User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 8919
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:23 pm

Welcome to New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019. Please continue to add your comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1426001&p=21550157#p21550157
Forum Moderator
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:14 pm

tealnz wrote:
I don't think it's all that complicated:

- Obviously they haven't taken a decision on what will replace the 77Ws. They did take a decision to "compartmentalise" the 77W replacement – meaning they didn't build that into the new 78J/789/GEnX package, even though that order includes a number of options.

- The working assumption is that they will replace the 77Ws with an aircraft larger than a 787 – Luxon specified 35K and 77X as possibilities. That's not a throwaway line: it implies the analysis they did for the 77E replacement came up with a continuing need for a type in the 35K/77X category.

- It's not a surprise. NZ may be fine flying pax-only 789s from NYC and ORD and 78Js on some LAX/SFO services. But they also need aircraft in the fleet that can carry a hold full of freight westbound. Cargo revenue is mostly profit - it's important for the bottom line.

- Yes we are seeing a continuing shift in long-haul strategy away from hubbing toward point to point. NZ like monopoly routes and they are planning for more, including ULH routes. Luxon still said they expected to need a larger aircraft to replace the 77Ws. There is no inconsistency there.


And I'd happily debate that it's not as simple as finding the best aircraft between the A35K and 77X, in response to your points

- From the outset the 77W was never part of the 772 replacement programme. OKS hasn't even had her 5th birthday yet so what will the world look like in 5-9years time?

- The A35K and 777X are the only options in the market at this point in time. While Luxon is saying, currently it's looking like they want a larger aircraft, the other side of the coin is there is a new CEO is coming, point to point flying is proving highly successful, the improved 78J is coming and will it's performance change their view, we're talking 5-6+years away. In simple terms, does NZ need the size of the 77W if it continues to perform really well with 787 sized aircraft into more routes.

- Cargo is mostly profit? No, it's not. Besides, the airline has done partnerships before with Atlas Air, QF has recently done this and what's stopping NZ from commencing something like this moving forward?

- Re the consistency of Luxon's comments and the change in trend. All that can be said is no one has a crystal ball. History shows 744' and 77W's have performed well into LAX/LHR/SFO etc but there is recent history of huge success not just with NZ but with many other carriers as they open more direct routes with slightly smaller more fuel-efficient aircraft.


I guess what I'm saying is, hang onto those comments from Luxon and you may well be right. however, there's an old saying about a frog and pot of boiling water. Look around at what's happening in the industry and what's happening really well. In 2030 will we see, 30+/- 787's spanning all over the pacific including say 8-9 North America ports? over 2x daily AKLLAX with a 777-8?

No one is right or wrong here as it's simply an unknown
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:25 pm

tealnz wrote:
Luxon has just announced the 78Js, to great fanfare. But he doesn't see them as the eventual 77W replacement. He says specifically he expected the airline to be looking at the 35K and 77X as the 77W replacement. Nothing complicated about what he said. And of course the 77W decision is years away. But Luxon will be basing his comments on the same analysis of future fleet needs that produced the 78J decision. You can't have it both ways.


tealnz, he's also left the door open and commented on what they probably want as of today. He's suggesting their analysis shows they want something bigger, is the 77X too big, do they want the A35K given it'll be a small fleet from another manufacturer? Have they even looked at this yet? When they do what will the outcome be?

I personally take that article is being about the relationship between the recent order and the 77W, in that there is none! Put simply, or in his words, "the 787 is not code for the 77W".

Let's just get the 78J on board, see what it can do, see where the market and industry goes over the next 4-6 years but keep monitoring it.

Don't forget, if LAX-LHR ever loses its strength as it's own stand-alone route, the airline will drop it. NZ isn't determined to keep a AKL-XXX-LHR route
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:49 pm

Hi Guys

can you explain the timeline for 77W replacement, please? I.e., when you say 5-6 years, do you mean the replacement *order* will be in 5-6 years, or the first ordered aircraft will enter service in 5-6 years? It is a genuine question, and it makes a HUGE difference in the debate to me. If indeed the *order* is still 5-6 years away, then it is almost moot discussing it already, since, as some of you already mentioned, things can change drastically in this time, in terms of external factors (economy, demand, competition), in terms of aircraft development/enhancements, and in terms of leadership at the airline.
If the first aircraft should be delivered by then, an order is not that far away, right?
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:06 pm

zkeoj wrote:
Hi Guys

can you explain the timeline for 77W replacement, please? I.e., when you say 5-6 years, do you mean the replacement *order* will be in 5-6 years, or the first ordered aircraft will enter service in 5-6 years? It is a genuine question, and it makes a HUGE difference in the debate to me. If indeed the *order* is still 5-6 years away, then it is almost moot discussing it already, since, as some of you already mentioned, things can change drastically in this time, in terms of external factors (economy, demand, competition), in terms of aircraft development/enhancements, and in terms of leadership at the airline.
If the first aircraft should be delivered by then, an order is not that far away, right?


You're 100% right which is sort of why I'm saying don't dismiss the 787 if things continue as they have.

To answer your question, there is no confirmed window, using the same article Luxon has said "Our intention at this stage is that when the 777-300s come up for replacement towards the mid-to-late 2020s ".

That's a large window and even with an 18-24month delivery timeline, you won't see much until 2024-2025 assuming they're looking around +/-2027, especially if they want to see how the 78J pans out. BUT it could be as early as 2022(ish) for a decsion..
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:51 pm

NZ6 wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
Hi Guys

can you explain the timeline for 77W replacement, please? I.e., when you say 5-6 years, do you mean the replacement *order* will be in 5-6 years, or the first ordered aircraft will enter service in 5-6 years? It is a genuine question, and it makes a HUGE difference in the debate to me. If indeed the *order* is still 5-6 years away, then it is almost moot discussing it already, since, as some of you already mentioned, things can change drastically in this time, in terms of external factors (economy, demand, competition), in terms of aircraft development/enhancements, and in terms of leadership at the airline.
If the first aircraft should be delivered by then, an order is not that far away, right?


You're 100% right which is sort of why I'm saying don't dismiss the 787 if things continue as they have.

To answer your question, there is no confirmed window, using the same article Luxon has said "Our intention at this stage is that when the 777-300s come up for replacement towards the mid-to-late 2020s ".

That's a large window and even with an 18-24month delivery timeline, you won't see much until 2024-2025 assuming they're looking around +/-2027, especially if they want to see how the 78J pans out. BUT it could be as early as 2022(ish) for a decsion..


Thanks, NZ6 ;-)
 
axio
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:53 pm

Air All Blacks is out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C24vrbrKxo
Should be massively less controversial than the last one :)
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:14 am

NZ6 wrote:
And I'd happily debate that it's not as simple as finding the best aircraft between the A35K and 77X, in response to your points

- From the outset the 77W was never part of the 772 replacement programme. OKS hasn't even had her 5th birthday yet so what will the world look like in 5-9years time?

- The A35K and 777X are the only options in the market at this point in time. While Luxon is saying, currently it's looking like they want a larger aircraft, the other side of the coin is there is a new CEO is coming, point to point flying is proving highly successful, the improved 78J is coming and will it's performance change their view, we're talking 5-6+years away. In simple terms, does NZ need the size of the 77W if it continues to perform really well with 787 sized aircraft into more routes.

- Cargo is mostly profit? No, it's not. Besides, the airline has done partnerships before with Atlas Air, QF has recently done this and what's stopping NZ from commencing something like this moving forward?

- Re the consistency of Luxon's comments and the change in trend. All that can be said is no one has a crystal ball. History shows 744' and 77W's have performed well into LAX/LHR/SFO etc but there is recent history of huge success not just with NZ but with many other carriers as they open more direct routes with slightly smaller more fuel-efficient aircraft.

I guess what I'm saying is, hang onto those comments from Luxon and you may well be right. however, there's an old saying about a frog and pot of boiling water. Look around at what's happening in the industry and what's happening really well. In 2030 will we see, 30+/- 787's spanning all over the pacific including say 8-9 North America ports? over 2x daily AKLLAX with a 777-8?

No one is right or wrong here as it's simply an unknown


I'm confused. If all you're saying is that we don't know how things will look in the mid-2020s then fine, we can't know, but in that case I dunno why we have a bunch of posts saying the answer should be the 78J.

I'm simply saying (in response to all the 78J posts) that, as of now, with the benefit of all the analysis that went into the 77E replacement decision (including NZ's detailed knowledge of what the improved 787 will offer) Luxon is saying that he expects the 77W replacement contenders will be the 35K and 77X. He should know.
 
stor72
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 12:50 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:27 am

NZ6 wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Luxon has just announced the 78Js, to great fanfare. But he doesn't see them as the eventual 77W replacement. He says specifically he expected the airline to be looking at the 35K and 77X as the 77W replacement. Nothing complicated about what he said. And of course the 77W decision is years away. But Luxon will be basing his comments on the same analysis of future fleet needs that produced the 78J decision. You can't have it both ways.


tealnz, he's also left the door open and commented on what they probably want as of today. He's suggesting their analysis shows they want something bigger, is the 77X too big, do they want the A35K given it'll be a small fleet from another manufacturer? Have they even looked at this yet? When they do what will the outcome be?

Maybe they could promote some of the A320 crew to the 350K? Lot of commonality between the airbus fleet.
Hi.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:53 am

stor72 wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
tealnz wrote:
Luxon has just announced the 78Js, to great fanfare. But he doesn't see them as the eventual 77W replacement. He says specifically he expected the airline to be looking at the 35K and 77X as the 77W replacement. Nothing complicated about what he said. And of course the 77W decision is years away. But Luxon will be basing his comments on the same analysis of future fleet needs that produced the 78J decision. You can't have it both ways.


tealnz, he's also left the door open and commented on what they probably want as of today. He's suggesting their analysis shows they want something bigger, is the 77X too big, do they want the A35K given it'll be a small fleet from another manufacturer? Have they even looked at this yet? When they do what will the outcome be?

Maybe they could promote some of the A320 crew to the 350K? Lot of commonality between the airbus fleet.


Oh boy! :roll:
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:14 am

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395 ... on-neutral

Electric Turbo Props within the decade.
 
concordianSYD
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:29 am

The new safety video is much more palatable. But it makes me curious, will an All Blacks Jersey ever have a big fat Koru on it? I’m surprised it never has (or has it - I don’t recall). Does NZ want to be the principal sponsor of the AB’s? maybe not, who knows. I don’t even know if NZ is a minor sponsor even though they piggy-back the AB’s so much.
Concord is simply my home, sadly not a reference to a plane I’ve flown.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:35 am

tealnz wrote:
I'm confused. If all you're saying is that we don't know how things will look in the mid-2020s then fine, we can't know, but in that case I dunno why we have a bunch of posts saying the answer should be the 78J.

I'm simply saying (in response to all the 78J posts) that, as of now, with the benefit of all the analysis that went into the 77E replacement decision (including NZ's detailed knowledge of what the improved 787 will offer) Luxon is saying that he expects the 77W replacement contenders will be the 35K and 77X. He should know.


- Luxon stated they probably want something larger, then quoted the two obvious options which likely came out of the RFI's when looking at options to replace the 772 and commented how impressed they were
- Luxon said at this point the 787-10s (or nines) are not code for replacing the -300s.

The underlying point(s) here is, he's been quoted on a bunch lines when obviously questioned around the topic of 787 and 77W together. There is no confirmed decision yet and it could go either way. I'm not saying you're wrong and I don't believe it will go 787 way. It could go either way.
 
concordianSYD
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:48 am

concordianSYD wrote:
The new safety video is much more palatable. But it makes me curious, will an All Blacks Jersey ever have a big fat Koru on it? I’m surprised it never has (or has it - I don’t recall). Does NZ want to be the principal sponsor of the AB’s? maybe not, who knows. I don’t even know if NZ is a minor sponsor even though they piggy-back the AB’s so much.



Have just looked up the AB’s sponsors and NZ is a ‘global partner’ which is one level down from ‘major global partner’ being AIG, which is below the ‘principal sponsor’ being Adidas. The top two get a mention on the jersey only.
Concord is simply my home, sadly not a reference to a plane I’ve flown.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:26 am

NZ6 wrote:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395714/air-nz-boss-flags-flying-guilt-as-challenge-to-be-more-carbon-neutral

Electric Turbo Props within the decade.


Well the Q300's aren't getting any newer....

An electric ATR 72-XXX would be interesting, but do wonder how long the aircraft would have to be on the ground to charge between services.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:48 am

zkncj wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395714/air-nz-boss-flags-flying-guilt-as-challenge-to-be-more-carbon-neutral

Electric Turbo Props within the decade.


Well the Q300's aren't getting any newer....

An electric ATR 72-XXX would be interesting, but do wonder how long the aircraft would have to be on the ground to charge between services.

I’d imagine any aircraft would have multiple chargers plugged in so 30 mins should be possible to give 2 hours flying time.
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:48 am

NZ6 wrote:
stor72 wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

tealnz, he's also left the door open and commented on what they probably want as of today. He's suggesting their analysis shows they want something bigger, is the 77X too big, do they want the A35K given it'll be a small fleet from another manufacturer? Have they even looked at this yet? When they do what will the outcome be?

Maybe they could promote some of the A320 crew to the 350K? Lot of commonality between the airbus fleet.


Oh boy! :roll:


I’m sure the 777 crew will enjoy the promotion to the ATR.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:51 am

NZ6 wrote:
tealnz wrote:
I'm confused. If all you're saying is that we don't know how things will look in the mid-2020s then fine, we can't know, but in that case I dunno why we have a bunch of posts saying the answer should be the 78J.

I'm simply saying (in response to all the 78J posts) that, as of now, with the benefit of all the analysis that went into the 77E replacement decision (including NZ's detailed knowledge of what the improved 787 will offer) Luxon is saying that he expects the 77W replacement contenders will be the 35K and 77X. He should know.


- Luxon stated they probably want something larger, then quoted the two obvious options which likely came out of the RFI's when looking at options to replace the 772 and commented how impressed they were
- Luxon said at this point the 787-10s (or nines) are not code for replacing the -300s.

The underlying point(s) here is, he's been quoted on a bunch lines when obviously questioned around the topic of 787 and 77W together. There is no confirmed decision yet and it could go either way. I'm not saying you're wrong and I don't believe it will go 787 way. It could go either way.


Well it will be interesting to see if they send the initial 78J to the Us west coast, if it’s improved enough, as a trial more than replace 77Ws Interesting times.
 
PA515
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:50 am

After ZK-NBT's post about the LAX schedule I had another look at my sample Air NZ schedule for the week 16-22 Dec 2019. There are 8 x 77Ws and 7 x 77Es utilised which means three 77W flights to LAX/SFO/IAH in the schedule will be 77Es to match the fleet of 7 x 77W and 8 x 77E.

Also NZ5 LAX-AKL now departs LAX an hour before NZ1 instead of 45 min after. The 16-22 Dec 2019 week for AKL-LAX/IAH/SFO (so far) is as follows:

NZ6 AKL-LAX 1930/1035 77E Mo We Fr Su --- NZ5 LAX-AKL 2005/0600 77E Mo We Fr Su
NZ6 AKL-LAX 1930/1035 77W Tu Th Sa --- NZ5 LAX-AKL 2005/0600 77W Tu Th Sa
NZ2 AKL-LAX 2255/1400 77W Daily --- NZ1 LAX-AKL 2105/0700 77W Daily

NZ28 AKL-IAH 1935/1410 77E Mo --- NZ29 IAH-AKL 1955/0555 77E Mo
NZ28 AKL-IAH 1935/1410 77W ex Mo --- NZ29 IAH-AKL 1955/0555 77W ex Mo

NZ8 AKL-SFO 1945/1100 77W Daily --- NZ7 SFO-AKL 1940/0545 77W Daily

PA515
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:13 am

PA515 wrote:
After ZK-NBT's post about the LAX schedule I had another look at my sample Air NZ schedule for the week 16-22 Dec 2019. There are 8 x 77Ws and 7 x 77Es utilised which means three 77W flights to LAX/SFO/IAH in the schedule will be 77Es to match the fleet of 7 x 77W and 8 x 77E.

Also NZ5 LAX-AKL now departs LAX an hour before NZ1 instead of 45 min after. The 16-22 Dec 2019 week for AKL-LAX/IAH/SFO (so far) is as follows:

NZ6 AKL-LAX 1930/1035 77E Mo We Fr Su --- NZ5 LAX-AKL 2005/0600 77E Mo We Fr Su
NZ6 AKL-LAX 1930/1035 77W Tu Th Sa --- NZ5 LAX-AKL 2005/0600 77W Tu Th Sa
NZ2 AKL-LAX 2255/1400 77W Daily --- NZ1 LAX-AKL 2105/0700 77W Daily

NZ28 AKL-IAH 1935/1410 77E Mo --- NZ29 IAH-AKL 1955/0555 77E Mo
NZ28 AKL-IAH 1935/1410 77W ex Mo --- NZ29 IAH-AKL 1955/0555 77W ex Mo

NZ8 AKL-SFO 1945/1100 77W Daily --- NZ7 SFO-AKL 1940/0545 77W Daily

PA515


Interesting If IAH is 6 77W, 1 77E, it would have to be NZ5/6 which shows 3 weekly 777-300 that would be a 772 interesting if that flight is a daily 772. SFO usually gets a weekly 772 but looks like IAH gets it instead.

Second NRT is a 772 on the 3 days it operates as is HNL 5 weekly.

Did you figure out PA515 where the code 2 789s go? It seems YVR x7, SIN x7, ORD x5 which means CHC-SIN will be a code 1, initially it seemed CHC-SIN would be a code 2 rotating with AKL-SIN via a W pattern, AKL-SIN-CHC-SIN-AKL now there is some 789 domestic services loaded, I think on Monday and Wednesday to position the CHC-SIN aircraft.
 
PA515
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 10:18 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
Interesting If IAH is 6 77W, 1 77E, it would have to be NZ5/6 which shows 3 weekly 777-300 that would be a 772 interesting if that flight is a daily 772. SFO usually gets a weekly 772 but looks like IAH gets it instead.


Possibly, but with LAX/SFO/IAH now all departing and arriving AKL within 15 mins of each other, they can vary where the 77E goes without disrupting the rest of the schedule. Just about every week is a different mix now.

ZK-NBT wrote:
Did you figure out PA515 where the code 2 789s go? It seems YVR x7, SIN x7, ORD x5 which means CHC-SIN will be a code 1, initially it seemed CHC-SIN would be a code 2 rotating with AKL-SIN via a W pattern, AKL-SIN-CHC-SIN-AKL now there is some 789 domestic services loaded, I think on Monday and Wednesday to position the CHC-SIN aircraft.


As for the Code 2 789s, the only way for it to work appears to be for AKL-SIN-AKL Sa & Su to be a Code 1 (or AKL-SIN-CHC Sa / CHC-SIN-AKL Su). Air NZ's 'Press Release' for CHC-SIN said it would be a Code 2, but they can change that. They've been mixing up Code 1 and Code 2 a bit. About half the flights to PER recently have been Code 2.

The schedule now has the 789s CHC-AKL 1130/1255 Mo & We and AKL-CHC 0730/0855 Tu & Th. All CHC-AKL flights are now 1hr 25min, was just AKL-CHC.

The NW schedule has not been updated with AKL-SYD/MEL/BNE/OOL/NAN/APW/TBU yet (still showing 320 instead of 321neo or 320neo). AKL-ADL/RAR/NOU/IUE have been updated, but not sure about AKL/CHC-PER.

PA515
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 10:47 am

PA515 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Interesting If IAH is 6 77W, 1 77E, it would have to be NZ5/6 which shows 3 weekly 777-300 that would be a 772 interesting if that flight is a daily 772. SFO usually gets a weekly 772 but looks like IAH gets it instead.


Possibly, but with LAX/SFO/IAH now all departing and arriving AKL within 15 mins of each other, they can vary where the 77E goes without disrupting the rest of the schedule. Just about every week is a different mix now.

ZK-NBT wrote:
Did you figure out PA515 where the code 2 789s go? It seems YVR x7, SIN x7, ORD x5 which means CHC-SIN will be a code 1, initially it seemed CHC-SIN would be a code 2 rotating with AKL-SIN via a W pattern, AKL-SIN-CHC-SIN-AKL now there is some 789 domestic services loaded, I think on Monday and Wednesday to position the CHC-SIN aircraft.


As for the Code 2 789s, the only way for it to work appears to be for AKL-SIN-AKL Sa & Su to be a Code 1 (or AKL-SIN-CHC Sa / CHC-SIN-AKL Su). Air NZ's 'Press Release' for CHC-SIN said it would be a Code 2, but they can change that. They've been mixing up Code 1 and Code 2 a bit. About half the flights to PER recently have been Code 2.

The schedule now has the 789s CHC-AKL 1130/1255 Mo & We and AKL-CHC 0730/0855 Tu & Th. All CHC-AKL flights are now 1hr 25min, was just AKL-CHC.

The NW schedule has not been updated with AKL-SYD/MEL/BNE/OOL/NAN/APW/TBU yet (still showing 320 instead of 321neo or 320neo). AKL-ADL/RAR/NOU/IUE have been updated, but not sure about AKL/CHC-PER.

PA515


The 4 code 2 frames only have 2 set routes over NS being 5 weekly AKL-SIN NZ283/284 and 3 weekly AKL-ORD. I’ve seen them going to PER a lot as you say NRT/PVG get them a bit as well.

With 5 code 2 frames for NW they can cover daily AKL-YVR And SIN along with 5x ORD, it’s just what they do with CHC-SIN.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1078
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 3:36 pm

I looked at NZ both in September and early December and the business cabin was already full on a number of dates. Seems they don't have the fleet mix quite right. I would suggest that SIN warrants code 2 in that instance. But it wasn't showing. Let's hope.
Plane mad!
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Fri Aug 02, 2019 10:42 pm

NZ321 wrote:
I looked at NZ both in September and early December and the business cabin was already full on a number of dates. Seems they don't have the fleet mix quite right. I would suggest that SIN warrants code 2 in that instance. But it wasn't showing. Let's hope.


Which route? Just SIN? NZ283/284 is 5 weekly and is a code 2 with 27J, NZ281/282 is a daily code 1 with 18J less than a single SQ 77W which has 48J and 4F.

There was mention here and by Luxon that there is a need for more premium seating on some Asian routes which we will probably are when the 78J arrives, while for now they will make do with what they have. Routes like PVG/NRT. There is a possibility of a quick reconfiguration of some code 1 to code 2? Or using 772s on longer routes to Asia more?
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sat Aug 03, 2019 7:43 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ321 wrote:
I looked at NZ both in September and early December and the business cabin was already full on a number of dates. Seems they don't have the fleet mix quite right. I would suggest that SIN warrants code 2 in that instance. But it wasn't showing. Let's hope.


Which route? Just SIN? NZ283/284 is 5 weekly and is a code 2 with 27J, NZ281/282 is a daily code 1 with 18J less than a single SQ 77W which has 48J and 4F.

There was mention here and by Luxon that there is a need for more premium seating on some Asian routes which we will probably are when the 78J arrives, while for now they will make do with what they have. Routes like PVG/NRT. There is a possibility of a quick reconfiguration of some code 1 to code 2? Or using 772s on longer routes to Asia more?
77E will be doing KIX apparently and maybe NRT.
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sat Aug 03, 2019 8:08 am

Zkpilot wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ321 wrote:
I looked at NZ both in September and early December and the business cabin was already full on a number of dates. Seems they don't have the fleet mix quite right. I would suggest that SIN warrants code 2 in that instance. But it wasn't showing. Let's hope.


Which route? Just SIN? NZ283/284 is 5 weekly and is a code 2 with 27J, NZ281/282 is a daily code 1 with 18J less than a single SQ 77W which has 48J and 4F.

There was mention here and by Luxon that there is a need for more premium seating on some Asian routes which we will probably are when the 78J arrives, while for now they will make do with what they have. Routes like PVG/NRT. There is a possibility of a quick reconfiguration of some code 1 to code 2? Or using 772s on longer routes to Asia more?
77E will be doing KIX apparently and maybe NRT.


77E is doing NRT during RWC, it is loaded on the second NRT 3 weekly over NW, KIX would surprise me, seems a better 789 route. SIN and maybe PER seem good for 77R
 
PA515
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sat Aug 03, 2019 8:19 am

Zkpilot wrote:
77E will be doing KIX apparently and maybe NRT.


ZK-NBT wrote:
77E is doing NRT during RWC, it is loaded on the second NRT 3 weekly over NW, KIX would surprise me, seems a better 789 route. SIN and maybe PER seem good for 77R


Just checked and AKL-KIX is a 77E 29 Dec to 27 Mar.

PA515
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sat Aug 03, 2019 9:23 am

PA515 wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
77E will be doing KIX apparently and maybe NRT.


ZK-NBT wrote:
77E is doing NRT during RWC, it is loaded on the second NRT 3 weekly over NW, KIX would surprise me, seems a better 789 route. SIN and maybe PER seem good for 77R


Just checked and AKL-KIX is a 77E 29 Dec to 27 Mar.

PA515


Still plenty of changes then. I wonder if that is at the expense of NRT getting a 772? It is alternate days to second NRT so maybe both go 772? Or a 789 short somewhere so a needed change. I didn’t think they would schedule anything other than 789s to KIX.
 
PA515
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sat Aug 03, 2019 3:03 pm

Photo of ATR 72-600 ZK-MVZ in BNE yesterday.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] ... ateposted/

PA515
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Sun Aug 04, 2019 3:16 am

KIX and second NRT getting 772s could be an overall network fleet mix getting more flights in, aircraft likely comes off HKG at 1015 with KIX at 1155 and NRT 1255 departures, they return around midday, and could do NZ125 to MEL at 1530 or one of the US flights at 1930-2000.
 
stor72
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 12:50 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:00 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
stor72 wrote:
Maybe they could promote some of the A320 crew to the 350K? Lot of commonality between the airbus fleet.


Oh boy! :roll:


I’m sure the 777 crew will enjoy the promotion to the ATR.

sort of a retiremnt home maybe?
Hi.
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:37 am

They're buying more 787s anyway, so that will take up some staff with a reasonably small amount of retraining. Presumably a reasonable amount of the 787crew are qualified (though lapsed) on the A320 as that will have been the training pathway since the decline in 737s.
 
User avatar
JacksonAviation
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:37 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:37 am

Would anyone happen to know the departure time of the US Defence E-4B from AKL tomorrow/Wednesday?
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10059
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:18 am

Some1Somewhere wrote:
They're buying more 787s anyway, so that will take up some staff with a reasonably small amount of retraining. Presumably a reasonable amount of the 787crew are qualified (though lapsed) on the A320 as that will have been the training pathway since the decline in 737s.

Think you'll find the 787 crew are ex 767 crew. A320/321 crew are mainly ex B733 crew
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:08 am

Zkpilot wrote:
zkncj wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395714/air-nz-boss-flags-flying-guilt-as-challenge-to-be-more-carbon-neutral

Electric Turbo Props within the decade.


Well the Q300's aren't getting any newer....

An electric ATR 72-XXX would be interesting, but do wonder how long the aircraft would have to be on the ground to charge between services.

I’d imagine any aircraft would have multiple chargers plugged in so 30 mins should be possible to give 2 hours flying time.


Why wouldn’t there be fully charged battery packs waiting at each port?
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:06 am

Motorhussy wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
zkncj wrote:

Well the Q300's aren't getting any newer....

An electric ATR 72-XXX would be interesting, but do wonder how long the aircraft would have to be on the ground to charge between services.

I’d imagine any aircraft would have multiple chargers plugged in so 30 mins should be possible to give 2 hours flying time.


Why wouldn’t there be fully charged battery packs waiting at each port?

Depends on the system. After all electric cars don’t swap out battery packs so why would an aircraft be different? Wings are currently used for fuel. If you put battery packs elsewhere they would eat into passenger capacity and/or baggage & cargo capacity.
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:08 am

Having readily removable battery packs means pulling multiple tons out of likely the wings. Fuel is already likely the heaviest thing on the plane, and batteries are less energy dense.

There is work being done on flow cells, where you have liquid components allowing very fast recharging (cycle old fluid off, new fluid on), but they're not ready yet or for some time.

Multiple chargers isn't going to speed up charging vs one large charger. That's primarily a problem of keeping it in the right temperature range (both too hot and too cold are very bad) and avoiding over-volting the pack, which requires a significant slowdown near end of charge. That last 10% takes a lot longer (per percentile) than the rest of the capacity.
 
User avatar
LaunchDetected
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:30 am

Regarding the electric aircraft, while a full electric ATR is seducing, it clearly won't happen in the next 10 years. However it costs nothing to say it for PR purposes.

Hybrid aircraft could be more plausible in the medium-term.

According to Tom Enders (ex Airbus CEO):
We believe that by 2030 passenger aircraft below 100 seats could be propelled by hybrid propulsion systems...
Caravelle lover
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:51 pm

Some1Somewhere wrote:
There is work being done on flow cells, where you have liquid components allowing very fast recharging (cycle old fluid off, new fluid on), but they're not ready yet or for some time


I'm no techo so please excuse me if this is a daft comment...

When you say old fluid off, are we talking now about 'waste' fluid, therefore, essentially making these batteries not rechargeable and while the engines would not produce carbon emissions would produce, presumably a high volume of toxic or hazardest waste instead? Or can this fluid somehow be reused over and over?
 
NZ6
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:10 pm

LaunchDetected wrote:
Regarding the electric aircraft, while a full electric ATR is seducing, it clearly won't happen in the next 10 years. However it costs nothing to say it for PR purposes.

Hybrid aircraft could be more plausible in the medium-term.

According to Tom Enders (ex Airbus CEO):
We believe that by 2030 passenger aircraft below 100 seats could be propelled by hybrid propulsion systems...


It will be interesting, Air NZ signed an agreement with Airbus in late 2018 to explore hybrid aircraft, as of late last week Air NZ is talking of having electric turboprop within the decade which would be carbon neutral.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395 ... on-neutral
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... d-aircraft

It's yet to be seen if

a) This is one and the same
b) Luxon is talking about a replacement of the older Q300 and these stories are unrelated.

I don't follow this topic close enough to know if there are any other players in the regional market exploring electric propulsion, at a guess Id assume there would have to be.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1437
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:14 pm

Noted that UA is scheduling the 78J on the LAX-PVG route from December. This is a great circle distance of 6,485 statute miles - a whisker shorter than LAX-AKL. Yes, different conditions etc but notwithstanding it seems that the 78J may already be more capable than many of us had assumed. And with the rumored 6T MTOW bump may be even more so.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:15 pm

NZ6 wrote:
LaunchDetected wrote:
Regarding the electric aircraft, while a full electric ATR is seducing, it clearly won't happen in the next 10 years. However it costs nothing to say it for PR purposes.

Hybrid aircraft could be more plausible in the medium-term.

According to Tom Enders (ex Airbus CEO):
We believe that by 2030 passenger aircraft below 100 seats could be propelled by hybrid propulsion systems...


It will be interesting, Air NZ signed an agreement with Airbus in late 2018 to explore hybrid aircraft, as of late last week Air NZ is talking of having electric turboprop within the decade which would be carbon neutral.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/395 ... on-neutral
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... d-aircraft

It's yet to be seen if

a) This is one and the same
b) Luxon is talking about a replacement of the older Q300 and these stories are unrelated.

I don't follow this topic close enough to know if there are any other players in the regional market exploring electric propulsion, at a guess Id assume there would have to be.


These are the ones I am aware of - I am sure there are more:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/14/18535971/ ... ean-energy
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2018081 ... ric-planes
https://electrek.co/2019/04/11/norway-6 ... airplanes/
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:55 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
Noted that UA is scheduling the 78J on the LAX-PVG route from December. This is a great circle distance of 6,485 statute miles - a whisker shorter than LAX-AKL. Yes, different conditions etc but notwithstanding it seems that the 78J may already be more capable than many of us had assumed. And with the rumored 6T MTOW bump may be even more so.


Maybe UA will send theirs to AKL sometime? It defiantly seems a capable frame and people probably get sick of me saying it but I would be surprised if NZ didn’t get more 78Js to replace the 77W fleet.

Interesting though that IAH looks to be getting 77Ws this NW 6 weekly, last NW was 3 77W/4 772 while the previous year was a daily 789 code 2, so pushing more connections away from LAX which was always the plan with NZ5/6 then being a 772 daily.

With that said my question is if IAH is doing that well then do they need a larger frame than the. 78J? It would seem unless the 78J gets a true ER then IAH would be a future 789 route again. So do NZ need a larger plane remains my question? The 778 seems like it may or may not be built, it is a similar size to the 77W but much heavier and extreme range which only a few airlines would need the range. The 779 wouldn’t seat that many more than the 77W maybe 360 and could be good still into the larger hubs?

Then there is UA who could add capacity say with a seasonal at least LAX-AKL to make up any capacity shortfalls as part of the JV.

At this stage I still can’t see a place for the 351 and think NZ will settle on an all 789:78J long haul fleet.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1437
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:06 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
Interesting though that IAH looks to be getting 77Ws this NW 6 weekly, last NW was 3 77W/4 772 while the previous year was a daily 789 code 2, so pushing more connections away from LAX which was always the plan with NZ5/6 then being a 772 daily.

With that said my question is if IAH is doing that well then do they need a larger frame than the 78J.

Surely if IAH is doing so well, it's mainly through ongoing connection traffic, much of it heading north and east. In which case I think it's more likely that the route's apparent success will result in increasing the frequency on AKL-ORD and maybe accelerate the introduction of AKL-EWR, rather than adding an even bigger airframe. NZ's strategy is, after all, diversification in the USA, not concentrating pax through a couple of ports.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:11 am

DavidByrne wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Interesting though that IAH looks to be getting 77Ws this NW 6 weekly, last NW was 3 77W/4 772 while the previous year was a daily 789 code 2, so pushing more connections away from LAX which was always the plan with NZ5/6 then being a 772 daily.

With that said my question is if IAH is doing that well then do they need a larger frame than the 78J.

Surely if IAH is doing so well, it's mainly through ongoing connection traffic, much of it heading north and east. In which case I think it's more likely that the route's apparent success will result in increasing the frequency on AKL-ORD and maybe accelerate the introduction of AKL-EWR, rather than adding an even bigger airframe. NZ's strategy is, after all, diversification in the USA, not concentrating pax through a couple of ports.


Yes I agree, I wonder if ORD could be daily by NW20/21, will be interesting to see for NS20 weather it gets an increase beyond 3 weekly.
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:16 am

Looks as if flight time LAX-PVG will be around 13 hours. On that basis NZ should be able to carry similar pax load to the 77E from SFO/LAX to AKL. Remains to be seen whether any improvements Boeing/GE are offering would also allow significant cargo over and above full pax. Failing that I guess the 77Ws will have to handle freight traffic. Going by Luxon's comments in the latest Australian Aviation it still looks as if NZ are seeing the 78Js primarily as capacity for Asian and regional routes.
 
NYKiwi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:41 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:48 am

Question on ORD connections, have 2 hour connection and the inbound NZ flight always seems to run late and having to clear customs and get to UA just curious id doable and if anyone else has done the connection
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 4:37 am

Some1Somewhere wrote:
Having readily removable battery packs means pulling multiple tons out of likely the wings. Fuel is already likely the heaviest thing on the plane, and batteries are less energy dense.

There is work being done on flow cells, where you have liquid components allowing very fast recharging (cycle old fluid off, new fluid on), but they're not ready yet or for some time.

Multiple chargers isn't going to speed up charging vs one large charger. That's primarily a problem of keeping it in the right temperature range (both too hot and too cold are very bad) and avoiding over-volting the pack, which requires a significant slowdown near end of charge. That last 10% takes a lot longer (per percentile) than the rest of the capacity.

You’re right about multiple chargers for smaller arrangements. Aircraft on the other hand due to their larger size and need for rapid charging would likely have multiple chargers to speed up the process. Yes the final 10% is the hardest, but there is no reason why the battery banks can’t be independent for charging. 2x 5L buckets fill up with 2 taps faster than a 10L bucket with 1 tap is an analogy to help explain it.
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
torin
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:53 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Tue Aug 06, 2019 7:24 am

JacksonAviation wrote:
Would anyone happen to know the departure time of the US Defence E-4B from AKL tomorrow/Wednesday?


It left at 9:30 this morning....

https://www.instagram.com/p/B0zrZ6hBJBR/?igshid=1fcbuo56tjnw3
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - August 2019

Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:18 am

Zkpilot wrote:
Some1Somewhere wrote:
Having readily removable battery packs means pulling multiple tons out of likely the wings. Fuel is already likely the heaviest thing on the plane, and batteries are less energy dense.

There is work being done on flow cells, where you have liquid components allowing very fast recharging (cycle old fluid off, new fluid on), but they're not ready yet or for some time.

Multiple chargers isn't going to speed up charging vs one large charger. That's primarily a problem of keeping it in the right temperature range (both too hot and too cold are very bad) and avoiding over-volting the pack, which requires a significant slowdown near end of charge. That last 10% takes a lot longer (per percentile) than the rest of the capacity.

You’re right about multiple chargers for smaller arrangements. Aircraft on the other hand due to their larger size and need for rapid charging would likely have multiple chargers to speed up the process. Yes the final 10% is the hardest, but there is no reason why the battery banks can’t be independent for charging. 2x 5L buckets fill up with 2 taps faster than a 10L bucket with 1 tap is an analogy to help explain it.

The fundamental limit isn't the tap, or the number of buckets. You can use a fire hose if you want, and that's faster than two taps.

When it comes down to it, the issue is a) getting rid of waste heat, and b) not over-volting the pack (charge acceptance).

A clearly isn't affected by the number of chargers.

B... the battery doesn't care about where the current is coming from. It's all about terminal voltage and amps in that one cell. Kirchoff's law and all that.

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