User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8099
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:05 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Is that the 788 with floaters?


What does that even mean?


You would need a 787 with floats attached to operate to WLG for when you inevitably go off the end of the runway and end up in the bay. It's this little thing called sarcasm.

The runway in WLG is only 6,800 feet, far too short to support non-stop long haul flights.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3309
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:15 pm

Unless The current WLG airport gets a far longer runway, or moves to another location, it isn’t getting any long haul flights.

AKL and CHC will be the be the main gateways. Best of luck to AA with their new services, especially LAX-CHC. Hasn’t been served in quite some time and seasonal service with a 788 should be far better positioned than previous efforts by NZ.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:30 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.


That's what the "floaters" comment means.

Wellington is a reasonably wealthy but tiny city, with very few corporate headquarters left. Throw in its geography - it's not at the end or the beginning of anyone's journey, really, like AKL and CHC are - and the super short runway, and you have your answer as to the likelihood of a WLG-anywhere service.

These are fantastic moves by AA. Totally stolen a march on NZ who I thought may have considered CHC-LAX for a few services a week as they lower frequency on AKL-LAX with all the non stops to other North American cities. Maybe it's a case of dominant carrier complacency, I dunno. Bit I hope it works out for Christchurch and AA.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:32 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.


That's what the "floaters" comment means.

Wellington is a reasonably wealthy but tiny city, with very few corporate headquarters left. Throw in its geography - it's not at the end or the beginning of anyone's journey, really, like AKL and CHC are - and the super short runway, and you have your answer as to the likelihood of a WLG-anywhere service.

These are fantastic moves by AA. Totally stolen a march on NZ who I thought may have considered CHC-LAX for a few services a week as they lower frequency on AKL-LAX with all the non stops to other North American cities. Maybe it's a case of dominant carrier complacency, I dunno. Bit I hope it works out for Christchurch and AA.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7131
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:44 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.[/quote

That's exactly what I meant, runway at WLG just isn't that long at slightly less than 2000m.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:04 am

JonNYC wrote:
Hard to believe anyone would seriously suggest that CHC isn't pretty radical/novel.

In fact, from the time I first posted the rumor, in August, not only did -I- not fully believe it (I even sat on it for a week as it made zero sense to me), but, have an inbox full of folks-- folks that actually know what they are talking about in the arena-- telling me they thought it was too far-fetched and I had been misled, etc., etc.

It had been strongly rumoured in NZ for months, so no real surprise in New Zealand that it happened.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:06 am

clrd4t8koff wrote:
Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.

Not going to happen off a 6,300 ft runway!
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
JonNYC
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:26 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:38 am

DavidByrne wrote:
JonNYC wrote:
Hard to believe anyone would seriously suggest that CHC isn't pretty radical/novel.

In fact, from the time I first posted the rumor, in August, not only did -I- not fully believe it (I even sat on it for a week as it made zero sense to me), but, have an inbox full of folks-- folks that actually know what they are talking about in the arena-- telling me they thought it was too far-fetched and I had been misled, etc., etc.

It had been strongly rumoured in NZ for months, so no real surprise in New Zealand that it happened.

They must all read my Twitter feed then. Makes sense.
 
bhxdtw
Posts: 1141
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 7:28 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:16 am

Can someone with better knowledge provide an up to date list of all Australasian flying from the USA/canada? Like, routes and carriers
Im behind with some of the additions etc.

Thx

Jordan
 
User avatar
hic787
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 4:29 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:22 am

Is DFW - AKL on 787-8 or 787-9 equipment?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7131
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:06 am

hic787 wrote:
Is DFW - AKL on 787-8 or 787-9 equipment?


789.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7131
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:20 am

bhxdtw wrote:
Can someone with better knowledge provide an up to date list of all Australasian flying from the USA/canada? Like, routes and carriers
Im behind with some of the additions etc.

Thx

Jordan


QF

LAX-MEL A380/789
LAX-SYD 380
LAX-BNE 789 (continues to JFK with a change of flight number)
SFO-SYD 744, 789 from DEC
SFO-MEL 789
DFW-SYD 380
SFO-BNE 789 (commences FEB 2020)
ORD-BNE 789 ( commences April 2020)

AA

LAX-SYD 789
LAX-AKL 789 (runs October-March)
LAX-CHC 788 ( commences OCT 2020 seasonal)
DFW-AKL 789 (commences OCT 2020 seasonal)

NZ

AKL-LAX 77W/772
AKL/SFO 77W/772
AKL-IAH 77W/772
AKL-ORD 789
AKL-EWR 789 ( commences OCT 2020)
AKL-YVR 789

UA

SFO-SYD 789(77W DEC-March)
LAX-SYD 789
IAH-SYD 789
SFO-MEL 789 ( new route commenced OCT 19)
LAX-MEL 789
SFO-AKL 77W/772 (78J from DEC 19, 772 usually in NS)

AC

YVR-SYD 77L
YVR-MEL 789
YVR-BNE 788
YVR-AKL 788 ( commences DEC seasonal through March)

VA

LAX-SYD 77W
LAX-BNE 77W
LAX-MEL 77W

DL

LAX-SYD 77L

Plenty of frequency variation particularly NZ/UA, didn’t include HNL. QF also serve SYD-SCL and NZ AKL-EZE.
 
hsuthe19
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:22 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:07 am

I must give credit to AA. They have been using DFW well. They have flights to East Asia, Australia, South America, Europe, soon to be Middle East, and one day, Africa.
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 6:10 am

clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.


Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem

And while it’s a small city its New Zealand’s second largest population, economy and out bound market to the US. And as someone said a gateway to the South Island in its own right.

Easily enough USA pax already for the 3pw aa have announced with ability to support year round (which chc will struggle with) and a sizeable business market.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:17 am

clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

NZ theoretically shouldn't have been able to support three US airlines flying there but look at it now. I'm sure if DL entered it would be less than daily and only seasonally.

Whoever enters WLG-LAX first will be smart. With a similar strategy as CHC and only 2-3x weekly seasonally they'd be sure to print money. Having been to both CHC and WLG there's so much more to see and and do around WLG than CHC after the earthquake, especially with the Marlborough wine region just across the Cook straight from WLG. WLG is an absolutely beautiful city and the 788 the perfect plane to fly there.


Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.

You’d need to add at least 500m onto the WLG runway for trans Pac and even then that’s pushing it. 1000m more would be getting there.
64 types. 44 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12771
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:21 am

NZ321 wrote:
DL had the opportunity and chose to pass on this one like they have on many trans-Pacific opportunities. They seem shy of ultra long haul flying. It's sad. I am not sure why?.

DL has/will have several flights in the 14-16hr range (e.g. ATL-JNB, ATL-BOM, LAX-SYD, ATL-PVG), so how does that equate to "shy of ultra long haul flying"...?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
qf002
Posts: 3602
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:29 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
QF

LAX-MEL A380/789
LAX-SYD 380
LAX-BNE 789 (continues to JFK with a change of flight number)
SFO-SYD 744, 789 from DEC
SFO-MEL 789
DFW-SYD 380
SFO-BNE 789 (commences FEB 2020)
ORD-BNE 789 ( commences April 2020)



And SYD-YVR 3wk 744 Dec-Jan/Jun-Jul
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:33 am

Wellingtons runway has hosted the NZ 747 back in the day. :o

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zea ... on-airport
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
Growing older, but not up.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:14 am

a7ala wrote:
Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem


Only if you try and load with any meaningful payload.

Fully loaded 77L can easily use 2800-3000m runway from sea level. Going WLG-LAX non-stop is only possible if you have zero pax/cargo on your plane.

Michael
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:59 am

eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem


Only if you try and load with any meaningful payload.

Fully loaded 77L can easily use 2800-3000m runway from sea level. Going WLG-LAX non-stop is only possible if you have zero pax/cargo on your plane.

Michael


Nope. Easily full pax load takeoff existing plus pax+cargo on landing. Remember it’s a tailwind ex wlg and it doesn’t need to carry anywhere near full fuel given its only 11-12 hour sector rather than the 18 hours it can do. It’s a 200er sized aircraft with 300er engines so great short runway performance.

Unfortunately airlines use them for what they were developed for - ultra long haul - rather than long haul off short runways.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3309
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 11:04 am

a7ala wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem


Only if you try and load with any meaningful payload.

Fully loaded 77L can easily use 2800-3000m runway from sea level. Going WLG-LAX non-stop is only possible if you have zero pax/cargo on your plane.

Michael


Nope. Easily full pax load takeoff existing plus pax+cargo on landing. Remember it’s a tailwind ex wlg and it doesn’t need to carry anywhere near full fuel given its only 11-12 hour sector rather than the 18 hours it can do. It’s a 200er sized aircraft with 300er engines so great short runway performance.

Unfortunately airlines use them for what they were developed for - ultra long haul - rather than long haul off short runways.


Sorry but it is not long enough for a fully loaded TPAC mission.

Love your optimism, but it’s been clear for a long time that WLG’s runway will not handle long haul with a viable payload and the airlines all seem to agree on that.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3366
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 11:43 am

readytotaxi wrote:
Wellingtons runway has hosted the NZ 747 back in the day. :o

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zea ... on-airport


These were all short-distance ferry flights with 744/777s, the NZ 777s did passengers flights into Wellington after CHC earthquake to help get people out of CHC.

SQ runs an 77E, WLG-MEL-SIN a couple time an week the MEL stop is an fuel stop as they can’t take the required payload ex-WLG to reach SIN which is only an 8-9hr non-stop flight from New Zealand.
 
bevan7
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:44 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 11:51 am

readytotaxi wrote:
Wellingtons runway has hosted the NZ 747 back in the day. :o

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zea ... on-airport

Nice find. I remember a United 747 diverted to Wellington once some time around the late 80s/early 90s. Can't seem to find the footage but they had to divert because Auckland, Christchurch and Ohakea were all closed. IIRC they took off all passengers/luggage etc when they took off back to Auckland
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 12:33 pm

a7ala wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem


Only if you try and load with any meaningful payload.

Fully loaded 77L can easily use 2800-3000m runway from sea level. Going WLG-LAX non-stop is only possible if you have zero pax/cargo on your plane.

Michael


Nope. Easily full pax load takeoff existing plus pax+cargo on landing. Remember it’s a tailwind ex wlg and it doesn’t need to carry anywhere near full fuel given its only 11-12 hour sector rather than the 18 hours it can do. It’s a 200er sized aircraft with 300er engines so great short runway performance.

Unfortunately airlines use them for what they were developed for - ultra long haul - rather than long haul off short runways.

Do you even bother checking the performance sheet before posting? Because your post clearly showing that you don't.

If you ever bother going to Google, type in 777 airport compatability chart, and actually read the payload range chart, you'll know your answer right away. The defence that 777 has superior performance that can go WLG-LAX is meaningless - you just can't beat the fact.

Since you don't bother, let me tell you the fact, straight out of the horse's mouth: taking off from a sea level 2000m runway on a perfect day condition, the plane is weight limited to 620,000lbs instead of the 766,000lbs MTOW. Now the plane itself weights 320,000lbs, with two GE90s consuming roughly 18,000lbs per hour of fuel, you need 234,000lbs plus at least 18,000lbs of reserve on a roughly 13hr WLG-LAX flight. That's 572,000lbs gone. Tell me how much you have left. And remind you this empty weight is real empty weight that does not include any kitchen, seats, toilets, etc. One set of business class seat can be some 880lbs, and you have 37 of that on DL, plus some 300 economy class seats. When you factor in roughly 300lbs per person plus luggage. Tell me that again?

And this is a perfect day ops. WLG is known for shitty weather like wild winds and rains. Try taking off or landing on that.

Michael
 
Brandon757
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:16 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:29 pm

Will DFW-AKL become AA's longest flight from DFW?
 
Detroit313
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:56 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:50 pm

Brandon757 wrote:
Will DFW-AKL become AA's longest flight from DFW?


How long is Hong Kong?
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1692
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:17 pm

Detroit313 wrote:
Brandon757 wrote:
Will DFW-AKL become AA's longest flight from DFW?


How long is Hong Kong?


Hong Kong is longer by about 700 miles.
 
notconcerned
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:14 pm

Brandon757 wrote:
Will DFW-AKL become AA's longest flight from DFW?


DFW-HKG is 8,123mi
DFW-AKL is 7,440mi
DFW-PVG is 7,351mi
 
dfw88
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:25 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:43 pm

notconcerned wrote:
Brandon757 wrote:
Will DFW-AKL become AA's longest flight from DFW?


DFW-HKG is 8,123mi
DFW-AKL is 7,440mi
DFW-PVG is 7,351mi


Also, LAX-SYD is 7,488mi, so while DFW-AKL is the 2nd longest from DFW, it ends up at 3rd longest in the network by only 48 miles.
 
kriskim
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:44 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:33 pm

zkncj wrote:
readytotaxi wrote:
Wellingtons runway has hosted the NZ 747 back in the day. :o

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zea ... on-airport


These were all short-distance ferry flights with 744/777s, the NZ 777s did passengers flights into Wellington after CHC earthquake to help get people out of CHC.

SQ runs an 77E, WLG-MEL-SIN a couple time an week the MEL stop is an fuel stop as they can’t take the required payload ex-WLG to reach SIN which is only an 8-9hr non-stop flight from New Zealand.


I’m sorry, but who told you that MEL was only a “fuel stop” it definitely is not, without having MEL’s pax contribute to the flight, WLG won’t even have a service. SQ247/248 was originally a 3 weekly dedicated MEL service.
A world built upon connectivity.
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:41 pm

eamondzhang wrote:
Do you even bother checking the performance sheet before posting? Because your post clearly showing that you don't.

If you ever bother going to Google, type in 777 airport compatability chart, and actually read the payload range chart, you'll know your answer right away. The defence that 777 has superior performance that can go WLG-LAX is meaningless - you just can't beat the fact.

Since you don't bother, let me tell you the fact, straight out of the horse's mouth: taking off from a sea level 2000m runway on a perfect day condition, the plane is weight limited to 620,000lbs instead of the 766,000lbs MTOW. Now the plane itself weights 320,000lbs, with two GE90s consuming roughly 18,000lbs per hour of fuel, you need 234,000lbs plus at least 18,000lbs of reserve on a roughly 13hr WLG-LAX flight. That's 572,000lbs gone. Tell me how much you have left. And remind you this empty weight is real empty weight that does not include any kitchen, seats, toilets, etc. One set of business class seat can be some 880lbs, and you have 37 of that on DL, plus some 300 economy class seats. When you factor in roughly 300lbs per person plus luggage. Tell me that again?

And this is a perfect day ops. WLG is known for shitty weather like wild winds and rains. Try taking off or landing on that.

Michael


Yes, actually I use the manuals quite regularly (for what they are worth). I prefer to use Kgs rather than Lbs but my take on it:

- OEW aircraft 200LR 145,150kg (from boeing doc)
- RLTW for 2000m runway at sealevel (which is what it performs like when taking balanced field length with clearways) is 295,000kg (from boeing doc table 3.3.5 - higher thrust)
- WLG-LAX GC distance is 5800Nm but add an additional 3-4% for tracking gives around 6000Nm
- 6000Nm mission with 295,000kg implies a non-fuel weight of 195,000kg (boeing doc table 3.2.1)
- Subtracting from 195,000kg the OEW 145,150kg gives a payload of 49,850kg
- DL's 200LR's have 288 seats according to wiki - so around 32,000kg assuming 110kg pax+bag for max pax, leaving another 18,000kg for cargo

So as I said can easily get to LAX with max pax (and significant cargo). And on landing in WLG a max payload is achievable with grooved runway credit.

Conservationism:
- WLG is a windy airport with constant headwind on takeoff - 85% of the time its greater than 5knots and an airline can bank on having this - according to a 200LR flight training manual I have a 5knot headwind could easily provide another 5,000 kg of take-off weight
- WLG-LAX would have around a 10knot tail wind (85% likely winds) on average so EASD might be less than 6000Nm

Optimism:
- OEW of aircraft will likely be higher but only by a few tonnes
- Additional reserve Etops fuel may be required on the pacific run
- You mentioned weather - doesnt affect takeoff much apart from increasing payload on windy headwind days, and wet has little impact on wet/grooved runway

I'll await your apology....
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:19 pm

a7ala wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
Do you even bother checking the performance sheet before posting? Because your post clearly showing that you don't.

If you ever bother going to Google, type in 777 airport compatability chart, and actually read the payload range chart, you'll know your answer right away. The defence that 777 has superior performance that can go WLG-LAX is meaningless - you just can't beat the fact.

Since you don't bother, let me tell you the fact, straight out of the horse's mouth: taking off from a sea level 2000m runway on a perfect day condition, the plane is weight limited to 620,000lbs instead of the 766,000lbs MTOW. Now the plane itself weights 320,000lbs, with two GE90s consuming roughly 18,000lbs per hour of fuel, you need 234,000lbs plus at least 18,000lbs of reserve on a roughly 13hr WLG-LAX flight. That's 572,000lbs gone. Tell me how much you have left. And remind you this empty weight is real empty weight that does not include any kitchen, seats, toilets, etc. One set of business class seat can be some 880lbs, and you have 37 of that on DL, plus some 300 economy class seats. When you factor in roughly 300lbs per person plus luggage. Tell me that again?

And this is a perfect day ops. WLG is known for shitty weather like wild winds and rains. Try taking off or landing on that.

Michael


Yes, actually I use the manuals quite regularly (for what they are worth). I prefer to use Kgs rather than Lbs but my take on it:

- OEW aircraft 200LR 145,150kg (from boeing doc)
- RLTW for 2000m runway at sealevel (which is what it performs like when taking balanced field length with clearways) is 295,000kg (from boeing doc table 3.3.5 - higher thrust)
- WLG-LAX GC distance is 5800Nm but add an additional 3-4% for tracking gives around 6000Nm
- 6000Nm mission with 295,000kg implies a non-fuel weight of 195,000kg (boeing doc table 3.2.1)
- Subtracting from 195,000kg the OEW 145,150kg gives a payload of 49,850kg
- DL's 200LR's have 288 seats according to wiki - so around 32,000kg assuming 110kg pax+bag for max pax, leaving another 18,000kg for cargo

So as I said can easily get to LAX with max pax (and significant cargo). And on landing in WLG a max payload is achievable with grooved runway credit.

Conservationism:
- WLG is a windy airport with constant headwind on takeoff - 85% of the time its greater than 5knots and an airline can bank on having this - according to a 200LR flight training manual I have a 5knot headwind could easily provide another 5,000 kg of take-off weight
- WLG-LAX would have around a 10knot tail wind (85% likely winds) on average so EASD might be less than 6000Nm

Optimism:
- OEW of aircraft will likely be higher but only by a few tonnes
- Additional reserve Etops fuel may be required on the pacific run
- You mentioned weather - doesnt affect takeoff much apart from increasing payload on windy headwind days, and wet has little impact on wet/grooved runway

I'll await your apology....

- Wind and wet runway has a significant impact on take-off performance
- You have never factored in RTO break performance, unless you want to feed the fish. If you ever run into a RTO scenario with that load you'll gonna likely end up int the bay.
- Furnishing weights far more than a few tonnes, easily occupying 15-30 tons and you never recognise that. In fact if the seat weights 400kg for Business Class, you're already 15 tons into your take off weight, and this does not factor in anything else.
- WLG-LAX is not going to cut it with 100 ton of fuel, and you never recognise 772LR's fuel burn. And you have never factored in reserve fuel which can easily be another 10-15 ton on top of it (45min legal minimum, plus the diversion fuel to nearest alternative let's say SFO, and you need another hour's fuel on top of it).

Michael
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:58 pm

eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
Do you even bother checking the performance sheet before posting? Because your post clearly showing that you don't.

If you ever bother going to Google, type in 777 airport compatability chart, and actually read the payload range chart, you'll know your answer right away. The defence that 777 has superior performance that can go WLG-LAX is meaningless - you just can't beat the fact.

Since you don't bother, let me tell you the fact, straight out of the horse's mouth: taking off from a sea level 2000m runway on a perfect day condition, the plane is weight limited to 620,000lbs instead of the 766,000lbs MTOW. Now the plane itself weights 320,000lbs, with two GE90s consuming roughly 18,000lbs per hour of fuel, you need 234,000lbs plus at least 18,000lbs of reserve on a roughly 13hr WLG-LAX flight. That's 572,000lbs gone. Tell me how much you have left. And remind you this empty weight is real empty weight that does not include any kitchen, seats, toilets, etc. One set of business class seat can be some 880lbs, and you have 37 of that on DL, plus some 300 economy class seats. When you factor in roughly 300lbs per person plus luggage. Tell me that again?

And this is a perfect day ops. WLG is known for shitty weather like wild winds and rains. Try taking off or landing on that.

Michael


Yes, actually I use the manuals quite regularly (for what they are worth). I prefer to use Kgs rather than Lbs but my take on it:

- OEW aircraft 200LR 145,150kg (from boeing doc)
- RLTW for 2000m runway at sealevel (which is what it performs like when taking balanced field length with clearways) is 295,000kg (from boeing doc table 3.3.5 - higher thrust)
- WLG-LAX GC distance is 5800Nm but add an additional 3-4% for tracking gives around 6000Nm
- 6000Nm mission with 295,000kg implies a non-fuel weight of 195,000kg (boeing doc table 3.2.1)
- Subtracting from 195,000kg the OEW 145,150kg gives a payload of 49,850kg
- DL's 200LR's have 288 seats according to wiki - so around 32,000kg assuming 110kg pax+bag for max pax, leaving another 18,000kg for cargo

So as I said can easily get to LAX with max pax (and significant cargo). And on landing in WLG a max payload is achievable with grooved runway credit.

Conservationism:
- WLG is a windy airport with constant headwind on takeoff - 85% of the time its greater than 5knots and an airline can bank on having this - according to a 200LR flight training manual I have a 5knot headwind could easily provide another 5,000 kg of take-off weight
- WLG-LAX would have around a 10knot tail wind (85% likely winds) on average so EASD might be less than 6000Nm

Optimism:
- OEW of aircraft will likely be higher but only by a few tonnes
- Additional reserve Etops fuel may be required on the pacific run
- You mentioned weather - doesnt affect takeoff much apart from increasing payload on windy headwind days, and wet has little impact on wet/grooved runway

I'll await your apology....

- Wind and wet runway has a significant impact on take-off performance
- You have never factored in RTO break performance, unless you want to feed the fish. If you ever run into a RTO scenario with that load you'll gonna likely end up int the bay.
- Furnishing weights far more than a few tonnes, easily occupying 15-30 tons and you never recognise that. In fact if the seat weights 400kg for Business Class, you're already 15 tons into your take off weight, and this does not factor in anything else.
- WLG-LAX is not going to cut it with 100 ton of fuel, and you never recognise 772LR's fuel burn. And you have never factored in reserve fuel which can easily be another 10-15 ton on top of it (45min legal minimum, plus the diversion fuel to nearest alternative let's say SFO, and you need another hour's fuel on top of it).

Michael


Michael, im just using the datasets/information you referred me to:

- Wind/Wet - As I said wind is a positive at WLG, wet runway of course a negative how much who knows as its not in the boeing airport stuff. How often is WLG's runway wet? Maybe 10-15% of the time.
- RTO break performance - shouldnt that be included in the takeoff performance charts?
- Furnishing weights - I dont have a feel for how large that would be, but 15-30 tonnes sounds extreme
- WLG-LAX the payload range chart for the 200LR I used from your suggested source has got the fuel burn included in it, plus has an assumption regarding diversion distance and holding fuel as I understand (not 100% accurate but good enough I would have thought)
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:09 am

a7ala wrote:
[Michael, im just using the datasets/information you referred me to:

- Wind/Wet - As I said wind is a positive at WLG, wet runway of course a negative how much who knows as its not in the boeing airport stuff. How often is WLG's runway wet? Maybe 10-15% of the time.
- RTO break performance - shouldnt that be included in the takeoff performance charts?
- Furnishing weights - I dont have a feel for how large that would be, but 15-30 tonnes sounds extreme
- WLG-LAX the payload range chart for the 200LR I used from your suggested source has got the fuel burn included in it, plus has an assumption regarding diversion distance and holding fuel as I understand (not 100% accurate but good enough I would have thought)

- On average WLG rains 1/3 of the year at least, with only 1/5 of the year that have any sort of sunshine.
- Payload range chart never includes fuel load
- RTO break performance - no, you always have to calculate that based on the weight of the aircraft, length of runway and break performance.
- Furnishing weights are very heavy - to be all honest to you I was a bit shocked as well when I first knew them. But that's precisely why they can impact aircraft range - CI's JFK-TPE apparently has to be weight restricted on a 77W due to the weight of their furnishing.

Michael
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:39 am

eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
[Michael, im just using the datasets/information you referred me to:

- Wind/Wet - As I said wind is a positive at WLG, wet runway of course a negative how much who knows as its not in the boeing airport stuff. How often is WLG's runway wet? Maybe 10-15% of the time.
- RTO break performance - shouldnt that be included in the takeoff performance charts?
- Furnishing weights - I dont have a feel for how large that would be, but 15-30 tonnes sounds extreme
- WLG-LAX the payload range chart for the 200LR I used from your suggested source has got the fuel burn included in it, plus has an assumption regarding diversion distance and holding fuel as I understand (not 100% accurate but good enough I would have thought)

- On average WLG rains 1/3 of the year at least, with only 1/5 of the year that have any sort of sunshine.
- Payload range chart never includes fuel load
- RTO break performance - no, you always have to calculate that based on the weight of the aircraft, length of runway and break performance.
- Furnishing weights are very heavy - to be all honest to you I was a bit shocked as well when I first knew them. But that's precisely why they can impact aircraft range - CI's JFK-TPE apparently has to be weight restricted on a 77W due to the weight of their furnishing.

Michael


- WLG rains 1/3 of the year? You have to be joking. Where do you get that info from? The runway at WLG is classed as "wet" 10-15% of the time.

- RTO - thats exactly what the takeoff chart accounts for....

- Im concerned you say payload/range doesnt include fuel. Have a look at https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... 2lr3er.pdf table 3.2.1. It shows that if an aircraft can take off with 295T of weight it can fly 6000Nm with 195T OEW+Payload. The different is the fuel used/carried. To read the chart, start at the bottom at 6000Nm, go directly up until you hit the diagonal line 650 (295) and then go straight across to 195T. In fact on the right hand of the chart they talk about maximum fuel capacity.
 
hereandthere41
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:31 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:51 am

a7ala wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
a7ala wrote:
[Michael, im just using the datasets/information you referred me to:

- Wind/Wet - As I said wind is a positive at WLG, wet runway of course a negative how much who knows as its not in the boeing airport stuff. How often is WLG's runway wet? Maybe 10-15% of the time.
- RTO break performance - shouldnt that be included in the takeoff performance charts?
- Furnishing weights - I dont have a feel for how large that would be, but 15-30 tonnes sounds extreme
- WLG-LAX the payload range chart for the 200LR I used from your suggested source has got the fuel burn included in it, plus has an assumption regarding diversion distance and holding fuel as I understand (not 100% accurate but good enough I would have thought)

- On average WLG rains 1/3 of the year at least, with only 1/5 of the year that have any sort of sunshine.
- Payload range chart never includes fuel load
- RTO break performance - no, you always have to calculate that based on the weight of the aircraft, length of runway and break performance.
- Furnishing weights are very heavy - to be all honest to you I was a bit shocked as well when I first knew them. But that's precisely why they can impact aircraft range - CI's JFK-TPE apparently has to be weight restricted on a 77W due to the weight of their furnishing.

Michael


- WLG rains 1/3 of the year? You have to be joking. Where do you get that info from? The runway at WLG is classed as "wet" 10-15% of the time.

- RTO - thats exactly what the takeoff chart accounts for....

- Im concerned you say payload/range doesnt include fuel. Have a look at https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... 2lr3er.pdf table 3.2.1. It shows that if an aircraft can take off with 295T of weight it can fly 6000Nm with 195T OEW+Payload. The different is the fuel used/carried. To read the chart, start at the bottom at 6000Nm, go directly up until you hit the diagonal line 650 (295) and then go straight across to 195T. In fact on the right hand of the chart they talk about maximum fuel capacity.



Wow. Why don't the two of you go offline and compare the size of your joysticks?
Give it a rest. Lol
 
lessredtape
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:57 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:08 am

wenders825 wrote:
CHC is massive. wow. definitely rumored that this was required for the JV to get approved

really surprised LAX-AKL can't sustain year round
CHC/LAX might be hard to fill with just CHC locals. Feel that maybe QF/JQ might have really good connections from Australia to CHC to continue onto LAX.

Anyway, 2 more ways to get between OZ & USA will be good for fares, even if have to go via NZ.

EK(QF codeshare) operates an A380 SYD/CHC daily 0845/1400 in Jan. That's one hell of a lot of seats to fill SYD/CHC, so can imagine pax on a QF ticket flying EK metal SYD/CHC, then AA metal CHC/LAX.
...
Coming home, the A380 doesn't depart CHC for SYD until 1845, so maybe if AA departs CHC at 1600 or 1700, which means it might arrive ...

arh., just looked at time of LAX/CHC/LAX. Anyway am sure some Australians will use the CHC/LAX/CHC even if they have to overnight in CHC.

Another possibility is flying one way via Fiji.

AA codeshare on Fiji Airways NAN/SFO & NAN/LAX & they also fly CHC/FIJI about 3 days a week. A Fiji stopover is a very easy sell.
Last edited by lessredtape on Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 7020
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:22 am

lessredtape wrote:
wenders825 wrote:
CHC is massive. wow. definitely rumored that this was required for the JV to get approved

really surprised LAX-AKL can't sustain year round
CHC/LAX might be hard to fill with just CHC locals. Feel that maybe QF/JQ might have really good connections from Australia to CHC to continue onto LAX.

Anyway, 2 more ways to get between OZ & USA will be good for fares, even if have to go via NZ.

EK(QF codeshare) operates an A380 SYD/CHC daily 0845/1400 in Jan. That's one hell of a lot of seats to fill SYD/CHC, so can imagine pax on a QF ticket flying EK metal SYD/CHC, then AA metal CHC/LAX.

Coming home, the A380 doesn't depart CHC for SYD until 1845, so maybe if AA departs CHC at 1600 or 1700, which means it might arrive


I’m going to go out on a limb here and say capturing connections from SYD on EK is not the target audience for this flight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1589
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:50 pm

a7ala wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:

Does WLG have a long enough runway to handle transpacific flights?


That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.


Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem

And while it’s a small city its New Zealand’s second largest population, economy and out bound market to the US. And as someone said a gateway to the South Island in its own right.

Easily enough USA pax already for the 3pw aa have announced with ability to support year round (which chc will struggle with) and a sizeable business market.


Are you saying WLG is a gateway to South Island or CHC? Id say Christchurch - yes. WLG? No way. That Cook Strait thing is an annoying barrier. Significant ferry service, but nobody things of WLG as a way to get to the South Island. CHC puts you smack in the middle of South Island and all the camper vans you could ever want to find.
 
NZ516
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:38 pm

A Christchurch to LAX 788 at 3 per week won't be too hard to fill as the city is well connected to 15 cities in New Zealand to help with feed and the single terminal transfer experience is a breeze compared to the Auckland terminal change. Regarding the idea of a 777 flying WLG to LAX non stop with 300 passengers and 18 tonnes of cargo on top. If it was possible why is an airline not doing it today? So they must know its not possible...just saying it.
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:54 pm

NZ516 wrote:
A Christchurch to LAX 788 at 3 per week won't be too hard to fill as the city is well connected to 15 cities in New Zealand to help with feed and the single terminal transfer experience is a breeze compared to the Auckland terminal change. Regarding the idea of a 777 flying WLG to LAX non stop with 300 passengers and 18 tonnes of cargo on top. If it was possible why is an airline not doing it today? So they must know its not possible...just saying it.


Wlg-lax Requires a 200lr variant which are rare and typically used on ultra-long haul routes not to overcome short runway issues.
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:56 pm

washingtonflyer wrote:
a7ala wrote:
clrd4t8koff wrote:

That's a good question and one I admittedly hadn't thought of. Perhaps that's why they don't have any TPAC flights.


Runway is actually long enough for a DL 77L wlg-lax no problem

And while it’s a small city its New Zealand’s second largest population, economy and out bound market to the US. And as someone said a gateway to the South Island in its own right.

Easily enough USA pax already for the 3pw aa have announced with ability to support year round (which chc will struggle with) and a sizeable business market.


Are you saying WLG is a gateway to South Island or CHC? Id say Christchurch - yes. WLG? No way. That Cook Strait thing is an annoying barrier. Significant ferry service, but nobody things of WLG as a way to get to the South Island. CHC puts you smack in the middle of South Island and all the camper vans you could ever want to find.


The ferry is actually very popular with tourists and especially North Americans. Yes agree chc is the main gateway but wlg provides another option and better links to top of the South Island.
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 7020
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:58 pm

I think it is safe to assume nobody is going to be starting WLG-US nonstop anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:46 pm

chepos wrote:
I think it is safe to assume nobody is going to be starting WLG-US nonstop anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Pretty sure that same comment was being made about CHC-US nonstop not too long ago and now look. NZ or AA could do LAX-WLG non-stop and then do WLG-AKL-LAX or WLG-CHC-LAX on the return 2-3x week seasonally.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1624
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:40 pm

a7ala,

1. Please use commas to bring up your sentences. We're adults.
2. There is no bigger fan of the 777 than me, but no, it cannot do WLG-LAX (Capital Letters) with any meaningful payload.

I'm sorry, but that just isn't correct. I wish it were, but it's not.
Whatever
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7131
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:46 pm

NZ516 wrote:
A Christchurch to LAX 788 at 3 per week won't be too hard to fill as the city is well connected to 15 cities in New Zealand to help with feed and the single terminal transfer experience is a breeze compared to the Auckland terminal change. Regarding the idea of a 777 flying WLG to LAX non stop with 300 passengers and 18 tonnes of cargo on top. If it was possible why is an airline not doing it today? So they must know its not possible...just saying it.


If WLG-LAX were possible today, I don’t necessarily think it would have happened, same reason as CHC-LAX, who would do it? Small market etc.

While WLG-LAX might be technically possible the reality is that there are so many other factors at play, runway overruns, viable payload etc.
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:53 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
a7ala,

1. Please use commas to bring up your sentences. We're adults.
2. There is no bigger fan of the 777 than me, but no, it cannot do WLG-LAX (Capital Letters) with any meaningful payload.

I'm sorry, but that just isn't correct. I wish it were, but it's not.


Thanks for the advice. Boeing's Airport Planning manual for the B777-200LR suggests it is possible (see my previous post #81). Where has my analysis gone wrong? Any advice would be appreciated.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8099
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:02 pm

It rains in Wellington 44 days out of 100, and you are assuming a headwind for takeoff whereas (very strong) crosswinds are fairly common in Wellington.

I have my doubts that the aircraft could even do it on paper in perfect conditions (I would be interested in seeing some actual data either way) but the conditions in Wellington are rarely, if ever, perfect.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
a7ala
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:17 pm

RyanairGuru wrote:
It rains in Wellington 44 days out of 100, and you are assuming a headwind for takeoff whereas (very strong) crosswinds are fairly common in Wellington.

I have my doubts that the aircraft could even do it on paper in perfect conditions (I would be interested in seeing some actual data either way) but the conditions in Wellington are rarely, if ever, perfect.


Agree on the 44 days out of 100, although that doesn't mean the runway is wet 44% of the time. I note the Astral work (https://www.connectwellington.co.nz/sta ... rt%201.pdf Page 19) for the proposed runway extension quoted 9% of the time the runway was classified as wet. I didn't assume any credit for headwind on takeoff, and I dont agree about the crosswinds. WLG has strong steady winds aligned pretty much straight up and down the runway. What it does have is a windshear issue when landing on RWY34.
 
NZ516
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: American to start DFW-AKL, LAX-CHC October 2020

Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:20 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
A Christchurch to LAX 788 at 3 per week won't be too hard to fill as the city is well connected to 15 cities in New Zealand to help with feed and the single terminal transfer experience is a breeze compared to the Auckland terminal change. Regarding the idea of a 777 flying WLG to LAX non stop with 300 passengers and 18 tonnes of cargo on top. If it was possible why is an airline not doing it today? So they must know its not possible...just saying it.


If WLG-LAX were possible today, I don’t necessarily think it would have happened, same reason as CHC-LAX, who would do it? Small market etc.

While WLG-LAX might be technically possible the reality is that there are so many other factors at play, runway overruns, viable payload etc.


The key thing not talked about on here is that it was American's choice of choosing CHC over WLG or anywhere else. Their point was for the US tourists to have a new direct route to the South Island of New Zealand from their press release. Their main point of sale for this flight will be USA based customers..

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