User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6993
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:04 pm

Welcome to the New Zealand Aviation Thread December 2018. Please add your comments below.

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1407391
Forum Moderator
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:52 pm

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-new-zeal ... 27&ref=rss

"More than 30 million Americans were considering New Zealand as a destination but just over 300,000 took the trip. Indirect flights, with inconvenient airport layovers were a deterrent."

I can't recall the month, but I was shot down for suggesting this a few months back.
 
910A
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:11 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 12:43 am

How about only 42% of Americans have a passport? Probably over half have incomes that would will not allow travel to your beautiful country. I was in Hawaii a few years ago, and I read that average number of trips to the Islands from US Residents is 1. So if they can't afford Hawaii, Tahiti, I see many more Americans going. It's a shame..I have always enjoyed my trips to NZ.
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 3:08 am

910A wrote:
How about only 42% of Americans have a passport? Probably over half have incomes that would will not allow travel to your beautiful country. I was in Hawaii a few years ago, and I read that average number of trips to the Islands from US Residents is 1. So if they can't afford Hawaii, Tahiti, I see many more Americans going. It's a shame..I have always enjoyed my trips to NZ.


40% of 326million is 130million, we're talking about 30 million of that, so well under your half. Besides, a passport is just a formality and many Americans don't need one for their regular vacations across either border, so this brings back into play a big chunk of the 196 million you dismissed.

I'd imagine fewer Kiwis would have one if we didn't need them for the Islands and or Australia.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:19 am

There are just so many travel options now, and being so far away, NZ kind of gets left out of the equation. I've never been, (though I may be moving there for work), but it seems basically like a somewhat more temperate Hawaii. If so, It makes sense that more Americans choose Hawaii for their Pacific island adventure locale of choice.

Hawaii is 5-6.5 hours from LAX and Vancouver, and Auckland is 13-15 from the North American west coast, (if you get a direct flight), with NZ flights costing more than twice as much.

The reality is that most travelers can get most of what NZ offers much closer to home and at a lower price. The people that do travel to NZ for tourism, are going because of what makes it unique. Unfortunately, most people vacation based primarily on price.
What the...?
 
NTLDaz
Posts: 212
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:56 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:24 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
There are just so many travel options now, and being so far away, NZ kind of gets left out of the equation. I've never been, (though I may be moving there for work), but it seems basically like a somewhat more temperate Hawaii. If so, It makes sense that more Americans choose Hawaii for their Pacific island adventure locale of choice.

Hawaii is 5-6.5 hours from LAX and Vancouver, and Auckland is 13-15 from the North American west coast, (if you get a direct flight), with NZ flights costing more than twice as much.

The reality is that most travelers can get most of what NZ offers much closer to home and at a lower price. The people that do travel to NZ for tourism, are going because of what makes it unique. Unfortunately, most people vacation based primarily on price.


Apart from a shared Polynesian heritage and being islands there isn't much in common between NZ and Hawaii.

I suggest a bit more reading.
 
PA515
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 11:20 am

Air NZ A321-271NX ZK-NNB (msn 8542) on delivery as ANZ6091 XFW-MCT.

https://www.flightradar24.com/ANZ6091/1ebce693

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 12:03 pm

All 23 of the Air NZ Q300 fleet now have ADS-B transponders. ZK-NES was the last to be equipped and resumed flying yesterday.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/zk-nes

PA515
 
NZ321
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 12:09 pm

Will be interesting to see how the GTF settles into service with NZ after their recent engine woes with the 787 and previous challenges with the GTF. Let's hope its relatively smooth sailing.
Plane mad!
 
PA515
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:20 pm

NZ321 wrote:
Will be interesting to see how the GTF settles into service with NZ after their recent engine woes with the 787 and previous challenges with the GTF. Let's hope its relatively smooth sailing.


Hope so. There was a problem with ZK-NNB, but don't know if it was engine related. The first and second flights were 4h 53m and 4h 13m compared with ZK-NNA's 2h 48m and 1h 00m. The delivery flight appears to have been delayed twice. There were flight plans on FR24 for NZ6091 CNS-AKL on 27 Nov and 02 Dec and now CNS-AKL will be 05 Dec.

ZK-NNA has had delays of about one hour ex BNE, OOL, SYD and MEL. I was surprised about MEL as the aircraft overnighted but still left an hour late. There has been some discussion elsewhere that Air NZ has changed ground handling in Australia in the past few days and that is causing delays.

PA515
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 7:51 pm

NTLDaz wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
There are just so many travel options now, and being so far away, NZ kind of gets left out of the equation. I've never been, (though I may be moving there for work), but it seems basically like a somewhat more temperate Hawaii. If so, It makes sense that more Americans choose Hawaii for their Pacific island adventure locale of choice.

Hawaii is 5-6.5 hours from LAX and Vancouver, and Auckland is 13-15 from the North American west coast, (if you get a direct flight), with NZ flights costing more than twice as much.

The reality is that most travelers can get most of what NZ offers much closer to home and at a lower price. The people that do travel to NZ for tourism, are going because of what makes it unique. Unfortunately, most people vacation based primarily on price.


Apart from a shared Polynesian heritage and being islands there isn't much in common between NZ and Hawaii.

I suggest a bit more reading.


I'm comparing them in relation to tourism, not cultural or geographic specifics. They are both first world, Pacific islands with temperate climates and a primarily English speaking population. That's what your average vacationer will look at. The most critical difference, in my mind when it comes to choosing between the two as a vacation destination, is distance from the prospective vacationers home, and the costs in time and money related to that distance.

Hawaii is warmer for the most part, and NZ has skiing. Those are some of the things which might make a difference to a prospective vacationer.

Hawaii is 5 or 6 hours away for, literally, billions of people. NZ is 3-6 hours from less than 20 million Australians, but at least a dozen hours from anywhere else. More distance equals more money, and fewer days actually on vacation instead of traveling.

And that's just Hawaii. There are hundreds of closer tropical vacation destinations for hundreds of millions N.Americans and billions of Asians.

I suspect the average vacationer isn't concerned about anything much more nuanced than what their vacation will cost and how much time they get to spend lounging.

My major point is that logistically, NZ is a tougher sell than almost any other Pacific destination.
What the...?
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:10 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
NTLDaz wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
There are just so many travel options now, and being so far away, NZ kind of gets left out of the equation. I've never been, (though I may be moving there for work), but it seems basically like a somewhat more temperate Hawaii. If so, It makes sense that more Americans choose Hawaii for their Pacific island adventure locale of choice.

Hawaii is 5-6.5 hours from LAX and Vancouver, and Auckland is 13-15 from the North American west coast, (if you get a direct flight), with NZ flights costing more than twice as much.

The reality is that most travelers can get most of what NZ offers much closer to home and at a lower price. The people that do travel to NZ for tourism, are going because of what makes it unique. Unfortunately, most people vacation based primarily on price.


Apart from a shared Polynesian heritage and being islands there isn't much in common between NZ and Hawaii.

I suggest a bit more reading.


I'm comparing them in relation to tourism, not cultural or geographic specifics. They are both first world, Pacific islands with temperate climates and a primarily English speaking population. That's what your average vacationer will look at. The most critical difference, in my mind when it comes to choosing between the two as a vacation destination, is distance from the prospective vacationers home, and the costs in time and money related to that distance.

Hawaii is warmer for the most part, and NZ has skiing. Those are some of the things which might make a difference to a prospective vacationer.

Hawaii is 5 or 6 hours away for, literally, billions of people. NZ is 3-6 hours from less than 20 million Australians, but at least a dozen hours from anywhere else. More distance equals more money, and fewer days actually on vacation instead of traveling.

And that's just Hawaii. There are hundreds of closer tropical vacation destinations for hundreds of millions N.Americans and billions of Asians.

I suspect the average vacationer isn't concerned about anything much more nuanced than what their vacation will cost and how much time they get to spend lounging.

My major point is that logistically, NZ is a tougher sell than almost any other Pacific destination.


I'm seriously lost on why or how you can compare NZ and Hawaii?? I guess loosely speaking Hawaii & NZ compete with each other but they do so with every other market with regard to the tourism dollar. I would be very reluctant to say people are substituting NZ for Hawaii due to the similarities however

You do however raise a valid and known issue for NZ as an airline and the whole NZ international inbound tourism market... and that being NZ's geographical isolation is a barrier for some and many who express a desire to travel to NZ but delay this with the intent to come back to it when they can afford it, or can commit more time for example... Things like direct flights to IAH/ORD/EZE are helping overcome this barrier.

I've seen a real-life scenario where someone who is currently booked to travel in late December from ORD. They have said previously this holiday would have involved flying ABC-ORD-LAX-AKL as there was no direct flight from their home port to the West Coast or Houston. I can't actually recall the name but was close to ORD area and now they're dropping the ABC-ORD sector and commuting via road to ORD and flying direct into AKL so it has gone from 3 sectors with two transits to a direct AKL service involving a short drive to the airport get on a flight and end up in your holiday destination.

Another example is I love the South East Asia Beach culture, I've done DPS direct but struggle to justify connecting through SIN/HKG/BKK/KUL for a one-week getaway. If someone flew direct into HKT, it'd probably use it.
 
jimmyah
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:53 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:35 am

Air NZ makes inflight wifi free until 28 Feb.

Thoughts? I feel like it will be extended if this goes well.

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/wifi
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4164
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:53 am

jimmyah wrote:
Air NZ makes inflight wifi free until 28 Feb.

Thoughts? I feel like it will be extended if this goes well.

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/wifi

Good move to get people trying it out. Of course it all depends on how robust the network and broadbands at feed is. As the article says, not much use if you have 200 people on it at the same time (unless NZ has gotten a more capable system than most other airlines?).

Really though how it should work onboard is free for business class and Gold Elites, $5 for Koru/Gold/Silver and $10 for everyone else Tasman/PI, $20 for longhaul and $25 if doing more than 1 sector/24 hours.
59 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
nirvarma
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 11:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:12 pm

I see Monday's TG flight to BKK has been delayed and is yet to depart (now Tuesday morning). Any info on why? Hopefully its not related to the RR engines.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:37 pm

jimmyah wrote:
Air NZ makes inflight wifi free until 28 Feb.

Thoughts? I feel like it will be extended if this goes well.

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/wifi


Darn, we will be on the Nightmareliners both ways :(
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:13 pm

NZ6 wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
NTLDaz wrote:

Apart from a shared Polynesian heritage and being islands there isn't much in common between NZ and Hawaii.

I suggest a bit more reading.


I'm comparing them in relation to tourism, not cultural or geographic specifics. They are both first world, Pacific islands with temperate climates and a primarily English speaking population. That's what your average vacationer will look at. The most critical difference, in my mind when it comes to choosing between the two as a vacation destination, is distance from the prospective vacationers home, and the costs in time and money related to that distance.

Hawaii is warmer for the most part, and NZ has skiing. Those are some of the things which might make a difference to a prospective vacationer.

Hawaii is 5 or 6 hours away for, literally, billions of people. NZ is 3-6 hours from less than 20 million Australians, but at least a dozen hours from anywhere else. More distance equals more money, and fewer days actually on vacation instead of traveling.

And that's just Hawaii. There are hundreds of closer tropical vacation destinations for hundreds of millions N.Americans and billions of Asians.

I suspect the average vacationer isn't concerned about anything much more nuanced than what their vacation will cost and how much time they get to spend lounging.

My major point is that logistically, NZ is a tougher sell than almost any other Pacific destination.


I'm seriously lost on why or how you can compare NZ and Hawaii?? I guess loosely speaking Hawaii & NZ compete with each other but they do so with every other market with regard to the tourism dollar. I would be very reluctant to say people are substituting NZ for Hawaii due to the similarities however

You do however raise a valid and known issue for NZ as an airline and the whole NZ international inbound tourism market... and that being NZ's geographical isolation is a barrier for some and many who express a desire to travel to NZ but delay this with the intent to come back to it when they can afford it, or can commit more time for example... Things like direct flights to IAH/ORD/EZE are helping overcome this barrier.

I've seen a real-life scenario where someone who is currently booked to travel in late December from ORD. They have said previously this holiday would have involved flying ABC-ORD-LAX-AKL as there was no direct flight from their home port to the West Coast or Houston. I can't actually recall the name but was close to ORD area and now they're dropping the ABC-ORD sector and commuting via road to ORD and flying direct into AKL so it has gone from 3 sectors with two transits to a direct AKL service involving a short drive to the airport get on a flight and end up in your holiday destination.

Another example is I love the South East Asia Beach culture, I've done DPS direct but struggle to justify connecting through SIN/HKG/BKK/KUL for a one-week getaway. If someone flew direct into HKT, it'd probably use it.


My point is that from my experience, given two relatively similar vacation options, people will tend to choose the cheaper and/or easier to get to, option.

When using N.America as a starting point, if one is looking for a Pacific Island vacation, Hawaii and NZ are two obvious options. There are lots of other vacation options but other than distance and price, they are the most similar, so seem to me the best examples to support my point.

The SE Asia beach vacation is a different experience altogether, more comparable to a Mexican or Caribbean vacation. That can also can be used to support my position that with comparable vacation options, people tend to chose locations which are cheaper and/or closer. Significantly more N.Americans visit Mexico and the Caribbean than SE Asia.

More direct flight options will, no doubt, increase tourism in NZ, because it will probably make it cheaper and easier to get to NZ decreasing the time and expense advantage of other vacation locations.
What the...?
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:25 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:

I'm comparing them in relation to tourism, not cultural or geographic specifics. They are both first world, Pacific islands with temperate climates and a primarily English speaking population. That's what your average vacationer will look at. The most critical difference, in my mind when it comes to choosing between the two as a vacation destination, is distance from the prospective vacationers home, and the costs in time and money related to that distance.

Hawaii is warmer for the most part, and NZ has skiing. Those are some of the things which might make a difference to a prospective vacationer.

Hawaii is 5 or 6 hours away for, literally, billions of people. NZ is 3-6 hours from less than 20 million Australians, but at least a dozen hours from anywhere else. More distance equals more money, and fewer days actually on vacation instead of traveling.

And that's just Hawaii. There are hundreds of closer tropical vacation destinations for hundreds of millions N.Americans and billions of Asians.

I suspect the average vacationer isn't concerned about anything much more nuanced than what their vacation will cost and how much time they get to spend lounging.

My major point is that logistically, NZ is a tougher sell than almost any other Pacific destination.


I'm seriously lost on why or how you can compare NZ and Hawaii?? I guess loosely speaking Hawaii & NZ compete with each other but they do so with every other market with regard to the tourism dollar. I would be very reluctant to say people are substituting NZ for Hawaii due to the similarities however

You do however raise a valid and known issue for NZ as an airline and the whole NZ international inbound tourism market... and that being NZ's geographical isolation is a barrier for some and many who express a desire to travel to NZ but delay this with the intent to come back to it when they can afford it, or can commit more time for example... Things like direct flights to IAH/ORD/EZE are helping overcome this barrier.

I've seen a real-life scenario where someone who is currently booked to travel in late December from ORD. They have said previously this holiday would have involved flying ABC-ORD-LAX-AKL as there was no direct flight from their home port to the West Coast or Houston. I can't actually recall the name but was close to ORD area and now they're dropping the ABC-ORD sector and commuting via road to ORD and flying direct into AKL so it has gone from 3 sectors with two transits to a direct AKL service involving a short drive to the airport get on a flight and end up in your holiday destination.

Another example is I love the South East Asia Beach culture, I've done DPS direct but struggle to justify connecting through SIN/HKG/BKK/KUL for a one-week getaway. If someone flew direct into HKT, it'd probably use it.


My point is that from my experience, given two relatively similar vacation options, people will tend to choose the cheaper and/or easier to get to, option.

When using N.America as a starting point, if one is looking for a Pacific Island vacation, Hawaii and NZ are two obvious options. There are lots of other vacation options but other than distance and price, they are the most similar, so seem to me the best examples to support my point.


But that's where you got it wrong - these are *not* similar vacation options. Come and visit NZ, and if you haven't been to Hawaii yet, stop there on the way. Then you'll see how fundamentally different these two places are. Even between the Hawaiian islands there are massive differences...
 
NTLDaz
Posts: 212
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:56 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:33 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:

I'm comparing them in relation to tourism, not cultural or geographic specifics. They are both first world, Pacific islands with temperate climates and a primarily English speaking population. That's what your average vacationer will look at. The most critical difference, in my mind when it comes to choosing between the two as a vacation destination, is distance from the prospective vacationers home, and the costs in time and money related to that distance.

Hawaii is warmer for the most part, and NZ has skiing. Those are some of the things which might make a difference to a prospective vacationer.

Hawaii is 5 or 6 hours away for, literally, billions of people. NZ is 3-6 hours from less than 20 million Australians, but at least a dozen hours from anywhere else. More distance equals more money, and fewer days actually on vacation instead of traveling.

And that's just Hawaii. There are hundreds of closer tropical vacation destinations for hundreds of millions N.Americans and billions of Asians.

I suspect the average vacationer isn't concerned about anything much more nuanced than what their vacation will cost and how much time they get to spend lounging.

My major point is that logistically, NZ is a tougher sell than almost any other Pacific destination.


I'm seriously lost on why or how you can compare NZ and Hawaii?? I guess loosely speaking Hawaii & NZ compete with each other but they do so with every other market with regard to the tourism dollar. I would be very reluctant to say people are substituting NZ for Hawaii due to the similarities however

You do however raise a valid and known issue for NZ as an airline and the whole NZ international inbound tourism market... and that being NZ's geographical isolation is a barrier for some and many who express a desire to travel to NZ but delay this with the intent to come back to it when they can afford it, or can commit more time for example... Things like direct flights to IAH/ORD/EZE are helping overcome this barrier.

I've seen a real-life scenario where someone who is currently booked to travel in late December from ORD. They have said previously this holiday would have involved flying ABC-ORD-LAX-AKL as there was no direct flight from their home port to the West Coast or Houston. I can't actually recall the name but was close to ORD area and now they're dropping the ABC-ORD sector and commuting via road to ORD and flying direct into AKL so it has gone from 3 sectors with two transits to a direct AKL service involving a short drive to the airport get on a flight and end up in your holiday destination.

Another example is I love the South East Asia Beach culture, I've done DPS direct but struggle to justify connecting through SIN/HKG/BKK/KUL for a one-week getaway. If someone flew direct into HKT, it'd probably use it.


My point is that from my experience, given two relatively similar vacation options, people will tend to choose the cheaper and/or easier to get to, option.

When using N.America as a starting point, if one is looking for a Pacific Island vacation, Hawaii and NZ are two obvious options. There are lots of other vacation options but other than distance and price, they are the most similar, so seem to me the best examples to support my point.

The SE Asia beach vacation is a different experience altogether, more comparable to a Mexican or Caribbean vacation. That can also can be used to support my position that with comparable vacation options, people tend to chose locations which are cheaper and/or closer. Significantly more N.Americans visit Mexico and the Caribbean than SE Asia.

More direct flight options will, no doubt, increase tourism in NZ, because it will probably make it cheaper and easier to get to NZ decreasing the time and expense advantage of other vacation locations.


If you were comparing Hawaii with Fiji ( for example ) I could see your point. They are 2 tropical Pacific destinations. I don't think people visit NZ for the tropical island experience because it's not tropical.

Previously you wrote that there are billions of people within 5-6 hours flight time of Hawaii which is not the case with the exception of Western USA and Canada it's a much longer flight than that.

Hawaii is by no means a cheap destination. The vast majority of the US population are a long flight to Hawaii.

Obviously NZ is a long way from most of the world's population and that does bring inherent challenges to attracting tourism but I don't feel it's a challenge that can easily be compared to Hawaii.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:47 pm

Sure there are differences...that's why I said similar, and not the same.

Those differences don't seem to be enough to overcome the cost and travel time differences, and coax more of the over 6 million N.Americans who visit Hawaii every year to join the 400,000 or so who visit N.Zealand.

People have a finite amount of vacation time and money and the more that is spent on travel, the less is available to maximize the destination experience. Going to NZ has long been on my wish list but if I wasn't going there for work, it's unlikely I would ever go, for those very reasons.

NZ will always be handicapped by its location, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Too much tourism has crushed some once idyllic places. The people who do visit NZ are likely to have more money to spend so fewer tourists may actually provide more economic benefit.
What the...?
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:11 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
.
My point is that from my experience, given two relatively similar vacation options, people will tend to choose the cheaper and/or easier to get to, option.

When using N.America as a starting point, if one is looking for a Pacific Island vacation, Hawaii and NZ are two obvious options. There are lots of other vacation options but other than distance and price, they are the most similar, so seem to me the best examples to support my point.


Have you been to New Zealand, if you're looking for a Pacific Island vacation you've definitely come to the wrong place!! While yes, there are some amazing beaches especially around the North the best of our summer season is short and our beaches aren't lined with resorts. Our cultural capital in the North is landlocked (ROT) and arguably the Southern capital (ZQN) is an alpine resort at it's best in winter.

Unless Hawaii is also on your bucket list why the heck would someone substitute New Zealand for Hawaii based on their similarities... I mean other than both being plonked in the Pacific Ocean and being 'first world' and who would choose their holiday destination on the later alone... I mean you could end up anywhere. there aren't remotely similar.

I don't dispute some may choose Hawaii over NZ as it's closer and more convenient but not because Hawaii is a closer more convenient similar option.

JoeCanuck wrote:
.
The SE Asia beach vacation is a different experience altogether, more comparable to a Mexican or Caribbean vacation. That can also can be used to support my position that with comparable vacation options, people tend to chose locations which are cheaper and/or closer. Significantly more N.Americans visit Mexico and the Caribbean than SE Asia.


That isn't my point at all.

My point is connecting destinations directly and offering a more convenient option would entice me personally to travel to the destination.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6993
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:05 am

Air New Zealand says there is potential for second seasonal service to PER to become year round, operating A321neo's to PER has been ruled out due to the length of the flight

https://thewest.com.au/news/travel/air- ... 881038452z
Forum Moderator
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:20 am

NZ6 wrote:
I don't dispute some may choose Hawaii over NZ as it's closer and more convenient but not because Hawaii is a closer more convenient similar option.


Right. You're from NZ. You're not likely to be a tourist of NZ. Maybe you've been to Hawaii. I have traveled extensively around the world and I haven't been to either. That is not to say I'm ignorant of those places but I'm also not ignorant of promotions and advertising. All tourists have to go on are basically brochures, and regardless of what the reality is, they are promoted as very similar vacation experiences. Sun, sea, mountains, adventure, nature, fun, friendly, Polynesian culture, and the list goes on.

They may be night and day different in reality, but they seem pretty similar to a prospective tourist.

You seem to be an expert. Most tourists aren't.
What the...?
 
A350OZ
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:36 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
All tourists have to go on are basically brochures, and regardless of what the reality is, they are promoted as very similar vacation experiences.


If this is true and there is *one* promoter that describes both as similar experiences (beyond being islands in the Pacific), then I would recommend not booking with them...

While I have not been to Hawaii yet but to NZ numerous times, no one has ever marketed them to me, or even tried to paint a picture of them, being similar destinations. Ever. Certain aspects may be the same volcanoes, golf holidays, etc.), but the destinations itself are not.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4597
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:41 am

A350OZ wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
All tourists have to go on are basically brochures, and regardless of what the reality is, they are promoted as very similar vacation experiences.


If this is true and there is *one* promoter that describes both as similar experiences (beyond being islands in the Pacific), then I would recommend not booking with them...

While I have not been to Hawaii yet but to NZ numerous times, no one has ever marketed them to me, or even tried to paint a picture of them, being similar destinations. Ever. Certain aspects may be the same volcanoes, golf holidays, etc.), but the destinations itself are not.


I guess it's just me then. Pacific islands, lush forests, sea, sand, surf, fishing, mountains, part of Polynesia, English speaking populations. Nah...nothing in common at all. My mistake.

I guess we know different people.
What the...?
 
Gasman
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:07 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
I guess it's just me then.


Yes. It really, really is.

Notwithstanding your self selected list of paper similarities, New Zealand and Hawaii are about as similar as Toronto and Vegas.
 
jimmyah
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:53 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:41 am

Zkpilot wrote:
jimmyah wrote:
Air NZ makes inflight wifi free until 28 Feb.

Thoughts? I feel like it will be extended if this goes well.

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/wifi

Good move to get people trying it out. Of course it all depends on how robust the network and broadbands at feed is. As the article says, not much use if you have 200 people on it at the same time (unless NZ has gotten a more capable system than most other airlines?).

Really though how it should work onboard is free for business class and Gold Elites, $5 for Koru/Gold/Silver and $10 for everyone else Tasman/PI, $20 for longhaul and $25 if doing more than 1 sector/24 hours.




That’s a good idea, especially with the number of connecting pax.
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:22 am

Not quite fitting the NZ Aviation thread, but NZ safety videos
sometimes feature here.
This well known US pilot/author often has a common sense
and practical approach to aviation issues/events.
Although I appreciate AirNZ's efforts so far, many of us might
well think time's up on this stuff. Please read his article on
this subject. (Let progressive AirNZ be the first...to go minimal !)

http://www.askthepilot.com/safety-demo-hell/
 
User avatar
Birdiey
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 9:31 am

https://i.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/bus ... e-airlines

Hamilton Airport considering bringing more airlines in. Thoughts?
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:57 pm

Birdiey wrote:
https://i.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/business/108963539/hamilton-airport-upgrading-researching-potential-to-bring-in-more-airlines

Hamilton Airport considering bringing more airlines in. Thoughts?


Oh, HLZ the city of the future... the future which is like the light at the end of the tunnel, the light which never seems to get any closer... :rotfl:

In reality, I can't see any long-haul carriers having an interest in flying to a 2nd tier port which is a little over 100km from AKL, especially when it's connected by a multi-lane expressway.

This leaves

VA
QF
JQ
FJ
OL
TN
TT

I'd be disappointed if they can't attract JQ and VA, capturing not just HLZ but people from around the wider Bay of Plenty & Waikato area (TRG/ROT etc)... as long as it can compete with AKL on fares.
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:58 pm

qf789 wrote:
Air New Zealand says there is potential for second seasonal service to PER to become year round, operating A321neo's to PER has been ruled out due to the length of the flight

https://thewest.com.au/news/travel/air- ... 881038452z



Sounds like a nice 78J route along with DPS, HNL, PPT, RAR-LAX......
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Tue Dec 04, 2018 8:03 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
I don't dispute some may choose Hawaii over NZ as it's closer and more convenient but not because Hawaii is a closer more convenient similar option.


Right. You're from NZ. You're not likely to be a tourist of NZ. Maybe you've been to Hawaii. I have traveled extensively around the world and I haven't been to either. That is not to say I'm ignorant of those places but I'm also not ignorant of promotions and advertising. All tourists have to go on are basically brochures, and regardless of what the reality is, they are promoted as very similar vacation experiences. Sun, sea, mountains, adventure, nature, fun, friendly, Polynesian culture, and the list goes on.

They may be night and day different in reality, but they seem pretty similar to a prospective tourist.

You seem to be an expert. Most tourists aren't.


Like others have said, find a new travel agent or visit our Tourism website https://www.newzealand.com/int/
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:44 am

Birdiey wrote:
https://i.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/business/108963539/hamilton-airport-upgrading-researching-potential-to-bring-in-more-airlines

Hamilton Airport considering bringing more airlines in. Thoughts?

Very surprised JQ didn't launch HLZ when the Q300s arrived, compared to New Plymouth. ROT is another port I thought would have come before New Plymouth
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,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:52 am

NZ6 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Air New Zealand says there is potential for second seasonal service to PER to become year round, operating A321neo's to PER has been ruled out due to the length of the flight

https://thewest.com.au/news/travel/air- ... 881038452z



Sounds like a nice 78J route along with DPS, HNL, PPT, RAR-LAX......


Is that a hint?

I wonder if CHC could go year round?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3033
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:58 am

NZ6 wrote:
I'd be disappointed if they can't attract JQ and VA, capturing not just HLZ but people from around the wider Bay of Plenty & Waikato area (TRG/ROT etc)... as long as it can compete with AKL on fares.


HLZ used to have VA services to either BNE or SYD? can't remember what it was.

In the past HLZ has had NZ/SJ doing routes like SYD,BNE,OOL,NAN all of which have failed in favour of people taking flights out of AKL.

HLZ really needs to be 'cheap' to attract someone like TT to start Tasman Services from HLZ, then needs to partner with an bus company to provide 'cheap' transfers to say Auckland and the Bay of Plenty.

As AKL becomes more crowded, an budget option ex-HLZ could work.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6993
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:18 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Air New Zealand says there is potential for second seasonal service to PER to become year round, operating A321neo's to PER has been ruled out due to the length of the flight

https://thewest.com.au/news/travel/air- ... 881038452z



Sounds like a nice 78J route along with DPS, HNL, PPT, RAR-LAX......


Is that a hint?

I wonder if CHC could go year round?


I guess that is always possible, though the focus seems to be on AKL. Despite what NZ has said I think the main focus may be FIFO traffic, there is a definite increase in mining traffic out of PER in recent months, new projects are coming online while there are others in construction mode, there is talking that the next mining boom is not too far away, lithium being the next big thing which will come into full swing over the next 12 months. Depending on how things go it will be interesting to see if NZ just sticks with the 9-10 weekly PER-AKL or increase that to double daily. FIFO traffic out of PER is at its highest on Tuesdays, Wednesday's and Thursday's, could NZ operate a mix of 789's and 78J's to match capacity required?
Forum Moderator
 
zkncj
Posts: 3033
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:34 am

qf789 wrote:
I guess that is always possible, though the focus seems to be on AKL. Despite what NZ has said I think the main focus may be FIFO traffic, there is a definite increase in mining traffic out of PER in recent months, new projects are coming online while there are others in construction mode, there is talking that the next mining boom is not too far away, lithium being the next big thing which will come into full swing over the next 12 months. Depending on how things go it will be interesting to see if NZ just sticks with the 9-10 weekly PER-AKL or increase that to double daily. FIFO traffic out of PER is at its highest on Tuesdays, Wednesday's and Thursday's, could NZ operate a mix of 789's and 78J's to match capacity required?


I guess it will come down to what VA,QF.JQ end up doing e.g if there is market for NZ todo double daily surely there is an market for VA or QF to come in (if they had spare resources).

Could we see JQ come onto PER-AKL once they get there A321LR's?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:08 am

qf789 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ6 wrote:


Sounds like a nice 78J route along with DPS, HNL, PPT, RAR-LAX......


Is that a hint?

I wonder if CHC could go year round?


I guess that is always possible, though the focus seems to be on AKL. Despite what NZ has said I think the main focus may be FIFO traffic, there is a definite increase in mining traffic out of PER in recent months, new projects are coming online while there are others in construction mode, there is talking that the next mining boom is not too far away, lithium being the next big thing which will come into full swing over the next 12 months. Depending on how things go it will be interesting to see if NZ just sticks with the 9-10 weekly PER-AKL or increase that to double daily. FIFO traffic out of PER is at its highest on Tuesdays, Wednesday's and Thursday's, could NZ operate a mix of 789's and 78J's to match capacity required?


I’d have thought double daily ex AKL would be the long term goal with connections to the Americas, then they could operate 789/78J mix seasonally to match capacity to demand more closely.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:30 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
I’d have thought double daily ex AKL would be the long term goal with connections to the Americas, then they could operate 789/78J mix seasonally to match capacity to demand more closely.

I thihk we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves to suggest that a 78J/789 mix on AKL-PER might be possible. So far, there's only been the slightest hint that the 78J is even in the mix. Besides, if they increase from 9-10 services a week to 14 services a week, that would already be a huge capacity increase . . . especially if the strategy may be frustrated by the entry of QF on the route. The idea of adding the 78J as well seems very risky in that context.

For my money, the 78J won't even make it into the fleet; I predict the future fleet will be something like 15x A350-1000 and 15x 787-9. NZ's stated priority is to increase the main Asian services to double daily (partly so that connections to and from South America can work well) and increasing the seat count on Asian flights to the capacity of a 78J can only delay the achievement of that better frequency.

To those who suggest that the A350-1000 would be too large as a 77E replacement, I suggest that the 789 and the 77E were bigger aircraft than the 763, and they pretty much replaced them flight-for-flight. The increase in size is only of the order of 40 seats above the 313 of the 77E - that's equivalent to about two years' very ordinary capacity growth.

But I've been wrong before . . .
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:02 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
I’d have thought double daily ex AKL would be the long term goal with connections to the Americas, then they could operate 789/78J mix seasonally to match capacity to demand more closely.

I thihk we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves to suggest that a 78J/789 mix on AKL-PER might be possible. So far, there's only been the slightest hint that the 78J is even in the mix. Besides, if they increase from 9-10 services a week to 14 services a week, that would already be a huge capacity increase . . . especially if the strategy may be frustrated by the entry of QF on the route. The idea of adding the 78J as well seems very risky in that context.

For my money, the 78J won't even make it into the fleet; I predict the future fleet will be something like 15x A350-1000 and 15x 787-9. NZ's stated priority is to increase the main Asian services to double daily (partly so that connections to and from South America can work well) and increasing the seat count on Asian flights to the capacity of a 78J can only delay the achievement of that better frequency.

To those who suggest that the A350-1000 would be too large as a 77E replacement, I suggest that the 789 and the 77E were bigger aircraft than the 763, and they pretty much replaced them flight-for-flight. The increase in size is only of the order of 40 seats above the 313 of the 77E - that's equivalent to about two years' very ordinary capacity growth.

But I've been wrong before . . .


Yes true, I’ve heard plenty of different opinions, the 78J and A350 in the same fleet is an interesting one, I think the larger 78J would add premium seats on at least 1 daily service to HKG/SIN/TYO maybe PER/PVG, with a 789 on the second flight.

I agree the 35J would probably be ok as a 772 replacement. Upsize 772 routes and enough range for ULH possibly.

Still it’s only on here where the 77X is to big or expensive or heavy or wherever.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:53 pm

777ER wrote:
Birdiey wrote:
https://i.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/business/108963539/hamilton-airport-upgrading-researching-potential-to-bring-in-more-airlines

Hamilton Airport considering bringing more airlines in. Thoughts?

Very surprised JQ didn't launch HLZ when the Q300s arrived, compared to New Plymouth. ROT is another port I thought would have come before New Plymouth


ROT doesn’t see the volume that NPL does. No where near as many flights. Keep in mind they are AKL centric. TRG will be next if they expand
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:37 pm

zkncj wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
I'd be disappointed if they can't attract JQ and VA, capturing not just HLZ but people from around the wider Bay of Plenty & Waikato area (TRG/ROT etc)... as long as it can compete with AKL on fares.


HLZ used to have VA services to either BNE or SYD? can't remember what it was.

In the past HLZ has had NZ/SJ doing routes like SYD,BNE,OOL,NAN all of which have failed in favour of people taking flights out of AKL.

HLZ really needs to be 'cheap' to attract someone like TT to start Tasman Services from HLZ, then needs to partner with an bus company to provide 'cheap' transfers to say Auckland and the Bay of Plenty.

As AKL becomes more crowded, an budget option ex-HLZ could work.


Yeah, that's why I said it needs to compete with AKL on fares.

We're 22 years on from Kiwi International Airlines, fares are cheaper and the popular of HLZ has increased. I know Freedom etc have done it more recently and ROT was a subsidised fail but it's about 1/4 the size of HLZ.

If HLZ is serious they may need to offer very low fees etc to attract a JQ or VA.
 
HLZCPH
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:35 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Thu Dec 06, 2018 12:50 pm

Hi. I see NZ6 to LAX (OKN) turned back to AKL on Wednesday night and hasn't flown since. Does anyone know what the problem was?
I saw NZM pop up on the radar briefly yesterday at the AKL maintenance shop. Is it getting close to coming back into service? Must be getting a bit crowded with NZC, NZF, NZJ, NZM parked up!
 
Gasman
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:22 pm

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12172849

While it could be argued that it's not like me to side with NZ management, I'm with the airline on this one. Is there really still a place for strike action in 2018? It seems to me like a hangover from the depression days and has no place in today's more regulated, and more ethical business environment. Don't think you're paid enough? Then negotiate with your employer in good faith. And if that doesn't work, and you're still not happy no one is stopping you from getting another job. If you really are worth what you think you are, that shouldn't be much of a problem.

But holding your employer to ransom - "pay me more or I'll screw with your business" - to me leaves a bad taste.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:48 pm

Gasman wrote:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12172849

While it could be argued that it's not like me to side with NZ management, I'm with the airline on this one. Is there really still a place for strike action in 2018? It seems to me like a hangover from the depression days and has no place in today's more regulated, and more ethical business environment. Don't think you're paid enough? Then negotiate with your employer in good faith. And if that doesn't work, and you're still not happy no one is stopping you from getting another job. If you really are worth what you think you are, that shouldn't be much of a problem.

But holding your employer to ransom - "pay me more or I'll screw with your business" - to me leaves a bad taste.


Totally agree, Gasman!
Air France forged themselves a very bad reputation over the years due to the many strikes. And even the otherwise so good Lufthansa had quite a few pilot strikes a couple of years back, and suffered a massive subsequent reputation loss. These people do not realise that they sawing off the branch they are sitting on - if your business is going down due to such action, it is your own job that is potentially on the line!
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:42 am

Gasman wrote:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12172849

While it could be argued that it's not like me to side with NZ management, I'm with the airline on this one. Is there really still a place for strike action in 2018? It seems to me like a hangover from the depression days and has no place in today's more regulated, and more ethical business environment. Don't think you're paid enough? Then negotiate with your employer in good faith. And if that doesn't work, and you're still not happy no one is stopping you from getting another job. If you really are worth what you think you are, that shouldn't be much of a problem.

But holding your employer to ransom - "pay me more or I'll screw with your business" - to me leaves a bad taste.


Hook, line and sinker. Forgive my cynicism but your response is essentially a validation of the media strategy around this issue. I'm obviously highly suspicious that the later reported mediation may have actually been agreed to prior to the above press release.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:09 am

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1812/S ... rvices.htm

NZ to operate seasonal CHC-SIN With 789.
 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:38 am

 
NZ6
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:39 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1812/S00185/air-new-zealand-to-operate-christchurch-singapore-services.htm

NZ to operate seasonal CHC-SIN With 789.


Didn't see that you had posted this as I hadn't refreshed my page. My apologies.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - December 2018

Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:37 am

NZ6 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1812/S00185/air-new-zealand-to-operate-christchurch-singapore-services.htm

NZ to operate seasonal CHC-SIN With 789.


Didn't see that you had posted this as I hadn't refreshed my page. My apologies.


All good. I can’t say I saw that coming but it will replace the second seasonal SQ service that is 3 weekly, so a 5 weekly 789 is a nice little increase, looks like a code 2? Certainly not where i expected those to go. Good to see however.

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