Whereas, GIS for example doesn't have that option.

The top 3 reasons people commute to WLG are - in no particular order.
1. Cheaper
2. Schedules.
3. Direct Service
4. Reliability
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:03 pm

Gemuser wrote:
From NZ 6 reply 198: "b) A platform levi on your rail ticket - probably called a 'development tax' or similar. SYD did this and I think still do"

Not quite right. All the stations on the "airport line" were built & operated by a private company who charged the levey to recover their costs. The NSW government built the actual rail line. There are 4 stations on the line: Greens Square, Mascot, Domestic & International, all underground. They all still have the levey even though the company went broke and the government took over the stations. I'm not sure who built/paid for the last station "Wolli Creek" the interchange with the rest of the suburban system.

Gemuser


Oh I wasn't aware of this, so I assume the levi now goes to the liquidator as they'll still be recovering the cost?

I still wouldn't be surprised to see AIAL charge AT for the rail line to enter AIAL's property.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:20 pm

NZ6 wrote:
Is it?

Yep - NZ said it was happy with PPQ demand, but you said that hardly anyone used the service, and that that was the entire issue. Definitely inconsistent. NZ didn't have to say that it was happy, nor did it have to attend these PPQ briefings - but, it did, and being happy with demand means that more people than "hardly anyone" were using the service. Any suggestion that there is a conspiracy behind the "happy" comment, just to throw off JQ, is reading way too much between the lines.

Cheers,

C.
Last edited by planemanofnz on Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:24 pm

I don't think that Andrew Crawford, CEO of Sounds Air, has been quoted in full. He made some statements which could be construed as negative to Kapiti Coast, but then he made a statement which was more positive:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/102 ... araparaumu

"Now that Air New Zealand are pulling out, we might have to review the situation," managing director Andrew Crawford said."

Which suggests at least another look. I think it's a pretty good route for Sounds, especially in view of the silence from Air Chathams - who would still get the guernsey. As the poster DavidByrne said, they have to do something with those new Saabs.

But if Sounds are also looking at bigger aircraft - and we know they've been investigating the idea - maybe the same rule applies to them, too. Image

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:50 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Is it?

Yep - NZ said it was happy with PPQ demand, but you said that hardly anyone used the service, and that that was the entire issue. Definitely inconsistent. NZ didn't have to say that it was happy, nor did it have to attend these PPQ briefings - but, it did, and being happy with demand means that more people than "hardly anyone" were using the service. Any suggestion that there is a conspiracy behind the "happy" comment, just to throw off JQ, is reading way too much between the lines.

I suspect that it came down to a whole host of factors other than flight loads and ticket costs, which perhaps other NZ insiders could confirm to you, given your superior connections to all of ours. For example, NZ failed to provide a consistent and reliable service for the majority of the service's life - while this may have improved in the final months of the service, six months is not enough lead-in time for the branding and reputational damage that'd been done to NZ at PPQ, to be fixed.

Cheers,

C.


So Ian Collier made some comments about being "Happy with Demand" and now that's set in concrete, Demand must be strong, no negotiation.We haven't yet talked yield. I mean heck, how much demand is there for $1 seats!

"Hardly anyone using it" is clearly just a figure of speech, it's not exactly a statistical quote is it. Yes demand is the entire issues, I stand by this comment.

The JQ comment was an example of WHY and airline won't be an open book. It wasn't a directive that JQ is a risk or that it was likely to become one. I was merely pointing out WHY an airline will play it's cards close it's chest providing ONE example.

"NZ failed to provide a consistent and reliable service for the majority of the service's life " This is subjective opinion of your own. Do you know what the region's satisfaction is regarding service readability or is that comment made on the back of one 6 month old Herald article? What is the long term OTP for PPQ?

"While this may have improved in the final months of the service, six months is not enough lead-in time for the branding and reputational damage that'd been done to NZ at PPQ, to be fixed. "

Again, what damage is done? can you prove there is branding / reputational damage and link this to why are people are not using it? Can you supply information to confirm this other than that one article. The article you've posted, which is dated July 2017 stated it's improved over the last 6 months. So it's not the "final months of service" it's been the final year of service, what are the forward trends looking like. Can you show is this please, as if the service has been more reliable over 1 year surely trends will be improving.

If not how long does NZ sit in the market?
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:59 pm

NZ6 wrote:
"Hardly anyone using it" is clearly just a figure of speech, it's not exactly a statistical quote ...

Ah, okay - well, it does seem that there is demand for the flights (as per NZ's comments). You pointed out yield though, which might well have rendered some of that demand redundant, and that's certainly a valid point on your part (particularly with the Regional Gotta Go fares). It'll be interesting to see whether PPQ will show the same level of demand and potential as WAG and WHK did, post-NZ's exit, should CV or someone else take over.

:crossfingers:

Cheers,

C.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:03 am

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Is it?

Yep - NZ said it was happy with PPQ demand, but you said that hardly anyone used the service, and that that was the entire issue. Definitely inconsistent. NZ didn't have to say that it was happy, nor did it have to attend these PPQ briefings - but, it did, and being happy with demand means that more people than "hardly anyone" were using the service. Any suggestion that there is a conspiracy behind the "happy" comment, just to throw off JQ, is reading way too much between the lines.

Cheers,

C.


Just another little comment or consideration. What do you think "demand" means to Mr Collier in this context? Is he likely to get up in front the region and say - we're happy with demand but you're paying enough for your tickets. I mean the perception of regional NZ already is that they are unfairly over charged for ticket prices.

- Is NZ charging what it needs by way of airfares to be profitable on this route?
- How many sales are they getting a positive yield?
- Ever considered working out how much "profitable demand" there is (or are just just looking at demand as a whole)
- How many people are actually using it for "profitable services"
- How many staff are using it
- How many loss leading gotta go fares are on there.

I'm not saying these points are applicable here or not. I'm just throwing more variables into the mix so you can understand it's not a simple as it may seem.

Happy with demand is quote made by someone who is an accountable public figure in NZ for the regions.

Using the article how you wish.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:11 am

planemanofnz wrote:
(particularly with the Regional Gotta Go fares). C.


How many of these are sold across the network each week?
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:16 am

NZ6 wrote:
- Is NZ charging what it needs by way of airfares to be profitable on this route?
- How many sales are they getting a positive yield?

I agree with you (as I already said above) - yield could well have been an issue here, particularly with (potentially) higher costs to cover than other carriers.

NZ6 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
(particularly with the Regional Gotta Go fares). C.


How many of these are sold across the network each week?

I'm not sure, but as per NZ, they are supposed to "address the issue of last minute prices" (which were typically the highest costing / the highest yielding)?

See: https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/regionalchanges.

Cheers,

C.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6255
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:42 am

Zkpilot wrote:
tealnz wrote:
georgiabill wrote:
If NZ were to consider a top off order for 789'S do you think NZ might consider routes from AKL to MNL,CPT or JNB,CTS or KIX,DEL or BOM, GIG or GRU although I think LIM would be a great place to connect with AV'S South and Central American flight network. I could see most of those routes I asked about working 3x or 4x. Not sure about the yield or potential for premium seats sales. But perhaps freight demand might off set any lack for premium priced services.
As mentioned before NZ is unlikely to order the 788 would the proposed Boeing NMA aircraft be of interest to NZ in the future? How much of Asia could NZ operate the 787-10 without taking a payload hit?

Looks as if the 14th frame they announced recently will be their final 789. NZ management have been pretty clear that they need an aircraft with more payload/range than the 789 for their 77E replacement. Even if a 789 could technically do ORD or NYC or GRU as an interim fix it hasn't got the ULH pax/freight capacity that NZ's business model requires.

That makes sense for now.
14x 789
14x A359/77X

Total 28x long haul aircraft which is up from 20x before the 789 started arriving.

Depending on how the A35J goes in service NZ might even consider splitting between A359 and A35J with the A35J operating the AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO.
I really do think that this is Airbus' order to lose. The A350 has a few advantages for NZ's needs:
1) Ready earlier (and proven - not that there should be any issues with derivative 777)
2) More comfortable cabin - 3-3-3 in economy for ULH has got to be a consideration vs 3-4-3 on the 777
3) Not being dependant on one manufacturer (airlines get better deals when they can play both off against each other)
4) Isn't too much plane - the general consensus out there is that while the 778 is very capable, the 779 is the better plane - but doesn't have the same ULH range as the 8. The 8 risks becoming a bit of a 77L. The 779 on the other hand is too much plane for NZ's needs except for AKL-LAX-LHR. Purchase costs for the 77X are looking to be quite high too.

For NZ the transition could go as follows: 2019 All 789 delivered. A359 start arriving to replace 77E.
2020 by the end of 2020 all 77E replaced by A359.
2021 no change
2022 77W start being replaced by A359/A35J
2023 continuing
2024 all 77W gone.
Air NZs long haul fleet average age would be sitting around 5 years old in 2025.


Except NZ have said 2022 for the 77E replacement cycle to begin, they are having 12 year heavy checks and repaints this year.

How much freight can the A359 lift? Compared to the current 77E? I agree it’s a fine aircraft.

NZ will have 29 long haul frames by end 2019, I’d imagine by the time atleast the 772’s are gone they will be over 30 32/33 maybe.

I’m not convinced they won’t add a few more 789’s, I do agree the 77X is expensive aswell, see what NZ can do.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:45 am

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
- Is NZ charging what it needs by way of airfares to be profitable on this route?
- How many sales are they getting a positive yield?

I agree with you (as I already said above) - yield could well have been an issue here, particularly with (potentially) higher costs to cover than other carriers.

C.


So please start to appreciate that everything isn't black and white. I think what you've started to understand here is "Happy with demand" could mean, there is demand however NZ isn't able to convert that into yield which can sustain a long term service, likely caused by the close proximity to WLG.

I'm not trying to pick every idea of yours to bits, but what I want you to start seeing is things are deeper in complexity than that what is just written in the media.


planemanofnz wrote:

NZ6 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
(particularly with the Regional Gotta Go fares). C.


How many of these are sold across the network each week?

I'm not sure, but as per NZ, they are supposed to "address the issue of last minute prices" (which were typically the highest costing / the highest yielding)?

See: https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/regionalchanges.

Cheers,

C.

Do you recall the timing?
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4132
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:24 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Looks as if the 14th frame they announced recently will be their final 789. NZ management have been pretty clear that they need an aircraft with more payload/range than the 789 for their 77E replacement. Even if a 789 could technically do ORD or NYC or GRU as an interim fix it hasn't got the ULH pax/freight capacity that NZ's business model requires.

That makes sense for now.
14x 789
14x A359/77X

Total 28x long haul aircraft which is up from 20x before the 789 started arriving.

Depending on how the A35J goes in service NZ might even consider splitting between A359 and A35J with the A35J operating the AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO.
I really do think that this is Airbus' order to lose. The A350 has a few advantages for NZ's needs:
1) Ready earlier (and proven - not that there should be any issues with derivative 777)
2) More comfortable cabin - 3-3-3 in economy for ULH has got to be a consideration vs 3-4-3 on the 777
3) Not being dependant on one manufacturer (airlines get better deals when they can play both off against each other)
4) Isn't too much plane - the general consensus out there is that while the 778 is very capable, the 779 is the better plane - but doesn't have the same ULH range as the 8. The 8 risks becoming a bit of a 77L. The 779 on the other hand is too much plane for NZ's needs except for AKL-LAX-LHR. Purchase costs for the 77X are looking to be quite high too.

For NZ the transition could go as follows: 2019 All 789 delivered. A359 start arriving to replace 77E.
2020 by the end of 2020 all 77E replaced by A359.
2021 no change
2022 77W start being replaced by A359/A35J
2023 continuing
2024 all 77W gone.
Air NZs long haul fleet average age would be sitting around 5 years old in 2025.


Except NZ have said 2022 for the 77E replacement cycle to begin, they are having 12 year heavy checks and repaints this year.

How much freight can the A359 lift? Compared to the current 77E? I agree it’s a fine aircraft.

NZ will have 29 long haul frames by end 2019, I’d imagine by the time atleast the 772’s are gone they will be over 30 32/33 maybe.

I’m not convinced they won’t add a few more 789’s, I do agree the 77X is expensive aswell, see what NZ can do.


All depends on fuel prices and I guess what sort of deal they can get on A359. Could also be a case of bluffing (especially QF) before launching ORD and EWR (although ORD is expected to be announced later this year).

Let's say for a moment that they do keep all 77E until 2022, that doesn't mean they can't get started with A359 before then and use the extra capacity for expansion (the 77E is still a very capable aircraft just not very cost-effective for ULH).

Sorry didn't add up the 77W fleet correctly 15x 777 to be replaced.
So 15x A350 and 14x 789

The A359 is larger than a 77E by about 15-20 passengers (depending on configuration) but otherwise is an almost perfect replacement for the 77E.

B772ER

Cargo:
Total volume 5,330 cu ft
(151 cu m) includes up to
six pallets, 14 LD-3
containers (or 32 LD-3 only), plus 600 cu ft
(17 cu m) bulk cargo.


A350-900

Cargo:
Total volume 6 088 ft³cu ft (172.39cu m)
includes up to
11 pallets, 36 LD-3
containers, plus 400 cu ft
(11.3 cu m) bulk cargo.

I do think that having a fleet of 14-15 A350 does mean they could split it between the A359 and the A35J as there is enough commonality between them. With the increasing fracturing of the destinations it is becoming less and less important to have the larger aircraft for the most part (LAX-LHR could still use that of course).
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:33 am

NZ6 wrote:
... please start to appreciate that everything isn't black and white.

Already do, hence taking issue with your statement that the "entire" problem was that "hardly anyone" was using the PPQ flight. :)

Cheers,

C.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:52 am

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
... please start to appreciate that everything isn't black and white.

Already do, hence taking issue with your statement that the "entire" problem was that "hardly anyone" was using the PPQ flight. :)

Cheers,

C.


What’s the load factor on the route?
 
PA515
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 2:12 am

Air NZ's next ATR 72-600 (ZK-MVR) has been painted. No msn or test registration details yet.
https://digitalairliners.com/category/tls-spotter-log/

Also, the Mo-Fr TRG-WLG / WLG-TRG will not be five Q300s as I suspected. There will still be one ATR, plus four Q300s.

The ATR is:
WLG-TRG 0855/1010, TRG-WLG 1045/1205 (was 0835/0950, 1025/1145)

The additional Q300 is:
AKL-TRG 0610/0650, TRG-WLG 0715/0835, WLG-TRG 0940/1055, TRG-AKL 1120/1155

The other Q300s are:
TRG-WLG 0645/0805 (was 0620/0740)
WLG-TRG 1215/1330, TRG-WLG 1355/1515 (no change)
WLG-TRG 1425/1540, TRG-WLG 1605/1725 (was 1545/1700, 1725/1845)
WLG-TRG 1800/1915 (was 1920/2035)

The increased use of 320s on WLG-CHC / CHC-WLG (up from two return flights Mo-Fr to seven) frees up three ATRs.

The next two ATR 72-500s to leave the fleet are both in maintenance at NSN. ZK-MCB since 09 Mar and ZK-MCU since 25 Feb. When advertised for sale ZK-MCB was said to be available Jun 2018, ZK-MCU Jul 2018 and ZK-MCY Nov 2018.

PA515
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4782
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 2:29 am

From NZ6 reply 208:
Oh I wasn't aware of this, so I assume the levi now goes to the liquidator as they'll still be recovering the cost?

I still wouldn't be surprised to see AIAL charge AT for the rail line to enter AIAL's property.
I'm not 100% sure but I think the NSW government brought the stations from the liquidator, at a liquidation price, but kept the levey to recover its cost.

Surely the Auckland Council or the NZ government could exercise the right of "eminent domain"? If it was in Oz that would basically limit the costs to AIAL costs, especially if the approach & station(s) were underground.

Gemuser
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:16 am

WLG's two-way traffic flow with China, according to OAG, was just 31,000 passengers in 2017 - behind NAN, but ahead of CBR and OOL. Although the numbers are small, as "the leading unserved markets in the South Pacific region for a direct Chinese service" (according to anna.aero), and given WLG's runway length, perhaps a Chinese carrier will consider a China - NAN - WLG service in the future? Perhaps Fiji will have more relaxed transit visa requirements than Australia?

See: http://www.anna.aero/2018/03/07/chinese ... 2010-2017/.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:42 am

Yikes - it seems that the NZ 787 engine issues can't be resolved soon enough! Newshub is reporting more complaints about Hi-Fly, including:

1. Head-rests falling off:

Image

2. Rubbish not cleaned:

Image

See: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/20 ... bbish.html.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:47 am

The Independent (UK) is calling NZ "a good candidate" to launch AKL - CPT - no sources are given, and I'd imagine this is a bit far-fetched?

See: http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/new ... 48671.html.

Cheers,

C.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3437
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:59 am

planemanofnz wrote:
The Independent (UK) is calling NZ "a good candidate" to launch AKL - CPT - no sources are given, and I'd imagine this is a bit far-fetched?

See: http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/new ... 48671.html.

Cheers,

C.


As others have pointed out recently, South Africa's recent decisions about appropriating the land-holdings of white farmers and denying Mandela's Truth and Reconciliation Commission's work towards balance... there is no show of this happening.
come visit the south pacific
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 4:08 am

Motorhussy wrote:
As others have pointed out recently, South Africa's recent decisions about appropriating the land-holdings of white farmers and denying Mandela's Truth and Reconciliation Commission's work towards balance... there is no show of this happening.

Aside from any economic and/or political issues in South Africa, would there not also be potential restrictions on the regulatory approval of such a flight, given how far south it would fly?

Cheers,

C.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6255
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:42 am

Zkpilot wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
That makes sense for now.
14x 789
14x A359/77X

Total 28x long haul aircraft which is up from 20x before the 789 started arriving.

Depending on how the A35J goes in service NZ might even consider splitting between A359 and A35J with the A35J operating the AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO.
I really do think that this is Airbus' order to lose. The A350 has a few advantages for NZ's needs:
1) Ready earlier (and proven - not that there should be any issues with derivative 777)
2) More comfortable cabin - 3-3-3 in economy for ULH has got to be a consideration vs 3-4-3 on the 777
3) Not being dependant on one manufacturer (airlines get better deals when they can play both off against each other)
4) Isn't too much plane - the general consensus out there is that while the 778 is very capable, the 779 is the better plane - but doesn't have the same ULH range as the 8. The 8 risks becoming a bit of a 77L. The 779 on the other hand is too much plane for NZ's needs except for AKL-LAX-LHR. Purchase costs for the 77X are looking to be quite high too.

For NZ the transition could go as follows: 2019 All 789 delivered. A359 start arriving to replace 77E.
2020 by the end of 2020 all 77E replaced by A359.
2021 no change
2022 77W start being replaced by A359/A35J
2023 continuing
2024 all 77W gone.
Air NZs long haul fleet average age would be sitting around 5 years old in 2025.


Except NZ have said 2022 for the 77E replacement cycle to begin, they are having 12 year heavy checks and repaints this year.

How much freight can the A359 lift? Compared to the current 77E? I agree it’s a fine aircraft.

NZ will have 29 long haul frames by end 2019, I’d imagine by the time atleast the 772’s are gone they will be over 30 32/33 maybe.

I’m not convinced they won’t add a few more 789’s, I do agree the 77X is expensive aswell, see what NZ can do.


All depends on fuel prices and I guess what sort of deal they can get on A359. Could also be a case of bluffing (especially QF) before launching ORD and EWR (although ORD is expected to be announced later this year).

Let's say for a moment that they do keep all 77E until 2022, that doesn't mean they can't get started with A359 before then and use the extra capacity for expansion (the 77E is still a very capable aircraft just not very cost-effective for ULH).

Sorry didn't add up the 77W fleet correctly 15x 777 to be replaced.
So 15x A350 and 14x 789

The A359 is larger than a 77E by about 15-20 passengers (depending on configuration) but otherwise is an almost perfect replacement for the 77E.

B772ER

Cargo:
Total volume 5,330 cu ft
(151 cu m) includes up to
six pallets, 14 LD-3
containers (or 32 LD-3 only), plus 600 cu ft
(17 cu m) bulk cargo.


A350-900

Cargo:
Total volume 6 088 ft³cu ft (172.39cu m)
includes up to
11 pallets, 36 LD-3
containers, plus 400 cu ft
(11.3 cu m) bulk cargo.

I do think that having a fleet of 14-15 A350 does mean they could split it between the A359 and the A35J as there is enough commonality between them. With the increasing fracturing of the destinations it is becoming less and less important to have the larger aircraft for the most part (LAX-LHR could still use that of course).


Sure, unless there is a downturn they likely won’t drop any 77E’s before 2022, and totally the replacement could start arriving before 2022 to be used for expansion, 789’s 10-14 are all expansion, I thought they had an option for 2020 aswell?

What does the 35J lift compared to the 77W? Weight wise?

Your overall numbers are quite conservative, if the market keeps going as is they could have closer to 35 long haul aircraft by the time the whole 777 fleet is replaced.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:52 am

It looks like NZ's issues in Samoa are on-going, as per reports in the NBR today. No doubt, these issues are being spurred by OL's losses, which are reportedly "substantial and growing every month." OL is so desperate, that it's now requesting that its APW landing fees be waived. It'll be interesting to see how long OL lasts at AKL, and if NZ will up the ante at APW.

See:
- https://www.nbr.co.nz/subscribe/213659.
- http://sobserver.ws/en/11_03_2018/local ... %80%9D.htm.
- http://www.sobserver.ws/en/10_03_2018/e ... irways.htm.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4132
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:04 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Yikes - it seems that the NZ 787 engine issues can't be resolved soon enough! Newshub is reporting more complaints about Hi-Fly, including:

1. Head-rests falling off:

Image

2. Rubbish not cleaned:

Image

See: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/20 ... bbish.html.

Cheers,

C.

You’ll be pleased to know that NZ has indicated to the industry that one 789 will be back any day now and another by the beginning of April meaning the hifly aircraft can leave (providing there are no more issues). ZK-NZE will still be out for the foreseeable future.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6255
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:40 am

Zkpilot wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Yikes - it seems that the NZ 787 engine issues can't be resolved soon enough! Newshub is reporting more complaints about Hi-Fly, including:

1. Head-rests falling off:

Image

2. Rubbish not cleaned:

Image

See: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/20 ... bbish.html.

Cheers,

C.

You’ll be pleased to know that NZ has indicated to the industry that one 789 will be back any day now and another by the beginning of April meaning the hifly aircraft can leave (providing there are no more issues). ZK-NZE will still be out for the foreseeable future.


ZK-NZD has been back for almost a week now. Looks like ETOPS 330 will be reinstated soon, 789’s due back to EZE from April 6th unless they are using 240mins?
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:24 am

This rare beauty landed in AKL today, carrying the Vietnamese PM on his official visit to New Zealand:

Image

See: https://www.instagram.com/nzaaspotter/.

Could you imagine NZ's reaction if, as part of the visit, VN announced year-round SGN - AKL flights? :lol:

The ambassador said there remains much room for the two countries to boost aviation and tourism links.

See: https://en.vietnamplus.vn/pms-visit-to- ... 127689.vnp.

Cheers,

C.
 
NZ321
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:34 am

Love to see VN at AKL - bring it on! Be interesting if the two airlines agreed to work together. Not holding my breath though and from memory I don't think VN has a particularly good reputation for reliability. Love the livery. So distinctive.
Plane mad!
 
NZ321
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:49 am

Re CV taking on PPQ the issue I have a bit with CV is their appetite for older equipment. Not sure of the condition of their recently purchased Saabs. Any reports? If Sounds were to purchase the B1900 this seems to be the better size for PPQ to be able to sustain ops through the quieter times of the day. Could be, for instance:

PPQ 0630 - AKL 0745
AKL 0830 - PPQ 0945

PPQ 1015 AKL 1125
AKL 1240 PPQ 1355

PPQ 1425 AKL1540
AKL 1615 PPQ 1725

PPQ 1800 AKL 1915
AKL 1950 PPQ 2105

4 flights at 19 seats each is 76 seats which is 1.5 DH8 at 50 seats. 2 x DH8 seemed to be more than NZ could justify for the route given their overheads.

And it provides the frequency to be attractive and offers reasonable connections in Auckland to and from an array of international and domestic flights. This is the kind of frequency that IMHO would make it attractive to business travelers and those connecting rather than a single service a day which - if delayed or cancelled creates significant mayhem for travelers (those have been the conversations in my family re the PPQ flight from NZ). Schedule could then reduce to 2 - 3 x daily in weekends. If Sounds were smart they would tie it in with a service to the South Island to offer AKL originating Sounds fliers a connection in PPQ and involve a 2nd aircraft to allow for a swap of equipment which would also limit impact from delays caused by a single frame going tech. Far fetched? Probably. But PPQ is well situated for a regional carrier with a proven profile in central New Zealand serving the Marlborough /Wellington region. :)

I think there are other opportunities waiting for regionals to move in and offer a compelling reason for NZ travelers to chose an alternative to NZ flights involving a substantial detour from their intended destination.
Plane mad!
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:00 am

NZ321 wrote:
Love to see VN at AKL

It's a real possibility - they've been consistently profitable, consistently expansionary, and they'll have 789's freed up from the deliveries of their 78J's from 2019 (with the 78J's being deployed to Australia). With JQ having launched MEL / SYD - SGN in 2017 (while NZ only maintains a low-frequency and seasonal service on AKL - SGN), VN might view AKL as a less-competitive, and logical next step. That being said, BNE has no flight to Vietnam, so they might go there instead.

It's interesting that during the Vietnamese Prime Minister's visit here this week, "the two sides will hold a business forum in Auckland city, and the event is expected to attract a number of big enterprises from the countries" - could NZ and/or VN be a part of this? Further, Vietnam's ambassador to New Zealand has explicitly highlighted aviation links as an area for development, as "... the number of New Zealand visitors to the Southeast Asian nation has soared by 41 percent."

See: http://english.vov.vn/diplomacy/pms-vis ... 370225.vov.

NZ321 wrote:
Be interesting if the two airlines agreed to work together

Please, no - not another monopoly long-haul destination scooped up by NZ into a JV! :talktothehand:

Cheers,

C.
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:00 am

Zkpilot wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Yikes - it seems that the NZ 787 engine issues can't be resolved soon enough! Newshub is reporting more complaints about Hi-Fly, including:

1. Head-rests falling off:

Image

2. Rubbish not cleaned:

Image

See: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/20 ... bbish.html.

Cheers,

C.

You’ll be pleased to know that NZ has indicated to the industry that one 789 will be back any day now and another by the beginning of April meaning the hifly aircraft can leave (providing there are no more issues). ZK-NZE will still be out for the foreseeable future.


It seems that ZK-NZE was talked about a while back, annoying some pro Rolls people, or were they NZ insiders?
NZ authorities silent about it's airworthiness. In a forum this size, surely someone knows the status of this plane.
Please tell us. (Things happen, it's no one persons fault, why the secret?) Strange, because normally, if such a
massive asset ($$$) was rendered unable to earn revenue, the first to know would be the stock exchange, surely?
Last edited by Deepinsider on Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:12 am

NZ321 wrote:
I have a bit with CV is their appetite for older equipment. Not sure of the condition of their recently purchased Saabs. Any reports?

Their two Saab 340's delivered in January used to fly for 'Skydive Guam' - make of that, what you will. :lol:

See: http://nzcivair.blogspot.co.nz/2018/01/ ... month.html.

The latest plane in the CV fleet to be fully painted is ZK-CIZ, which was photographed at AKL on Saturday:

Image

See: http://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.co.nz/2018/0 ... rvice.html.

Cheers,

C.
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:38 am

Deepinsider wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Yikes - it seems that the NZ 787 engine issues can't be resolved soon enough! Newshub is reporting more complaints about Hi-Fly, including:

1. Head-rests falling off:

Image

2. Rubbish not cleaned:

Image

See: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/20 ... bbish.html.

Cheers,

C.

You’ll be pleased to know that NZ has indicated to the industry that one 789 will be back any day now and another by the beginning of April meaning the hifly aircraft can leave (providing there are no more issues). ZK-NZE will still be out for the foreseeable future.


It seems that ZK-NZE was talked about a while back, annoying some pro Rolls people, or were they NZ insiders?
NZ authorities silent about it's airworthiness. In a forum this size, surely someone knows the status of this plane.
Please tell us. (Things happen, it's no one persons fault, why the secret?) Strange, because normally, if such a
massive asset ($$$) was rendered unable to earn revenue, the first to know would be the stock exchange, surely?


I forgot to mention that my comments assumed serviceable engines were available, or imminent.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 11537
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:46 am

mariner wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

Incidentally, Silverdale/Orewa does have a small, functioning airport, North Shore Aerodrome, which Barrier Air uses, so I'm not sure of your point.

mariner


I could guarantee that the vast majority of people living in Auckland don't have a clue that this airport exists or that it offers scheduled flights.
 
tealnz
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:32 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:

How much freight can the A359 lift? Compared to the current 77E? I agree it’s a fine aircraft.


I don't know about the 77E but: "The A359 and 77W will lift near identical payload over 6500 nm, below that the 77W carries more, above that the A359 carries more". That from Zeke last year based on CX experience with the two types.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018 6:14 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
I could guarantee that the vast majority of people living in Auckland don't have a clue that this airport exists or that it offers scheduled flights.


Oh, probably.

I'm just saying that it's there.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8102
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:08 am

I checked the loads for PPQ over a couple of days and they were literally half empty for all bar one flight on the day of departure or 1-2 days prior. The AM flight was "full" in one direction but the saleable config was reduced by a substantial amount, not sure of the reason - but there was a cyclone around, who knows?... They would be able to fill an extra Q300 between pretty much any of the main ports, a better use IMO. There are passengers, but it needs to be operated by 1) smaller aircraft and 2) reduced service. That said CV did boost passenger traffic for WAG so they might be able to do the same for PPQ. A 19 seater (metro) would be about right to ensure 2-3 full services a day.and frequency.
Flown to 147 Airports in 59 Countries on 81 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:15 am

NZ6 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
... please start to appreciate that everything isn't black and white.

Already do, hence taking issue with your statement that the "entire" problem was that "hardly anyone" was using the PPQ flight. :)

Cheers,

C.


What’s the load factor on the route?


aerorobnz wrote:
I checked the loads for PPQ over a couple of days and they were literally half empty for all bar one flight on the day of departure or 1-2 days prior. The AM flight was "full" in one direction but the saleable config was reduced by a substantial amount, not sure of the reason - but there was a cyclone around, who knows?... They would be able to fill an extra Q300 between pretty much any of the main ports, a better use IMO. There are passengers, but it needs to be operated by 1) smaller aircraft and 2) reduced service. That said CV did boost passenger traffic for WAG so they might be able to do the same for PPQ. A 19 seater (metro) would be about right to ensure 2-3 full services a day.and frequency.


What we do know is that NZ said as recently as a few months ago that it was happy with demand, and, according to the former PPQ owner, "Air NZ have always said to me that if they're over 60 per cent loading they're happy — and last year it has been well over 80 per cent". Your snapshot is interesting though, aerorobnz.

See: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=12011794.

Cheers,

C.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:04 am

planemanofnz wrote:
What we do know is that NZ said as recently as a few months ago that it was happy with demand, and, according to the former PPQ owner, "Air NZ have always said to me that if they're over 60 per cent loading they're happy — and last year it has been well over 80 per cent".

Once again, we're trying to second-guess what the airline meant by "happy" in this context. I think that you do yourself a disservice by analysing statements and drawing firm conclusions when the context is not clear and when we have a significant lack of relevant information. In addition, the "happy" quote is second hand from the owner of the airport - hardly a disinterested party I'd have thought. We don't know if the "happy" statement was an unguarded casual comment in passing, when it was made, whether circumstances have changed since then, or whether it was a formal written statement that could be given appropriate weight.

I know for sure that if I was held to every casual comment I made in an unguarded moment in my day-to-day work activities, I'd be perceived as a complete mess of contradictions. Arguably, statements by airline execs made in a similar context that were not formal, official statements, should also be treated with great caution. In particular, I don't believe they can or should be picked over for their meaning over a period of several days like we have a tendency to do here!
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:39 am

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Already do, hence taking issue with your statement that the "entire" problem was that "hardly anyone" was using the PPQ flight. :)

Cheers,

C.


What’s the load factor on the route?


aerorobnz wrote:
I checked the loads for PPQ over a couple of days and they were literally half empty for all bar one flight on the day of departure or 1-2 days prior. The AM flight was "full" in one direction but the saleable config was reduced by a substantial amount, not sure of the reason - but there was a cyclone around, who knows?... They would be able to fill an extra Q300 between pretty much any of the main ports, a better use IMO. There are passengers, but it needs to be operated by 1) smaller aircraft and 2) reduced service. That said CV did boost passenger traffic for WAG so they might be able to do the same for PPQ. A 19 seater (metro) would be about right to ensure 2-3 full services a day.and frequency.


What we do know is that NZ said as recently as a few months ago that it was happy with demand, and, according to the former PPQ owner, "Air NZ have always said to me that if they're over 60 per cent loading they're happy — and last year it has been well over 80 per cent". Your snapshot is interesting though, aerorobnz.

See: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=12011794.

Cheers,

C.


Here we go again, you still haven't got this one.

Let me explain this in the simplist way possible, the numbers used are just round numbers and don't reflect reality in any way. I'm using these numbers by way of explaining it

- NZ has demand for 1,500 seats PPQ / AKL vv each week = Happy with this demand
- NZ adds 1,000 seats into the market each week for capture this demand and make money.
- NZ needs to sell each of the 1,000 seats at $100 to be profitable
- NZ is only able to sell seats at $75 due to factors such as the close proximity of WLG, it's not converting demand.

As the price point needs to be $75 to capture the demand and with the actual price point being over this, the entire issue is people are not using it.

As I said last week, Happy with demand can mean anything. :banghead:

This isn't the only issue but hopefully you can see why I'm saying you need to look beyond single quotes and media articles. Commercial Aviation is a complex business, the SLT who are making these decisions are earning well into 6 figures so please appreciate there's more than just playing with little integers and everything turning out positive.

You can look at a single load factor, or a range of load factors for this week. You can jump of board and look around. Let's say it's full, it's full of $50 seats, half what NZ needs. Is it successful because it's full?

What's the long term load factor, what's the booking curve look like, what's the loads -90, -30, -7, -1 (days) etc?
 
thegrandvizier
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:01 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:55 am

I've heard a rumour Timaru will be next to be let go by Auntie Koru. Seems a coincidence (not) that Chat's have some new capacity. Also, I believe they have purchased NZ's 733 simulator.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:05 am

NZ6 wrote:
This isn't the only issue ...

Finally! Yes, so the entire issue is not that hardly anyone uses the service - it's not that black and white.

Cheers,

C.
Last edited by planemanofnz on Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:06 am

thegrandvizier wrote:
I've heard a rumour Timaru will be next to be let go by Auntie Koru. Seems a coincidence (not) that Chat's have some new capacity. Also, I believe they have purchased NZ's 733 simulator.

It'd be a shame for NZ to pull out of TIU, given that they TIU's terminal upgrade will be finished in April.

Separately, where will CV fly 733's? AFAIK, CHT's runway cannot handle them without upgrade works.

Cheers,

C.
 
zkncj
Posts: 2979
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:17 am

planemanofnz wrote:
thegrandvizier wrote:
I've heard a rumour Timaru will be next to be let go by Auntie Koru. Seems a coincidence (not) that Chat's have some new capacity. Also, I believe they have purchased NZ's 733 simulator.

It'd be a shame for NZ to pull out of TIU, given that they TIU's terminal upgrade will be finished in April.

Separately, where will CV fly 733's? AFAIK, CHT's runway cannot handle them without upgrade works.

Cheers,

C.


There was an article about CV looking into purchasing an 737 fleet last year, on the basis that they could do it if CHT got its runway upgraded funded by the Government.

AS has now retired there 734 Combi's which could be prefect for what they need to replace the CV580s.
 
NZ6
Posts: 521
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - March 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:00 am

planemanofnz wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
This isn't the only issue ...

Finally! Yes, so the entire issue is not that hardly anyone uses the service - it's not that black and white.

Cheers,

C.


Really? - Are you intentionally not trying to learn it or just don't want to / can't face being wrong? - Serious question.

That is the issue, the factors to why aren't black and white.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12

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