PA515
Posts: 1347
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:11 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Luxon again singled out GIG and GRU this week as being possible with NZ's new planes. In light of this, can someone tell me why the 772 can't already do AKL - GRU? It's virtually the same distance as AKL - IAH, and follows virtually the same ETOPS path as AKL - EZE, both of which are or have been flown by the 772. Am I missing something?

ICAO EDTO Module 6 -Flight Operations considerations, initially sent to me by 'sunrisevalley' in Feb 2015.
http://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2014-EDTO Scroll down and 'Click' EDTO Module 6 -Flight Operations considerations.

Pages 98-100 have an example flight plan for a Trent 895 77E EZE-AKL which is not an identical EDTO scenario to IAH-AKL as additional reserve fuel is required due to the lack of enroute alternates.

zkncj wrote:
Only 4x 77E we're converted to ETDO 330minutes - and with the 789 fleet now lost that certification for the time being the current 4x 77Es are going to be pretty well tied up with flying flights that need the 330. I would expect the 789 to take an while to regain its status for long over water journeys with the FAA.

As per page 85 the fire suppression modification is for up to 302 minutes.

PA515
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:39 am

SelandiaBaru wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Still waiting for someone to tell me which aspect of the proposed codeshare is actually anti-competitive. I just can't see it myself - we tend to assume that any arrangement between airlines is to the detriment of the consumer, but I'm struggling to figure how that might be the case here.


So Qantas Group have Jetstar operating in NZ with A320 and Q300, these flights often have QF code-shares. Given the Q300 operation is marginal and operates where NZ does I can't see how QF code-sharing on NZ metal will help the viability of the Jetstar Q300.

OK, so in that case the solution would be to apply a requirement that JQ could not reduce routes or frequencies on any of the routes that QF codeshares with NZ on. I'm struggling a little to see that ComCom could impose conditions on a third party that was not part of the application, notwithstanding that it is a "related party" to QF. Is there a precedent for that?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:56 am

DavidByrne wrote:
OK, so in that case the solution would be to apply a requirement that JQ could not reduce routes or frequencies on any of the routes that QF codeshares with NZ on. I'm struggling a little to see that ComCom could impose conditions on a third party that was not part of the application, notwithstanding that it is a "related party" to QF. Is there a precedent for that?


Yeah I can't really see that happening and hence I feel the competitive landscape may be the poorer for it.
 
getluv
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:06 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
If you argue HBA and CBR rely more on connections whereas the others don't, would NZ or QF ever actually have an interest in flying there direct from NZ or is it better served for the customer if there is an alliance in place for the connection but both carriers are independent on the Tasman?

This passenger would definitely be better served by a 3x weekly nonstop AKL-HBA than a daily AKL-SYD/MEL-HBA transfer with baggage clearance and recheck-in en route - and at SYD even a bus trip across the airport for added pleasure (not). I suspect that NZ is more concerned about what's good for NZ's bottom line (which I don't quibble with), and in particular will have weighed the potential of being first mover in the HBA/CBR-Americas (without an en route terminal transfer and inbound double baggage handling) market against the value of the QF codeshare. So far, nonstop services have not met whatever criteria are set for opening new routes, but I live in hope!


If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

Further to this, on most routes QF usually have higher frequencies than VA.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
NZ6
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:24 am

getluv wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

This passenger would definitely be better served by a 3x weekly nonstop AKL-HBA than a daily AKL-SYD/MEL-HBA transfer with baggage clearance and recheck-in en route - and at SYD even a bus trip across the airport for added pleasure (not). I suspect that NZ is more concerned about what's good for NZ's bottom line (which I don't quibble with), and in particular will have weighed the potential of being first mover in the HBA/CBR-Americas (without an en route terminal transfer and inbound double baggage handling) market against the value of the QF codeshare. So far, nonstop services have not met whatever criteria are set for opening new routes, but I live in hope!


If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

Further to this, on most routes QF usually have higher frequencies than VA.


Took the words out of my mouth, frequency vs direct is 100% down to what market segment you target or get.

Business = Frequency and or convenience including connections
Leisure = Cost sensitive and direct
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:26 am

getluv wrote:
If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

Most business travellers would welcome a nonstop on the three days a week that they could fly nonstop, and grudgingly accept a transfer on the days they can't.

getluv wrote:
I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

My recent experience on AKL-MEL-HBA on VA involved at least a half-hour queue in the zoo that is MEL check-in, despite the fact that I already had checked in on-line and all I needed was to "bag drop". If you'd told me that I also had to catch a bus across the airport I'd have been a seriously unhappy camper. I don't know if it's standard practice for VA to do this, but previous trips on JQ have been so much more efficient. But still required me to collect my bags at an intermediate point, which is my main gripe about transfers.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
zkncj
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:29 am

DavidByrne wrote:
.

getluv wrote:
I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

My recent experience on AKL-MEL-HBA on VA involved at least a half-hour queue in the zoo that is MEL check-in, despite the fact that I already had checked in on-line and all I needed was to "bag drop". If you'd told me that I also had to catch a bus across the airport I'd have been a seriously unhappy camper. I don't know if it's standard practice for VA to do this, but previous trips on JQ have been so much more efficient. But still required me to collect my bags at an intermediate point, which is my main gripe about transfers.


The VA bag drops in SYD and MEL are beyond an joke at peak times, I've waited mutplie times over 30minutes in SYD Domestic to drop by bags. How can an airline of VA's size get ti so wrong?

Although its not the worst - I've once had to wait 2hours in an bag drop line at VCE with AZ for an there single A320 flight departing.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:44 am

tealnz wrote:
Doesn't exactly sound as they're just checking it out for trans-Tasman hops.


No it doesn't. Although I'm sure SQ will be interested. Would love to know more about the A350's performance from NZWN and what might be achievable.
It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:53 am

tealnz wrote:
Another piece of news: Eric Schulz from Airbus has mentioned possible NZ interest in an even longer range version of the A350 that they are developing as a candidate for the QF ULH requirement: "Air New Zealand Ltd. could also consider a longer-range version of the A350, Airbus’s Schulz said" (Bloomberg).

Any clues as to the background? As far as I know the current A359 can comfortably handle any of the ULH routes Luxon has mentioned, including New York. No hint NZ are thinking about London non-stop? It's hard to imagine it working.

It’s an A350-1000ULR that Airbus are referring to. Can potentially do almost the same range as an A359ULR (due to larger wings) while carrying up to 20% more passengers. Basically almost as big as a 779 but with more range. Unlikely NZ would buy them as the normal A35J can do what they need and the A359ULR can do any trickier missions. But for QF it would be of immense interest as NY is 2 hours addition from SYD than from AKL.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6457
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:58 am

The Australian Airport Association has weighed into the QF/NZ codeshare deal saying it will lessen competition and potentially constraining the Trans-Tasman market calling for regulators to intervene

The Australian Airports Association has called on regulators in Australia and in New Zealand to make sure the agreement won’t impact travellers or Virgin Australia, saying the deal would likely lessen competition on both sides of the Tasman.
“There are a limited number of airlines operating in both countries, and between them, so it is important there remains a healthy level of competition in the market,” said association chief executive Caroline Wilkie.
“This arrangement seems likely to make it harder for Virgin Australia to compete in the Australian market.”
It comes after Qantas (QAN) and Air New Zealand said they’d will remain competitive on trans-Tasman routes as they announced a deal to that will add 115 new domestic routes in Australia and New Zealand on Friday.


VA has also issued a statement saying it was bad news for customers

A spokesperson for Virgin Australia, which has an interlining agreement with Air New Zealand up for renegotiation in October, said last week that the deal was “bad news for customers” and that it would stifle competition.
“We are particularly concerned this arrangement will further strengthen Qantas’ dominant position in the Australian market to the detriment of both Virgin Australia and the Australian travelling public,” Ms Wilkie said today.
“The ability to distribute each other’s passengers on the other side of the Tasman will improve the market position of Qantas and Air New Zealand and make it harder for Virgin to compete on trans-Tasman routes.
“It is important to ensure both the Australian and New Zealand economies enjoy the tourism benefits of easy and affordable trans-Tasman travel and this can only be ensured if there are more carriers, not less, flying these routes.”


https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... um=Twitter
Forum Moderator
 
getluv
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:59 am

DavidByrne wrote:
getluv wrote:
If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

Most business travellers would welcome a nonstop on the three days a week that they could fly nonstop, and grudgingly accept a transfer on the days they can't.

getluv wrote:
I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

My recent experience on AKL-MEL-HBA on VA involved at least a half-hour queue in the zoo that is MEL check-in, despite the fact that I already had checked in on-line and all I needed was to "bag drop". If you'd told me that I also had to catch a bus across the airport I'd have been a seriously unhappy camper. I don't know if it's standard practice for VA to do this, but previous trips on JQ have been so much more efficient. But still required me to collect my bags at an intermediate point, which is my main gripe about transfers.


You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA. QF process is so much easier, you clear security on the international side and go straight to airside of T3. Even if you were flying SYD-MEL without a transfer with VA you would think you’re flying in a LCC.

JQ you know that you have to pick your bags up and make your own way when you book.

Re frequency: QF fly 5x day on most days between MEL-HBA, and there are several flights a day to CBR. 1 flight a 3x a week at 11am won’t cut it.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:03 am

zkncj wrote:
Surely any return trip between New Zealand and Asia for less than NZD$1000/return would be loss making?

On an $500NZD oneway fare there isn't much room to make an profit, with increasing fuel prices and ever increaseing costs to use AKL.

3U is even cheaper than HU, at NZD 602 return for AKL - CTU (which is longer than AKL - SZX), with taxes being NZD 102 of that amount!

See: http://global.sichuanair.com/News/Detail/5059.

Most airlines offer sub-NZD 1000/return Asian flights, with many European flights only ~NZD 1500/return, so the break-even must be lower?

Back to the Chinese routes, I do wonder how many of them will be sustainable if/when subsidies are pulled - I could see GS to XIY dropped.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6457
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:07 am

Forum Moderator
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6236
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:16 am

getluv wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
getluv wrote:
If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

Most business travellers would welcome a nonstop on the three days a week that they could fly nonstop, and grudgingly accept a transfer on the days they can't.

getluv wrote:
I think the SYD transfer issue, whilst inconvenient, isn't the market killing issue people make it out to be. I've had a lot more inconvenient transfers even when transfers have been in the same building. It is worth reiterating, NZ compete on price for transfer traffic, not the convenience of a routlette game as to whether you'll arrive at a remote stand in AKL.

My recent experience on AKL-MEL-HBA on VA involved at least a half-hour queue in the zoo that is MEL check-in, despite the fact that I already had checked in on-line and all I needed was to "bag drop". If you'd told me that I also had to catch a bus across the airport I'd have been a seriously unhappy camper. I don't know if it's standard practice for VA to do this, but previous trips on JQ have been so much more efficient. But still required me to collect my bags at an intermediate point, which is my main gripe about transfers.


You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA. QF process is so much easier, you clear security on the international side and go straight to airside of T3. Even if you were flying SYD-MEL without a transfer with VA you would think you’re flying in a LCC.

JQ you know that you have to pick your bags up and make your own way when you book.

Re frequency: QF fly 5x day on most days between MEL-HBA, and there are several flights a day to CBR. 1 flight a 3x a week at 11am won’t cut it.


A non stop 3 weekly AKL-HBT though would grow the local market, as said earlier the other days people would have to go via MEL however as the market grows More AKL-HBT services get added with American and domestic connections aswell.
 
getluv
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:41 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
getluv wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Most business travellers would welcome a nonstop on the three days a week that they could fly nonstop, and grudgingly accept a transfer on the days they can't.


My recent experience on AKL-MEL-HBA on VA involved at least a half-hour queue in the zoo that is MEL check-in, despite the fact that I already had checked in on-line and all I needed was to "bag drop". If you'd told me that I also had to catch a bus across the airport I'd have been a seriously unhappy camper. I don't know if it's standard practice for VA to do this, but previous trips on JQ have been so much more efficient. But still required me to collect my bags at an intermediate point, which is my main gripe about transfers.


You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA. QF process is so much easier, you clear security on the international side and go straight to airside of T3. Even if you were flying SYD-MEL without a transfer with VA you would think you’re flying in a LCC.

JQ you know that you have to pick your bags up and make your own way when you book.

Re frequency: QF fly 5x day on most days between MEL-HBA, and there are several flights a day to CBR. 1 flight a 3x a week at 11am won’t cut it.


A non stop 3 weekly AKL-HBT though would grow the local market, as said earlier the other days people would have to go via MEL however as the market grows More AKL-HBT services get added with American and domestic connections aswell.


With a fleet that’s becoming increasingly stretched, I struggle to see the logic logistically and commercially.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6236
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:17 am

getluv wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
getluv wrote:

You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA. QF process is so much easier, you clear security on the international side and go straight to airside of T3. Even if you were flying SYD-MEL without a transfer with VA you would think you’re flying in a LCC.

JQ you know that you have to pick your bags up and make your own way when you book.

Re frequency: QF fly 5x day on most days between MEL-HBA, and there are several flights a day to CBR. 1 flight a 3x a week at 11am won’t cut it.


A non stop 3 weekly AKL-HBT though would grow the local market, as said earlier the other days people would have to go via MEL however as the market grows More AKL-HBT services get added with American and domestic connections aswell.


With a fleet that’s becoming increasingly stretched, I struggle to see the logic logistically and commercially.


I’m talking about NZ here, they have new aircraft arriving and the option to hold onto some older ones, who are you talking about? I’m not expecting QF or VA to do AKL-HBT.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:30 am

getluv wrote:
You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA.

Sorry, didn't mean to be boring. It was an experience though that was quite shocking to me, not having been a regular VA passenger.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:34 am

getluv wrote:
With a fleet that’s becoming increasingly stretched, I struggle to see the logic logistically and commercially.

I don't get that logic - there are a heap of new A320/321NEOs on the way. Commercially, it's no different from any new destination that is currently served by codeshare - you take a punt and try to make it work by growing the market from not much to something sustainable. With that logic, you'd never open another new destination but run an airline based on codeshares alone.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
PA515
Posts: 1347
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:41 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
A non stop 3 weekly AKL-HBT though would grow the local market, as said earlier the other days people would have to go via MEL however as the market grows More AKL-HBT services get added with American and domestic connections aswell.


I agree. AKL-HBA / HBA-AKL saves the pax time and eliminates the QF billing between HBA and MEL. Depends on how many HBA people would use AKL as a transit, but even if it only broke even initially it would still benefit the overall Air NZ network.

A good schedule for International and Domestic connections would be something like AKL-HBA 0905/1055, HBA-AKL 1155/1715.
(based on CHC-MEL / MEL-CHC 2,419 kms less 5 mins, due AKL-HBA / HBA-AKL 2,409 kms and less air traffic than MEL).

PA515
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:49 am

Some updates on NZ's fleet situation:

- One 777 dry lease has been signed, while another "should be" "soon" - no mention of the source of the 777's

- The request for proposal for the 350's / 777-X's won't be issued until Mar-Apr 2019, with deliveries from 2022

See: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/ ... e-problems.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:55 am

LY is to code-share on HX's HKG - AKL service, while HX will offer connections and its code on LY's HKG - TLV flight.

See: https://www.eturbonews.com/203438/how-e ... a-or-seoul.

HX is slowly building up some good code-shares to AKL, with 9W and EY too - hopefully these improve AKL's viability!

Cheers,

Cfl
 
getluv
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:01 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
getluv wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

A non stop 3 weekly AKL-HBT though would grow the local market, as said earlier the other days people would have to go via MEL however as the market grows More AKL-HBT services get added with American and domestic connections aswell.


With a fleet that’s becoming increasingly stretched, I struggle to see the logic logistically and commercially.


I’m talking about NZ here, they have new aircraft arriving and the option to hold onto some older ones, who are you talking about? I’m not expecting QF or VA to do AKL-HBT.


Firstly, it's HBA and I was talking about NZ. Secondly, they've got far more important routes to utilise their aircraft on.

DavidByrne wrote:
getluv wrote:
You’ve talked about your recent experience quite a few times now. No offence, but that’s VA.

Sorry, didn't mean to be boring. It was an experience though that was quite shocking to me, not having been a regular VA passenger.


I would say in your experience, you're lucky. Wait until you see what the experience is like without a codeshare, and you're on a plain old interline.
Last edited by getluv on Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:11 am

getluv wrote:
NZ ... they've got far more important routes to utilise their aircraft on.

IMO, it's correct that NZ will have some narrow-body capacity in the coming months and years, in light of factors, like:

- Australian services moving to some or mostly wide-body 777/787 flights (even small ports like ADL), freeing up 320's
- New 320NEO and 321NEO planes coming online from later this year, which will also free up some of the older 320's

Whether NZ uses this additional capacity to add new routes, or increase capacity on existing routes, is yet to be seen.

Cheers,

C.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8102
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:46 am

It makes sense, the best schedule in one country makes the best connections with the other. I fail to see how that will be a bad thing
-QF passengers can use the lounge domestically here, and NZ can use the Qantas Club in Australia
-Both airline's passengers can get boarding passes at the origin which allows faster connections and no double handling.
- It's only a codeshare, it doesn't require regulatory approval. It is basically no different from HX/LY upthread. It just makes life as a passenger simpler and more convenient. NZ gets the NZ revenue, QF gets the QF revenue and it should generate more demand for travel.

VA is just sore because they screwed things up with NZ and they caused NZ to look elsewhere. If they had been financially responsible, and held the board to be accountable for their actions, hadn't been such a useless airline for passenger handling and customer experience and wanted all the access to the good stuff for no cost to them they would still have the arrangement, but they weren't any of those things and now they know they shoved a rod up their own backside. If VA goes under, there will be an opportunity for all these airlines that want Australian feed to set up a joint airline that they can run the way they want it EY/SQ/HU and all the others would be well advised that it will cost them less, in the long run, to do properly and they wouldn't have to be lied to by JB.
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.
 
Kashmon
Posts: 633
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:15 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
LY is to code-share on HX's HKG - AKL service, while HX will offer connections and its code on LY's HKG - TLV flight.

See: https://www.eturbonews.com/203438/how-e ... a-or-seoul.

HX is slowly building up some good code-shares to AKL, with 9W and EY too - hopefully these improve AKL's viability!

Cheers,

Cfl


considering they have already declined to 4 weekly? 5 weekly?

it ain't working
in fact they entire HX network is not profitable and it does not have to be.
HX sole purpose is to get planes into China for the Hainan group and act as a thorn in the flesh for CX
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 9982
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:51 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
SelandiaBaru wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Still waiting for someone to tell me which aspect of the proposed codeshare is actually anti-competitive. I just can't see it myself - we tend to assume that any arrangement between airlines is to the detriment of the consumer, but I'm struggling to figure how that might be the case here.


So Qantas Group have Jetstar operating in NZ with A320 and Q300, these flights often have QF code-shares. Given the Q300 operation is marginal and operates where NZ does I can't see how QF code-sharing on NZ metal will help the viability of the Jetstar Q300.

OK, so in that case the solution would be to apply a requirement that JQ could not reduce routes or frequencies on any of the routes that QF codeshares with NZ on. I'm struggling a little to see that ComCom could impose conditions on a third party that was not part of the application, notwithstanding that it is a "related party" to QF. Is there a precedent for that?

From what I understand about the NZ/QF deal is if there is a JQ service around the same time, then the QF code will only apply to the JQ service. WLG-AKL, AKL-CHC and AKL-ZQN won't see many NZ codeshares compared to the regional routes which don't have JQ
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/W,B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ
 
DavidJ08
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:18 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:23 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
Some updates on NZ's fleet situation:

- One 777 dry lease has been signed, while another "should be" "soon" - no mention of the source of the 777's

- The request for proposal for the 350's / 777-X's won't be issued until Mar-Apr 2019, with deliveries from 2022

See: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/ ... e-problems.

Cheers,

C.

So if the RFP won't get issued until Mar/Apr 2019, then I'm guessing an order won't be due until near the end of 2019 or potentially even 2020?

Re 777s that sounds about right - wouldn't have made much sense registering the aircraft as ZK-OKI before they signed the lease for it. Waiting with great interest to see what the other 777 will be.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:52 pm

777ER wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
SelandiaBaru wrote:

So Qantas Group have Jetstar operating in NZ with A320 and Q300, these flights often have QF code-shares. Given the Q300 operation is marginal and operates where NZ does I can't see how QF code-sharing on NZ metal will help the viability of the Jetstar Q300.

OK, so in that case the solution would be to apply a requirement that JQ could not reduce routes or frequencies on any of the routes that QF codeshares with NZ on. I'm struggling a little to see that ComCom could impose conditions on a third party that was not part of the application, notwithstanding that it is a "related party" to QF. Is there a precedent for that?

From what I understand about the NZ/QF deal is if there is a JQ service around the same time, then the QF code will only apply to the JQ service. WLG-AKL, AKL-CHC and AKL-ZQN won't see many NZ codeshares compared to the regional routes which don't have JQ

My understanding was the opposite... where there is a JQ service operating at the same time as a NZ service the NZ flight won’t have the QF code. Could be wrong but that’s how I initially saw it.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:36 pm

Kashmon wrote:
HX ... considering they have already declined to 4 weekly? 5 weekly? it ain't working. in fact they entire HX network is not profitable and it does not have to be.

Two points:

1. In light of the HNA Group's troubles, there's more pressure now on HX to be profitable, and as the dropping of CNS and OOL shows, routes that aren't profitable or don't show potential, will be dropped - AKL is clearly profitable and/or has potential, otherwise it would've been dropped, alongside CNS and OOL.

2. The seasonal downgrading of HX's service to 5x weekly shows nothing other than the fact that New Zealand is a seasonal market - remember, in the past summer, they actually increased AKL from 10x weekly to 14x weekly. Even at 5x weekly in winter, they're still ahead of established carriers (CA / KE).

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:42 pm

aerorobnz wrote:
It's only a codeshare, it doesn't require regulatory approval.

I thought that code-sharing does now require regulatory approval?

See: https://www.transport.govt.nz/air/inter ... mpetition/.

However, yes, NZ and QF seem to say that they do not need this.

When they announced the deal, Qantas and Air New Zealand said it did not need regulatory approval, unlike other deeper relationships airlines form.

See: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12064327.

It'll be interesting to see if VA / AAA's calls for scrutiny are heard.

Cheers,

C.
Last edited by planemanofnz on Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:53 pm

DavidJ08 wrote:
So if the RFP won't get issued until Mar/Apr 2019, then I'm guessing an order won't be due until near the end of 2019 or potentially even 2020?

Yes, which raises some questions for me:

1. Why is NZ not issuing the RFP for another year, when they've been talking about this order already for more than a year? In mid-2017, Luxon said that NZ "will go shopping" for their next wide body planes "from the end of the year" (i.e. the end of 2017). Now, he's talking about mid-2019? Is CAPEX budgeting an issue?

2. If NZ is leaving it until potentially early-2020 to place an order, will they be able to get sufficient slots to actually get 2 or 3 of the new planes in 2022, so that a new route with them can be launched that year? Is that leaving enough buffer time for the risk of delays, particularly with the new and unproven 777-X technology?

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:04 pm

Some interesting comments from the QF Group regarding JQ in New Zealand:

- “We’re fully committed to Jetstar in New Zealand” - “We are 110 per cent behind our operation over there” - “It’s a very very important piece of the Jetstar jigsaw puzzle."

- "the codeshare deal did not necessarily mean Jetstar New Zealand was less likely to grow," "if we see opportunities, and we’ve got fleet available then we’ll look to grow."

See: http://australianaviation.com.au/air-nz ... -nz-evans/.

I can't see any further turbo-prop growth for JQ here - maybe TRG or ROT?

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

DavidJ08 wrote:
Waiting with great interest to see what the other 777 will be.

It seems like the 2nd dry-leased 777 will be a 77W from BR (not CX, as rumoured), and will arrive in mid-August. However, ithe deal has not been finalised.

"One is a former Singapore Airlines aircraft, and is due to arrive by late July. The carrier is aiming to lease the other from Taiwan’s EVA Air in mid-August ..."

See: http://aviationweek.com/awincommercial/ ... luxon-says.

Cheers,

C.
 
Gasman
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:09 am

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12064327

When they announced the deal, Qantas and Air New Zealand said it did not need regulatory approval, unlike other deeper relationships airlines form.

So that's how it works? If two big corporations collude with each other, and state they don't need regulatory approval to do so, I guess everything's okay then.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:19 am

Gasman wrote:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12064327

When they announced the deal, Qantas and Air New Zealand said it did not need regulatory approval, unlike other deeper relationships airlines form.

So that's how it works? If two big corporations collude with each other, and state they don't need regulatory approval to do so, I guess everything's okay then.

I'm no regulatory expert, but it seems to make sense that the regulator wouldn't need to approve all solely code-share relationships - for example, would New Zealand's regulator need to approve BA code-sharing on QR's AKL service, or LY code-sharing on HX's AKL service? You'd end up taking up a lot of resources.

On the flip-side, for selected large-scale relationships, as this one stands to be, I can see regulators justifying a degree of scrutiny - how much though, I don't know. There are areas of interest for consumers - like, how will QF code-sharing on NZ and JQ on the trunk routes affect JQ's sustainability as a competitor of NZ.

Does anyone have insight here? Will the NZCC get involved?

Cheers,

C.
 
tealnz
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:01 am

planemanofnz wrote:
DavidJ08 wrote:
So if the RFP won't get issued until Mar/Apr 2019, then I'm guessing an order won't be due until near the end of 2019 or potentially even 2020?

Yes, which raises some questions for me:

1. Why is NZ not issuing the RFP for another year, when they've been talking about this order already for more than a year? In mid-2017, Luxon said that NZ "will go shopping" for their next wide body planes "from the end of the year" (i.e. the end of 2017). Now, he's talking about mid-2019? Is CAPEX budgeting an issue?

2. If NZ is leaving it until potentially early-2020 to place an order, will they be able to get sufficient slots to actually get 2 or 3 of the new planes in 2022, so that a new route with them can be launched that year? Is that leaving enough buffer time for the risk of delays, particularly with the new and unproven 777-X technology?


NZ will want a real competition I guess. But after the 787 experience I can imagine them wanting to see flight test results from a 779 before they make any decisions. Good reason to wait. They're a desirable customer: I'm sure both makers will be able to give them at least an initial batch in the timeframe they want.
 
NZ6
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:52 am

DavidByrne wrote:
getluv wrote:
If you were a business traveller, you would opt for the frequency (even if connecting) over a 3x week schedule.

Most business travellers would welcome a nonstop on the three days a week that they could fly nonstop, and grudgingly accept a transfer on the days they can't.


Doesn't that apply to any customer?
 
NZ6
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:57 am

DavidJ08 wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Some updates on NZ's fleet situation:

- One 777 dry lease has been signed, while another "should be" "soon" - no mention of the source of the 777's

- The request for proposal for the 350's / 777-X's won't be issued until Mar-Apr 2019, with deliveries from 2022

See: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/ ... e-problems.

Cheers,

C.

So if the RFP won't get issued until Mar/Apr 2019, then I'm guessing an order won't be due until near the end of 2019 or potentially even 2020?

Re 777s that sounds about right - wouldn't have made much sense registering the aircraft as ZK-OKI before they signed the lease for it. Waiting with great interest to see what the other 777 will be.


My understanding is there is a 'preferred' type and I was lead to believe the RFP was going out this year. I'm not sure if whats stated there is smoke and mirrors stuff for now or if it's been pushed back. Will have to do some digging.

The next 18 months will be interesting.
 
PA515
Posts: 1347
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 3:41 am

NZ6 wrote:
My understanding is there is a 'preferred' type and I was lead to believe the RFP was going out this year. I'm not sure if whats stated there is smoke and mirrors stuff for now or if it's been pushed back. Will have to do some digging.

The next 18 months will be interesting.


The 01 June 2017 'Investor Day' presentation said RFI in 2017 and RFP in 2018.

What you will see us turning our mind to and will --- it's an activity we'll start later on this calendar year, will be what we call an RFI, a request for information, around wide-bodies, and that will be looking at effectively the replacement for the 777-200ER, which will probably start from around 2022. So that will be a lot of work around what's a good replacement, but also what's out there of aircraft that could also do stuff we have growth ambitions around our network and fleet.

So that process takes a little while, but eventually I expect sometime next year would get to a point where we'll end up looking for an RFP, or request for proposal, which is effectively commercial offers from Airbus and Boeing. And the great thing is both of them have really good offerings.


They may have decided to wait another year to see if there are changes to the A350 and 777X, or just tactics to get the best deal. Grant Bradley even mentioned the 787-10 in the last few days, which had previously been ruled out.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1347
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 4:20 am

Air NZ will have an extra ATR overnighting at PMR eff. 13 Aug 2018. AKL-PMR 1750/1900 Su-Fr, PMR-AKL 0725/0830 Mo-Sa
http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-re ... from-palmy

Also, Air NZ intends to increase seats into and out of TRG by about 80,000 over the next twelve months. That would equate to six Q300 flights a day replaced by ATRs.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=12062174

PA515
 
Gasman
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:06 am

PA515 wrote:
They may have decided to wait another year to see if there are changes to the A350 and 777X, or just tactics to get the best deal.

Indeed. I just don't see that there's any major hurry here - NZ are pretty well served by the current fleet (configuration and powerplant issues aside) and the ULH routes that are being mooted are hardly no-brainers for the NZ market. I actually think all this discussion is at least two years premature. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if a decision isn't made until such time as the performance data of the 77X becomes rock solid.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:27 am

Regarding the rumour about an exciting new route from an established carrier that NZ6 posted about, is it possible that the route may be AKL - EWR on a UA 789?

It's virtually the same distance as LAX - SIN, which UA already flies with the 789 (7,655 nm v 7,621 nm), and would be consistent with UA's strategy of ULH flights.

For NZ, does it make a difference if the route was on NZ or UA metal, given the revenue-sharing JV? UA operating it would remove NZ's pressure for a new order?

Gasman wrote:
Indeed. I just don't see that there's any major hurry here ...

See above. The only route with urgency (i.e. pre-2022) is IMO, AKL - NYC. UA opening it instead under the JV may remove NZ's pressure to get a 359/777-X for it.

Cheers,

C.
Last edited by planemanofnz on Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6457
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:35 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Regarding the rumour about an exciting new route from an established carrier that NZ6 posted about, is it possible that the route may be AKL - EWR on a UA 789?

It's virtually the same distance as LAX - SIN, which UA already flies with the 789 (7,655 nm v 7,621 nm), and would be consistent with UA's strategy of ULH flights.

For NZ, does it make a difference if the route was on NZ or UA metal, given the revenue-sharing JV? UA operating it would remove NZ's pressure for a new order?

Cheers,

C.


UA does not operate the 787-9 to EWR, it would need to be positioned from another hub
Forum Moderator
 
Gasman
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:37 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Regarding the rumour about an exciting new route from an established carrier that NZ6 posted about, is it possible that the route may be AKL - EWR on a UA 789?


Can't see it myself, in spite of eating humble pie on ORD (although I won't eat the *whole* pie until the route actually commences)

planemanofnz wrote:
For NZ, does it make a difference if the route was on NZ or UA metal, given the revenue-sharing JV?

Yes, in that any JV is a "safe" investment. But if you want to make the big money, you operate your own metal and sell all the seats to your own pax. And if UA were flying the route, it's of course entirely possible for New Zealand passengers to book and pay for a UA ticket
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:38 am

qf789 wrote:
UA does not operate the 787-9 to EWR, it would need to be positioned from another hub.

True, however:

1. UA "is considering a Boeing 787 pilot base at Newark", albeit for the up-coming 787-10's, but it's the start of some 787 infrastructure there
2. UA also has a history of moving 787 bases around - for example, its IAH 787 base was moved to IAD, but IAH still sees a SYD 789 flight

See:
- https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 586091002/.
- https://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com ... on-dulles/.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:49 am

Gasman wrote:
Can't see it myself, in spite of eating humble pie on ORD (although I won't eat the *whole* pie until the route actually commences).

LOL - well, Gasman, maybe it'll be your lucky day and UA will announce AKL - LAS instead!

Gasman wrote:
... if UA were flying the route, it's of course entirely possible for New Zealand passengers to book and pay for a UA ticket.

But even then, doesn't NZ get some of the revenue? I don't know - I'm not familiar with JV's.

Cheers,

C.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 6:28 am

In line with DUD's success in getting NZ to beef up its operations there of late, it seems that DUD is also using the same tactics to try to restore SYD and MEL flights.

See: https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/pilo ... ht-success.

Could this be a strategy for VA and/or TT to explore in New Zealand? That is, eroding NZ's feeder traffic from the regions, by servicing the regions direct, more often?

Cheers,

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

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:03 am

qf789 wrote:
UA does not operate the 787-9 to EWR, it would need to be positioned from another hub

Or operate SFO-AKL-EWR and v/v.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:17 am

planemanofnz wrote:
DavidJ08 wrote:
Waiting with great interest to see what the other 777 will be.

It seems like the 2nd dry-leased 777 will be a 77W from BR (not CX, as rumoured), and will arrive in mid-August. However, ithe deal has not been finalised.

"One is a former Singapore Airlines aircraft, and is due to arrive by late July. The carrier is aiming to lease the other from Taiwan’s EVA Air in mid-August ..."

See: http://aviationweek.com/awincommercial/ ... luxon-says.

Cheers,

C.

Yes I had heard about BR rather than CX but haven’t had a chance to post til now.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
NZ321
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - June 2018

Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:34 am

[/quote]
Yes I had heard about BR rather than CX but haven’t had a chance to post til now.[/quote]

The BR 77W has 39+56+258 in the layout with 10 abreast economy or 39+56+238 in the layout with 9 abreast economy. NZ has 44+54+244 with 10 abreast economy. In both cases the BR business class is fairly compatible with NZ's product - an improvement indeed with reverse herringbone and a wider seat. Seems a better fit than the CX aircraft overall.
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