Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:56 am

V60Polestar wrote:
https://www.odt.co.nz/star-news/star-business/jet-raro-flight-idea-christchurch
From what I've found, the service will be operated with A320s.

Mike Pero quoted about the lessor:
"I cannot tell you who the airline is at this stage ... but most Kiwis will be familiar with the name."

(he looked for) "Airlines from Dublin to Los Angeles to the Pacific region and I’m in discussions with somebody that can do it on an aircraft the same as Air New Zealand operate and with competitive fares.


Air Aisa or Scoot? AirCalin....

Unless its just Jetstar (but the quoted $299 - seems an bit high for an JQ Entry Level Fare)

HiFly have A320s, but wouldn't call them an well known airline.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 2:19 am

zkncj wrote:
V60Polestar wrote:
https://www.odt.co.nz/star-news/star-business/jet-raro-flight-idea-christchurch
From what I've found, the service will be operated with A320s.

Mike Pero quoted about the lessor:
"I cannot tell you who the airline is at this stage ... but most Kiwis will be familiar with the name."

(he looked for) "Airlines from Dublin to Los Angeles to the Pacific region and I’m in discussions with somebody that can do it on an aircraft the same as Air New Zealand operate and with competitive fares.


Air Aisa or Scoot? AirCalin....

Unless its just Jetstar (but the quoted $299 - seems an bit high for an JQ Entry Level Fare)

HiFly have A320s, but wouldn't call them an well known airline.

Surely, it has to be JetStar, though it's hardly a "global airline".
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
GuideVanes
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:04 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:18 am

Jonjo757 wrote:
Hi there, I live in Auckland and I am familiar with the sound of different aircraft flying over my house, usually Caravans and Islanders to the Barrier some weekends a DC-3 (the odd police eagle as well) . This morning I heard an unfamiliar one but didn't catch a glimpse, a look on a flight tracking site showed it was ZK-CIZ going from AKL to Whenuapai and the flight history says it has made multiple flights between these airports.

Does anybody know why? I thought maybe training but most flights are full stop landings not approaches or touch and go's and it would be an expensive way to get prisoners to Paremoremo. Cheers


These flights are 6 monthly Competency Check (OCA) flights for the Saab crews. The simulator for check and training is in Melbourne, so the sim is currently unaccessable. The CAA has made an exemption for these flights to be done in the aircraft with an approved flight test plan, until travel and the simulator opens up again.

The flights do not land, although they appear to on FlightAware. Part of the flight is to do the approaches, flying down to the minima, followed by the missed approaches. Then when complete returning to AKL.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:21 am

Just a point regarding this Mike Pero proposal...

I think he's either forgetting or completely unaware there's a "capacity' issue in Rarotonga... During our mid year school holidays Rarotonga reaches 100% occupancy and it normally reaches this state some months in advance.

While one can argue, we're not in school holidays (well won't be then) nor will they have the Australian visitors - we can also argue this is the ONLY tropical destination Kiwis can access during our coldest months to escape the cold and wet.

NZ has said they don't have the "resources" to fly CHC-RAR. But one does have to wonder if that's because the resources they have (which are heavily reduced now) will be focused ex AKL.

What's my point? While we can argue there's no shortage of mainlanders who would want jump at the chance at escaping to the Raro, how many will look to use credits with NZ and how many will hotels will be available for Mikes crew once the wholesalers have nabbed most up and the "big boys" work together?

As for who it will be, practical assumption would be JQ using their domestic A320's and crew on "charter" flights. Seems odd and complicated to bring in external crew, equipment and so on in given the restrictions we have and the number of services he'd likely run.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:27 am

Off topic, but still on Mike Pero....

I've never liked the guy since the CHC earthquakes. Out of ALL New Zealanders he purchased the most number of standby recovery tickets for himself. All used for commercial business reasons.

Those standby tickets were designed for those who needed to travel unexpectedly and as a result of the Earthquake and who were in financial hardship not CEO's conducting usual business practices.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15112
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:49 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
An airline well known to New Zealand and in a different Timezone. What rights would a foreign airline need for CHC-RAR? Still 5th freedom? RAR is pretty kiwi.


Fiji, Hawaiian, United, American ? These are international charters, rights wouldn’t be big issue is NZ has said no in writing.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:45 am

zeke wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
An airline well known to New Zealand and in a different Timezone. What rights would a foreign airline need for CHC-RAR? Still 5th freedom? RAR is pretty kiwi.


Fiji, Hawaiian, United, American ? These are international charters, rights wouldn’t be big issue is NZ has said no in writing.


https://jetraro.co.nz/

Well JetRaro has just launched its website, stating it will be 3-5 weekly and operated by an a320.

SB could be an option? They would be looking for some working for there a320s.
 
torin
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:53 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 10:03 am

zkncj wrote:
zeke wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
An airline well known to New Zealand and in a different Timezone. What rights would a foreign airline need for CHC-RAR? Still 5th freedom? RAR is pretty kiwi.


Fiji, Hawaiian, United, American ? These are international charters, rights wouldn’t be big issue is NZ has said no in writing.


https://jetraro.co.nz/

Well JetRaro has just launched its website, stating it will be 3-5 weekly and operated by an a320.

SB could be an option? They would be looking for some working for there a320s.


He mentioned BA and LH on a radio interview.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15112
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:44 pm

torin wrote:

He mentioned BA and LH on a radio interview.


Hmm, I think that’s a bit of a stretch. I could see Air France being interested with connection to French Polynesia.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 15, 2020 11:34 pm

zkncj wrote:
zeke wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
An airline well known to New Zealand and in a different Timezone. What rights would a foreign airline need for CHC-RAR? Still 5th freedom? RAR is pretty kiwi.


Fiji, Hawaiian, United, American ? These are international charters, rights wouldn’t be big issue is NZ has said no in writing.


https://jetraro.co.nz/

Well JetRaro has just launched its website, stating it will be 3-5 weekly and operated by an a320.

SB could be an option? They would be looking for some working for there a320s.


Crew...if it's a "bubble" flight, they will need "sterile" crew. So for international flights coming into NZ, any crew will need to self isolate/quarantine to be free of normal movement restrictions.Therefore an international operator will need base some crew in NZ, basically crew that have self isolated for 14 days and remain inside the bubble.

Of course an exception could be applied for but the result of that would heavily depend on where the operator was coming from. Given NOU still has an open links careful consideration would need to be given to the risk around that. Who the crew are etc.

Is he in it for a quick buck or long term.... seems completely insane to try start an airline at this time but if he can crunch the numbers and believes 24 charter flights will make $X then I guess good on him.

I'm predicting RAR to get near 100% occupancy and airline capacity will outweigh accommodation supply in RAR. So he'll have no shortage of potential customers but if they have nowhere to stay it'll be hard to sell them a ticket.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15112
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 12:59 am

NZ6 wrote:

Crew...if it's a "bubble" flight, they will need "sterile" crew. So for international flights coming into NZ, any crew will need to self isolate/quarantine to be free of normal movement restrictions.Therefore an international operator will need base some crew in NZ, basically crew that have self isolated for 14 days and remain inside the bubble.


That is not true, please refer to this for the factual information https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files ... june20.pdf

As crew we are being tested regularly, wear masks, have dedicated transport, dedicated hotel checked, do use gyms, pools, have room service. Our lives are in a constant bubble.

It would be very easy to get a crew into NZ to operate these flights.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:20 am

zeke wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

Crew...if it's a "bubble" flight, they will need "sterile" crew. So for international flights coming into NZ, any crew will need to self isolate/quarantine to be free of normal movement restrictions.Therefore an international operator will need base some crew in NZ, basically crew that have self isolated for 14 days and remain inside the bubble.


That is not true, please refer to this for the factual information https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files ... june20.pdf

As crew we are being tested regularly, wear masks, have dedicated transport, dedicated hotel checked, do use gyms, pools, have room service. Our lives are in a constant bubble.

It would be very easy to get a crew into NZ to operate these flights.



No it is completely true.

That document relates to the regulations around crew on current international routes outside of any "bubble" arrangement. Any future bubble will likely see dedicated crew who will not be exposed to the same rules. Much like bubble and non bubble passengers need to be securely separated in the terminal.

Do you really think, we'd allow potentially exposed crew members to fly into New Zealand then fly "bubble passengers around" while serving them food and drinks? A little on the pointless side isn't it?

You say it would be easy to get crew into operate these flights... if they're not NZ citizens or permanent residents they'll need to apply for an exception. Personally, I'd have to ask why it should be approved given we've got perfectly good pilots here that have been made redundant recently...

Supports my thoughts it's just JQ who he's spoken to.
 
wstakl
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:43 am

Full credit should go to Mike Pero and whatever airline is involved. At least they are prepared to try and stimulate the tourism/aviation sector, unlike NZ who seemingly don't want to fly international anymore. Its also disappointing the government has changed their goal regarding Covid. First it was to 'flatten the curve' which we achieved but now's it's 'elimination' which in all honestly won't happen.
 
Toenga
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:11 am

wstakl wrote:
Full credit should go to Mike Pero and whatever airline is involved. At least they are prepared to try and stimulate the tourism/aviation sector, unlike NZ who seemingly don't want to fly international anymore. Its also disappointing the government has changed their goal regarding Covid. First it was to 'flatten the curve' which we achieved but now's it's 'elimination' which in all honestly won't happen.

What do you mean won't happen?
With no community transmissions for the last 76days, yes that is approaching 6 14 day covid cycles, elimination has happened.
Flattening the curve, or suppression, still requires rigourous border controls, but with the additional heavy social and economic disadvantages of ongoing social distancing. Just look across the Tasman right now.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:22 am

wstakl wrote:
Full credit should go to Mike Pero and whatever airline is involved. At least they are prepared to try and stimulate the tourism/aviation sector, unlike NZ who seemingly don't want to fly international anymore. Its also disappointing the government has changed their goal regarding Covid. First it was to 'flatten the curve' which we achieved but now's it's 'elimination' which in all honestly won't happen.


I'm interested to watch what happens with Mike's adventure should it eventuate. I've long believed there is a market for short term, short haul seasonal charters. We see them in Europe and there's no real reason they can't work here. There's plenty of options (destinations) out there should someone seriously want to give this business model a go. Perhaps not during COVID but one day.

That aside, you comments confuse me. How does NZ seemingly not want to fly international anymore? Where has that come from?? It seems like a complete left field comment.

How has the government changed their goal? We needed to flatten the curve, that was why we did lock down not closed the border. To that point we did flatten the curve. But as we've seen in many places around the world the moment the pressure is off and the curve spikes almost immediately again. Therefore if we opened the borders now within a fortnight new cases would resemble Manhattan once again and we'd be in lock down again.

Therefore our goal is elimination and you say it won't happen. Dr Bloomfield has been at pains to say it's not a single moment in time but an ongoing state. We're in that stat now so it has happened. We have no community transition and haven't for about 80 odd days (nearly 3 months).

To keep the current state of elimination we need stick border controls. Flatter the curve and elimination go hand in hand.

If you disagree on if the borders should be open...well, we have an election shortly.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15112
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 4:41 am

NZ6 wrote:

No it is completely true.

That document relates to the regulations around crew on current international routes outside of any "bubble" arrangement. Any future bubble will likely see dedicated crew who will not be exposed to the same rules. Much like bubble and non bubble passengers need to be securely separated in the terminal.

Do you really think, we'd allow potentially exposed crew members to fly into New Zealand then fly "bubble passengers around" while serving them food and drinks? A little on the pointless side isn't it?

You say it would be easy to get crew into operate these flights... if they're not NZ citizens or permanent residents they'll need to apply for an exception. Personally, I'd have to ask why it should be approved given we've got perfectly good pilots here that have been made redundant recently...

Supports my thoughts it's just JQ who he's spoken to.


What I posted is correct and backed up with the official NZ health document. Did you read the link I provided ?

Crew from the EU would be covid tested two days after arrival as per the NZ health requirements.

These are international charters, they do not require a NZ domestic AOC, nor would crew require a NZ work visa as they are not working in NZ. They are entering and exiting as international crew.

Charters are different to normal international schedule air tickets, the tickets are sold via a travel agency and that travel agency hires whatever carrier it wants to do the flights. If my memory serves correct Canada 3000 did a South Pacific tour years ago, HNL-BNE-AKL-RAR.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 5:35 am

zeke wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

No it is completely true.

That document relates to the regulations around crew on current international routes outside of any "bubble" arrangement. Any future bubble will likely see dedicated crew who will not be exposed to the same rules. Much like bubble and non bubble passengers need to be securely separated in the terminal.

Do you really think, we'd allow potentially exposed crew members to fly into New Zealand then fly "bubble passengers around" while serving them food and drinks? A little on the pointless side isn't it?

You say it would be easy to get crew into operate these flights... if they're not NZ citizens or permanent residents they'll need to apply for an exception. Personally, I'd have to ask why it should be approved given we've got perfectly good pilots here that have been made redundant recently...

Supports my thoughts it's just JQ who he's spoken to.


What I posted is correct and backed up with the official NZ health document. Did you read the link I provided ?

Crew from the EU would be covid tested two days after arrival as per the NZ health requirements.

These are international charters, they do not require a NZ domestic AOC, nor would crew require a NZ work visa as they are not working in NZ. They are entering and exiting as international crew.

Charters are different to normal international schedule air tickets, the tickets are sold via a travel agency and that travel agency hires whatever carrier it wants to do the flights. If my memory serves correct Canada 3000 did a South Pacific tour years ago, HNL-BNE-AKL-RAR.


You're missing the fact this is a bubble flight not a normal routine international flight. Yep, international flights to and from NZ are subject to those requirements. But likewise all passengers on these flights are required on arrival to quarantine on arrival for 14 days and be tested etc etc.

Bubble flights (details of which aren't finalized or public) will require passengers in airport terminals to be physically separated and will require dedicated crew. Therefore crew that have already been quarantined and not exposed to non quarantined people... as a result passengers will be able to travel between the two countries without any quarantining requirements.

Yes, airline crew can fly in, out and via NZ under the rules you've published but these flights are different.

The giveaway should be bubble... don't level anyone into the bubble who's not quarantined.
 
Toenga
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 5:52 am

[/quote]What I posted is correct and backed up with the official NZ health document. Did you read the link I provided ?

Crew from the EU would be covid tested two days after arrival as per the NZ health requirements.

These are international charters, they do not require a NZ domestic AOC, nor would crew require a NZ work visa as they are not working in NZ. They are entering and exiting as international crew.

Charters are different to normal international schedule air tickets, the tickets are sold via a travel agency and that travel agency hires whatever carrier it wants to do the flights. If my memory serves correct Canada 3000 did a South Pacific tour years ago, HNL-BNE-AKL-RAR.[/quote]

Any flights between NZ and Rarotonga will be subject to all the conditions and protocols, whatever they are, set by both the governments of NZ and the Cook Islands.
Both will take counsel of their chief medical officers particularly taking account of the potentially devastating effect of covid on such remote communities.
Other internationally agreed covid protocols for international aircrew will be largely irrelevant.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:27 am

Toenga wrote:
Any flights between NZ and Rarotonga will be subject to all the conditions and protocols, whatever they are, set by both the governments of NZ and the Cook Islands.
Both will take counsel of their chief medical officers particularly taking account of the potentially devastating effect of covid on such remote communities.
Other internationally agreed covid protocols for international aircrew will be largely irrelevant.


You're 100% correct mate!

Based on this we're left with only a few options....

- Nothing once Mike gets into detail and works out it's pretty dam complex.
- An NZ based JQ crew using a JQ charter aircraft - Likely
- Application for foreign nationals to enter NZ remain in NZ after completing 14 days quarantine. As mentioned above, you'd had to ask why we'd let in more when we have a surplus of skilled workforce here already whom are unemployed.
- Mike employs ex NZ crew but I suspect that'll get far to out of control, complex and costly to make any of this worth while.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:34 am

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politi ... in-history

Perhaps just another empty election promise but personally I prefer it for the airport link than light rail. Likelihood of having it by 2026...less than 2% I'd say.

"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4324
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:49 am

NZ6 wrote:
"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."


Ha I've been saying that would be the best solution to this for a while, though I'd extend the Onehunga line through to the airport before connecting it up to Puhinui.
First to fly the 787-9
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:46 am

zkojq wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."


Ha I've been saying that would be the best solution to this for a while, though I'd extend the Onehunga line through to the airport before connecting it up to Puhinui.

Yes, it's certainly the best solution for the Airport but it's NOT the best solution for public transport in Auckland overall, alas. Quite apart from the fact that the Puhinui connection would rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland and lead to congestion on the CRL which would impact on other services as well. It saddens me that our politicians cannot see past the airport to recognise there are other communities desperately in need of rapid transit as well. At least the extension of the Onehunga line (the original AT plan) can be constructed without stuffing the rest of the network,

And TWO heavy rail routes to the airport will soak up the very limited post-Covid capital available to the detriment of other much-needed projects. Especially wasteful when the bus rapid transit route to Puhinui is already under construction, with mega-millions being spent on the new bus-rail interchange there as well, right now. Thankfully, National seems to have little chance, so they know it's a promise they won't have to deliver on.

Even if the two lines are built its likely they'd not be a through service because extensive tunneling under the airport would be required to achieve that, vastly raising the cost. More likely they'd join east of the terminal and run on a shared alignment from there.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 3:48 am

DavidByrne wrote:
zkojq wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."


Ha I've been saying that would be the best solution to this for a while, though I'd extend the Onehunga line through to the airport before connecting it up to Puhinui.

Yes, it's certainly the best solution for the Airport but it's NOT the best solution for public transport in Auckland overall, alas. Quite apart from the fact that the Puhinui connection would rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland and lead to congestion on the CRL which would impact on other services as well. It saddens me that our politicians cannot see past the airport to recognise there are other communities desperately in need of rapid transit as well. At least the extension of the Onehunga line (the original AT plan) can be constructed without stuffing the rest of the network,

And TWO heavy rail routes to the airport will soak up the very limited post-Covid capital available to the detriment of other much-needed projects. Especially wasteful when the bus rapid transit route to Puhinui is already under construction, with mega-millions being spent on the new bus-rail interchange there as well, right now. Thankfully, National seems to have little chance, so they know it's a promise they won't have to deliver on.

Even if the two lines are built its likely they'd not be a through service because extensive tunneling under the airport would be required to achieve that, vastly raising the cost. More likely they'd join east of the terminal and run on a shared alignment from there.


There's no silver bullet to solve all the public transport and congestion issues in AKL. In my mind Light Rail was a two birds one stone approach and offered little for the Airport. In all honesty, I can't see how LR won a cost to benefit ratio over something like electric buses provided by Sky Bus when looking at the cost of the extension.

I have nothing against LR itself, and the residents of in inner city suburbs can't rely on cars and diesel buses forever so something will need to be done here at some point. But I don't think we can solve both issues with one solution.

To your points which I clearly see you hold extensive knowledge on.

- You say "rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland" One would assume any branch would come off the main line south of Puhinui given that's being developed into a transport hub. This is almost all industrial so not so much a community.
- I'm not sure how it will lead to congestion in the CRL. There's working being done now between Otahuhu and Wiri to increase overall network capacity and the CRL is set to double Britomarts capacity. No point doubling it if we don't then use it or is that extra capacity reserved for the Western and Southern lines only. I'd also be interested to know if or how the Onehunga and Manukau branches are impacted/involved? Long term is is Britomart - Onehunga - Airport - Puhinui - Manukau? rainy day idea there.

- You say the two HR lines and post COVID. Well the first one is set for 2026, 6 years away and there will be slippage, the second what 5+ years on that. So potentially over a decade away. If that still COVID recovery stimulus money ?


To be honest, I agree with you and I don't see National winning let alone doing these projects..

I'm still in favor of an autonomous "skytrain" from Puhinui.

"Puhinui > Domestic > International > Rental Cars > Long Term Car Parking > Commercial"

Image
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 3:59 am

zkojq wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."


Ha I've been saying that would be the best solution to this for a while, though I'd extend the Onehunga line through to the airport before connecting it up to Puhinui.


I would say that the Puhinui option first, would because it would be the quickest and simplest options to build. That way it would get heavy rail going to the airport, then can work on the more complicated route to Onehuga.

You are looking at Approximately 7km to Puhinui, mainly via Open Farm land / undeveloped land vs 10-15km to Onehunga with an decent harbour crossing.
 
nz2
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:38 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 4:30 am

The "New" Mangere Bridge was built with capability for heavy rail to be installed later
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 5:29 am

nz2 wrote:
The "New" Mangere Bridge was built with capability for heavy rail to be installed later


Isn't it just the bridge can support it later on, but the room isn't there for the rail which would have to be built and attached to the bridge.
 
V60Polestar
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:58 am

Either way I do believe it would both be most cost effective and least disruptive through Onehunga from my perspective.
The line has plenty of free space to be double-tracked, and it wouldn't require the traversal of the marshland and hilly landscape alongside Puhinui road as well as the various other bridges required.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:00 am

NZ6 wrote:

There's no silver bullet to solve all the public transport and congestion issues in AKL. In my mind Light Rail was a two birds one stone approach and offered little for the Airport. In all honesty, I can't see how LR won a cost to benefit ratio over something like electric buses provided by Sky Bus when looking at the cost of the extension.

I have nothing against LR itself, and the residents of in inner city suburbs can't rely on cars and diesel buses forever so something will need to be done here at some point. But I don't think we can solve both issues with one solution.

To your points which I clearly see you hold extensive knowledge on.

- You say "rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland" One would assume any branch would come off the main line south of Puhinui given that's being developed into a transport hub. This is almost all industrial so not so much a community.
- I'm not sure how it will lead to congestion in the CRL. There's working being done now between Otahuhu and Wiri to increase overall network capacity and the CRL is set to double Britomarts capacity. No point doubling it if we don't then use it or is that extra capacity reserved for the Western and Southern lines only. I'd also be interested to know if or how the Onehunga and Manukau branches are impacted/involved? Long term is is Britomart - Onehunga - Airport - Puhinui - Manukau? rainy day idea there.

- You say the two HR lines and post COVID. Well the first one is set for 2026, 6 years away and there will be slippage, the second what 5+ years on that. So potentially over a decade away. If that still COVID recovery stimulus money ?

To be honest, I agree with you and I don't see National winning let alone doing these projects..

I'm still in favor of an autonomous "skytrain" from Puhinui.

"Puhinui > Domestic > International > Rental Cars > Long Term Car Parking > Commercial"

Image

A few comments on the options to clarify:

Airport-Puhinui HR link: Talked up by NZ First and now National, but it's by no means as straightforward as may first appear. Assuming the line branches south of Puhinui (otherwise that massive new station now under construction will be completely valueless) it will go through an industrial area, sure, but when you look at the aerial photos, it's about as densely packed industrial area you'll see anywhere. Property purchases will be a complete nightmare and will take literally years to finalise. Then there's the big issue of crossing the SW Motorway. Sure, let's trench it either side, or build a bridge, To achieve acceptable grades, either a trench or a bridge would need to be at least a kilometre long (the New Lynn rail trench is about 1.1 km), and would cost a fortune. The New Lynn trench cost $300m about a decade ago, and I can imagine that we would be looking at at least $500m just to cross the motorway at Puhinui. Then the train would continue along the Southern Line to Otahuhu, effectively adding a third service to the two lines that are already planned for that stretch - this extra capacity is effectively wasted and yields no benefits at all for the network. The train would probably then travel to Britomart via Panmure and terminate at Britomart to avoid overly congesting the CRL, which is already expected to reach capacity when the existing lines are given modest frequency increases. And the Puhinui link does nothing whatsoever to address the bigger problem for Auckland's public transport - we have very little "net" in our "network".

Airport-Onehunga HR link: This was AT and NZTA's previous favoured route before light rail was considered. It has a relatively easy route alongside the motorway, though it would still encounter a significant industrial area which would either have to be cut through or tunnelled under, both of which add to the expense. As an extension of the Onehunga line it's a much more efficient use of the network (you'd be adding a few stops to an existing line and double tracking from Onehunga to Penrose). The Mangere Bridge is designed to carry a single track underneath the existing deck IIRC. But AT have long made clear that you can't run a frequent service to an important destination like the airport with a single track section of line - it would cause endless delays and frustrations for passengers, so a new bridge would be apparently required. IMHO the smart thing to do, whatever mode was chosen, would have been to accommodate rail on the new Mangere pedestrian bridge, which is mostly causeway anyway. But for reasons which are unclear to me, a high bridge is preferred. The removal of the Nelson St overbridge a few years ago also makes this option more difficult.

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Rail link: This has been extensively discussed before, so I won't repeat all the arguments. It is the option that AT and NZTA settled on after literally years of reports, discussions and benefit/cost analyses, and provides the best outcome for the AT network as a whole (and therefore for the region), by a country mile, as well as addressing PT needs in the isthmus and Mangere areas. It's undeniably not as good for airport passengers (though it's far better than the other options for airport industrial estate workers).

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Metro link: This is the option that Labour seems fixated on, and has most of the advantages of light rail and better speed. However, it will require at least 8 km and probably 10 km of tunnelling under the isthmus and would be prohibitively expensive. Assuming they go for cut-and-cover (much cheaper than bored tunnelling) it would disrupt Dominion Road for literally years. The proposed Quebec pension fund ownership also grates a bit with me.

In my view National and NZ First are proposing a solution which will (initially) add only one station to the network, the airport, probably at a cost of more than $1 billion all-up. Labour are proposing a better solution which will be hard to achieve a realistic benefit/cost ratio. Light rail (still favoured by the Greens?) has most of the advantages of Labour's light metro idea, but at a much, much lower cost.

Let's not forget Skybus. It's an excellent limited stop service which is almost as fast as light rail or heavy rail would be apart from peak periods. Trouble is, it's just not sexy, and I think the perceived sexiness of the options is what is now driving a lot of the discussion. The big problem in my view is that the loudest voices on this issue are now the politicians (principally NZ First, Labour and National) who are not thinking about what's best for Auckland but are principally thinking about perceived electoral advantage. When AT and NZTA were calling the shots those considerations were not part of the mix. And once again, it should NOT be the case that the needs of airport users should outweigh the interests of the rest of Auckland. That would be just plain wrong.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:52 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

There's no silver bullet to solve all the public transport and congestion issues in AKL. In my mind Light Rail was a two birds one stone approach and offered little for the Airport. In all honesty, I can't see how LR won a cost to benefit ratio over something like electric buses provided by Sky Bus when looking at the cost of the extension.

I have nothing against LR itself, and the residents of in inner city suburbs can't rely on cars and diesel buses forever so something will need to be done here at some point. But I don't think we can solve both issues with one solution.

To your points which I clearly see you hold extensive knowledge on.

- You say "rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland" One would assume any branch would come off the main line south of Puhinui given that's being developed into a transport hub. This is almost all industrial so not so much a community.
- I'm not sure how it will lead to congestion in the CRL. There's working being done now between Otahuhu and Wiri to increase overall network capacity and the CRL is set to double Britomarts capacity. No point doubling it if we don't then use it or is that extra capacity reserved for the Western and Southern lines only. I'd also be interested to know if or how the Onehunga and Manukau branches are impacted/involved? Long term is is Britomart - Onehunga - Airport - Puhinui - Manukau? rainy day idea there.

- You say the two HR lines and post COVID. Well the first one is set for 2026, 6 years away and there will be slippage, the second what 5+ years on that. So potentially over a decade away. If that still COVID recovery stimulus money ?

To be honest, I agree with you and I don't see National winning let alone doing these projects..

I'm still in favor of an autonomous "skytrain" from Puhinui.

"Puhinui > Domestic > International > Rental Cars > Long Term Car Parking > Commercial"

Image

A few comments on the options to clarify:

Airport-Puhinui HR link: Talked up by NZ First and now National, but it's by no means as straightforward as may first appear. Assuming the line branches south of Puhinui (otherwise that massive new station now under construction will be completely valueless) it will go through an industrial area, sure, but when you look at the aerial photos, it's about as densely packed industrial area you'll see anywhere. Property purchases will be a complete nightmare and will take literally years to finalise. Then there's the big issue of crossing the SW Motorway. Sure, let's trench it either side, or build a bridge, To achieve acceptable grades, either a trench or a bridge would need to be at least a kilometre long (the New Lynn rail trench is about 1.1 km), and would cost a fortune. The New Lynn trench cost $300m about a decade ago, and I can imagine that we would be looking at at least $500m just to cross the motorway at Puhinui. Then the train would continue along the Southern Line to Otahuhu, effectively adding a third service to the two lines that are already planned for that stretch - this extra capacity is effectively wasted and yields no benefits at all for the network. The train would probably then travel to Britomart via Panmure and terminate at Britomart to avoid overly congesting the CRL, which is already expected to reach capacity when the existing lines are given modest frequency increases. And the Puhinui link does nothing whatsoever to address the bigger problem for Auckland's public transport - we have very little "net" in our "network".

Airport-Onehunga HR link: This was AT and NZTA's previous favoured route before light rail was considered. It has a relatively easy route alongside the motorway, though it would still encounter a significant industrial area which would either have to be cut through or tunnelled under, both of which add to the expense. As an extension of the Onehunga line it's a much more efficient use of the network (you'd be adding a few stops to an existing line and double tracking from Onehunga to Penrose). The Mangere Bridge is designed to carry a single track underneath the existing deck IIRC. But AT have long made clear that you can't run a frequent service to an important destination like the airport with a single track section of line - it would cause endless delays and frustrations for passengers, so a new bridge would be apparently required. IMHO the smart thing to do, whatever mode was chosen, would have been to accommodate rail on the new Mangere pedestrian bridge, which is mostly causeway anyway. But for reasons which are unclear to me, a high bridge is preferred. The removal of the Nelson St overbridge a few years ago also makes this option more difficult.

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Rail link: This has been extensively discussed before, so I won't repeat all the arguments. It is the option that AT and NZTA settled on after literally years of reports, discussions and benefit/cost analyses, and provides the best outcome for the AT network as a whole (and therefore for the region), by a country mile, as well as addressing PT needs in the isthmus and Mangere areas. It's undeniably not as good for airport passengers (though it's far better than the other options for airport industrial estate workers).

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Metro link: This is the option that Labour seems fixated on, and has most of the advantages of light rail and better speed. However, it will require at least 8 km and probably 10 km of tunnelling under the isthmus and would be prohibitively expensive. Assuming they go for cut-and-cover (much cheaper than bored tunnelling) it would disrupt Dominion Road for literally years. The proposed Quebec pension fund ownership also grates a bit with me.

In my view National and NZ First are proposing a solution which will (initially) add only one station to the network, the airport, probably at a cost of more than $1 billion all-up. Labour are proposing a better solution which will be hard to achieve a realistic benefit/cost ratio. Light rail (still favoured by the Greens?) has most of the advantages of Labour's light metro idea, but at a much, much lower cost.

Let's not forget Skybus. It's an excellent limited stop service which is almost as fast as light rail or heavy rail would be apart from peak periods. Trouble is, it's just not sexy, and I think the perceived sexiness of the options is what is now driving a lot of the discussion. The big problem in my view is that the loudest voices on this issue are now the politicians (principally NZ First, Labour and National) who are not thinking about what's best for Auckland but are principally thinking about perceived electoral advantage. When AT and NZTA were calling the shots those considerations were not part of the mix. And once again, it should NOT be the case that the needs of airport users should outweigh the interests of the rest of Auckland. That would be just plain wrong.


:thumbsup: Great reply!

Two questions

1. What would you do?
2. With aviation and the airport in mind only, does that change anything?
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:06 am

NZ6 wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:

There's no silver bullet to solve all the public transport and congestion issues in AKL. In my mind Light Rail was a two birds one stone approach and offered little for the Airport. In all honesty, I can't see how LR won a cost to benefit ratio over something like electric buses provided by Sky Bus when looking at the cost of the extension.

I have nothing against LR itself, and the residents of in inner city suburbs can't rely on cars and diesel buses forever so something will need to be done here at some point. But I don't think we can solve both issues with one solution.

To your points which I clearly see you hold extensive knowledge on.

- You say "rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland" One would assume any branch would come off the main line south of Puhinui given that's being developed into a transport hub. This is almost all industrial so not so much a community.
- I'm not sure how it will lead to congestion in the CRL. There's working being done now between Otahuhu and Wiri to increase overall network capacity and the CRL is set to double Britomarts capacity. No point doubling it if we don't then use it or is that extra capacity reserved for the Western and Southern lines only. I'd also be interested to know if or how the Onehunga and Manukau branches are impacted/involved? Long term is is Britomart - Onehunga - Airport - Puhinui - Manukau? rainy day idea there.

- You say the two HR lines and post COVID. Well the first one is set for 2026, 6 years away and there will be slippage, the second what 5+ years on that. So potentially over a decade away. If that still COVID recovery stimulus money ?

To be honest, I agree with you and I don't see National winning let alone doing these projects..

I'm still in favor of an autonomous "skytrain" from Puhinui.

"Puhinui > Domestic > International > Rental Cars > Long Term Car Parking > Commercial"

Image

A few comments on the options to clarify:

Airport-Puhinui HR link: Talked up by NZ First and now National, but it's by no means as straightforward as may first appear. Assuming the line branches south of Puhinui (otherwise that massive new station now under construction will be completely valueless) it will go through an industrial area, sure, but when you look at the aerial photos, it's about as densely packed industrial area you'll see anywhere. Property purchases will be a complete nightmare and will take literally years to finalise. Then there's the big issue of crossing the SW Motorway. Sure, let's trench it either side, or build a bridge, To achieve acceptable grades, either a trench or a bridge would need to be at least a kilometre long (the New Lynn rail trench is about 1.1 km), and would cost a fortune. The New Lynn trench cost $300m about a decade ago, and I can imagine that we would be looking at at least $500m just to cross the motorway at Puhinui. Then the train would continue along the Southern Line to Otahuhu, effectively adding a third service to the two lines that are already planned for that stretch - this extra capacity is effectively wasted and yields no benefits at all for the network. The train would probably then travel to Britomart via Panmure and terminate at Britomart to avoid overly congesting the CRL, which is already expected to reach capacity when the existing lines are given modest frequency increases. And the Puhinui link does nothing whatsoever to address the bigger problem for Auckland's public transport - we have very little "net" in our "network".

Airport-Onehunga HR link: This was AT and NZTA's previous favoured route before light rail was considered. It has a relatively easy route alongside the motorway, though it would still encounter a significant industrial area which would either have to be cut through or tunnelled under, both of which add to the expense. As an extension of the Onehunga line it's a much more efficient use of the network (you'd be adding a few stops to an existing line and double tracking from Onehunga to Penrose). The Mangere Bridge is designed to carry a single track underneath the existing deck IIRC. But AT have long made clear that you can't run a frequent service to an important destination like the airport with a single track section of line - it would cause endless delays and frustrations for passengers, so a new bridge would be apparently required. IMHO the smart thing to do, whatever mode was chosen, would have been to accommodate rail on the new Mangere pedestrian bridge, which is mostly causeway anyway. But for reasons which are unclear to me, a high bridge is preferred. The removal of the Nelson St overbridge a few years ago also makes this option more difficult.

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Rail link: This has been extensively discussed before, so I won't repeat all the arguments. It is the option that AT and NZTA settled on after literally years of reports, discussions and benefit/cost analyses, and provides the best outcome for the AT network as a whole (and therefore for the region), by a country mile, as well as addressing PT needs in the isthmus and Mangere areas. It's undeniably not as good for airport passengers (though it's far better than the other options for airport industrial estate workers).

Airport-Onehunga-Dominion Rd Light Metro link: This is the option that Labour seems fixated on, and has most of the advantages of light rail and better speed. However, it will require at least 8 km and probably 10 km of tunnelling under the isthmus and would be prohibitively expensive. Assuming they go for cut-and-cover (much cheaper than bored tunnelling) it would disrupt Dominion Road for literally years. The proposed Quebec pension fund ownership also grates a bit with me.

In my view National and NZ First are proposing a solution which will (initially) add only one station to the network, the airport, probably at a cost of more than $1 billion all-up. Labour are proposing a better solution which will be hard to achieve a realistic benefit/cost ratio. Light rail (still favoured by the Greens?) has most of the advantages of Labour's light metro idea, but at a much, much lower cost.

Let's not forget Skybus. It's an excellent limited stop service which is almost as fast as light rail or heavy rail would be apart from peak periods. Trouble is, it's just not sexy, and I think the perceived sexiness of the options is what is now driving a lot of the discussion. The big problem in my view is that the loudest voices on this issue are now the politicians (principally NZ First, Labour and National) who are not thinking about what's best for Auckland but are principally thinking about perceived electoral advantage. When AT and NZTA were calling the shots those considerations were not part of the mix. And once again, it should NOT be the case that the needs of airport users should outweigh the interests of the rest of Auckland. That would be just plain wrong.


:thumbsup: Great reply!

Two questions

1. What would you do?
2. With aviation and the airport in mind only, does that change anything?

If the solution had to be HR, then I'd go for the Onehunga link and add to that the express bus route already under construction to the new bus/rail interchange also now under construction at Puhinui. But I personally prefer the LR option to the city for the added benefits it offers to non-airport patrons and for the "net"work as a whole. If people don't think it's sexy enough they can use the express bus to the new Puhinui interchange and take the train from there.

As an aside there's also soon (next year?) going to be a new AT express or limited stop bus from New Lynn to the airport.

If I had aviation only in mind I'd probably go with the Onehunga rail line. The Puhinui express bus link (which will continue to Manukau and eventually to Botany) is happening now whether Winston or Judith Collins like it or not and it would be ridiculous to pull the pin on it while it's already under construction.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
V60Polestar
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 18, 2020 12:25 am

The Mangere pedestrian bridge is only a pedestrian bridge now as it was deemed too structurally unstable to be used for traffic into the future. I believe it's rumoured to be demolished in the coming years.

On another topic however, I believe 777-300ERs will begin to re-enter service with ANZ from next week. We have a flight to LAX scheduled on NZ 1006 with a 77W on Tuesday evening, with more services to follow.
On Instagram I believe I saw a post from the past couple of days showing ZK-OKQ being moved from engineering at Auckland. Could this possibly be in preparation?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 18, 2020 12:30 am

V60Polestar wrote:

On another topic however, I believe 777-300ERs will begin to re-enter service with ANZ from next week. We have a flight to LAX scheduled on NZ 1006 with a 77W on Tuesday evening, with more services to follow.
On Instagram I believe I saw a post from the past couple of days showing ZK-OKQ being moved from engineering at Auckland. Could this possibly be in preparation?


They have appeared to done a couple of Tasman runs in the past week to for freight.

Think the 77Ws have still been doing some freight runs, the 77Es on the other hand are coke cans in the waiting.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 18, 2020 12:42 am

V60Polestar wrote:
The Mangere pedestrian bridge is only a pedestrian bridge now as it was deemed too structurally unstable to be used for traffic into the future. I believe it's rumoured to be demolished in the coming years.

The new bridge is being built as we speak. I just think it's a pity it wasn't designed to be multi-modal.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
V60Polestar
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:08 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 18, 2020 2:44 am

They were doing some freight runs early on post-lockdown, but they were all put into storage for most of June and July if I remember correct.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10110
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 18, 2020 10:11 am

zkncj wrote:
V60Polestar wrote:

On another topic however, I believe 777-300ERs will begin to re-enter service with ANZ from next week. We have a flight to LAX scheduled on NZ 1006 with a 77W on Tuesday evening, with more services to follow.
On Instagram I believe I saw a post from the past couple of days showing ZK-OKQ being moved from engineering at Auckland. Could this possibly be in preparation?


They have appeared to done a couple of Tasman runs in the past week to for freight.

Think the 77Ws have still been doing some freight runs, the 77Es on the other hand are coke cans in the waiting.

Certainly is a good sign if NZ is needing to add 77W to the covid operating fleet.
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
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10110
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:22 am

Major international airlines Qatar Airways and Malaysia Airlines are planning a return to New Zealand, resulting in five additional passenger aircraft arriving in the country each week.

The flights come as the New Zealand Government works to add capacity to its managed isolation facilities, which are at risk of being overwhelmed due to a surge of Kiwis returning home to seek refuge from the worsening coronavirus pandemic.

From August 3 Qatar is planning to operate flights from Doha to Auckland via Brisbane three times a week.

From September 3 Malaysia Airlines will operate a twice weekly non-stop service between Kuala Lumpur and Auckland with flights landing in Auckland on Mondays and Fridays.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indust ... ew-zealand

Not sure what to make of this due to covid and isolation requirements but airlines need to return to business as much as possible. Just wish it was more freight services
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
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:50 am

777ER wrote:
Major international airlines Qatar Airways and Malaysia Airlines are planning a return to New Zealand, resulting in five additional passenger aircraft arriving in the country each week.

The flights come as the New Zealand Government works to add capacity to its managed isolation facilities, which are at risk of being overwhelmed due to a surge of Kiwis returning home to seek refuge from the worsening coronavirus pandemic.

From August 3 Qatar is planning to operate flights from Doha to Auckland via Brisbane three times a week.

From September 3 Malaysia Airlines will operate a twice weekly non-stop service between Kuala Lumpur and Auckland with flights landing in Auckland on Mondays and Fridays.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indust ... ew-zealand

Not sure what to make of this due to covid and isolation requirements but airlines need to return to business as much as possible. Just wish it was more freight services


Would assume that these flights are largely funded by the cargo onboard?

Hardly think by September that New Zealand would be willing to allow any more passengers per week into the country.

The only routes that I could see allowing major passenger movements before the end of the year would be the Pacific Islands.

Hard to think that an 14 day managed isolation, currently applies for arrivals from places like Rarotonga which is COVID-19 free and has been for months.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10110
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:15 am

zkncj wrote:
777ER wrote:
Major international airlines Qatar Airways and Malaysia Airlines are planning a return to New Zealand, resulting in five additional passenger aircraft arriving in the country each week.

The flights come as the New Zealand Government works to add capacity to its managed isolation facilities, which are at risk of being overwhelmed due to a surge of Kiwis returning home to seek refuge from the worsening coronavirus pandemic.

From August 3 Qatar is planning to operate flights from Doha to Auckland via Brisbane three times a week.

From September 3 Malaysia Airlines will operate a twice weekly non-stop service between Kuala Lumpur and Auckland with flights landing in Auckland on Mondays and Fridays.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indust ... ew-zealand

Not sure what to make of this due to covid and isolation requirements but airlines need to return to business as much as possible. Just wish it was more freight services


Would assume that these flights are largely funded by the cargo onboard?

Hardly think by September that New Zealand would be willing to allow any more passengers per week into the country.

The only routes that I could see allowing major passenger movements before the end of the year would be the Pacific Islands.

Hard to think that an 14 day managed isolation, currently applies for arrivals from places like Rarotonga which is COVID-19 free and has been for months.

Really starting to wonder if QR is simply using this service as a way to re-enter a market and allow two flights for one service - similar to EK with their Australia-New Zealand services to overcome the Australia and New Zealand entry limits
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
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8346
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sun Jul 19, 2020 6:26 pm

Qatar flight is operated by A350-1000.
QR912 2355 0330+2
QR913 1900 0610+1
W,F,Su

it is only loaded as BNE-DOH and AKL-DOH, not AKL-BNE
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
a7ala
Posts: 359
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:52 pm

777ER wrote:
Really starting to wonder if QR is simply using this service as a way to re-enter a market and allow two flights for one service - similar to EK with their Australia-New Zealand services to overcome the Australia and New Zealand entry limits


Good on them - makes sense to combine multiple markets on one long haul flight. Maybe we will start to see some unusual flying as a result.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3876
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:31 am

a7ala wrote:
777ER wrote:
Really starting to wonder if QR is simply using this service as a way to re-enter a market and allow two flights for one service - similar to EK with their Australia-New Zealand services to overcome the Australia and New Zealand entry limits


Good on them - makes sense to combine multiple markets on one long haul flight. Maybe we will start to see some unusual flying as a result.


Although would make more sense for QR to come to an agreement with New Zealand/Australian Governments, to open an managed Isolation Facility in DOH (after all the facilities here are struggling).

Then all passengers would arrive into Australia and New Zealand, after completing there Isolation in DOH and would be able to walk straight out.
 
a7ala
Posts: 359
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 3:34 am

zkncj wrote:
a7ala wrote:
777ER wrote:
Really starting to wonder if QR is simply using this service as a way to re-enter a market and allow two flights for one service - similar to EK with their Australia-New Zealand services to overcome the Australia and New Zealand entry limits


Good on them - makes sense to combine multiple markets on one long haul flight. Maybe we will start to see some unusual flying as a result.


Although would make more sense for QR to come to an agreement with New Zealand/Australian Governments, to open an managed Isolation Facility in DOH (after all the facilities here are struggling).

Then all passengers would arrive into Australia and New Zealand, after completing there Isolation in DOH and would be able to walk straight out.


Every country will have its own isolation requirements so far better to isolate in each own country. Particularly given none of the people will actually be originating from DOH. Isolating needs to be the responsibly of the residing country - not some third party.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 4:18 am

a7ala wrote:
Every country will have its own isolation requirements so far better to isolate in each own country. Particularly given none of the people will actually be originating from DOH. Isolating needs to be the responsibly of the residing country - not some third party.

Absolutely. We have enough problem guaranteeing that our own quarantine facilities are secure. The idea of passing responsibility to another country (with a far higher number of cases and lots of community transmission) without the ability to monitor the process fills me with dread.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7500
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 6:19 am

a7ala wrote:
777ER wrote:
Really starting to wonder if QR is simply using this service as a way to re-enter a market and allow two flights for one service - similar to EK with their Australia-New Zealand services to overcome the Australia and New Zealand entry limits


Good on them - makes sense to combine multiple markets on one long haul flight. Maybe we will start to see some unusual flying as a result.


There are things like crew costs however I do agree personally that we may see more fifth freedom flights again depends on the bubble and transit laws etc.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12983
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:43 am

DavidByrne wrote:
zkojq wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
"National would scrap plans for light rail to Auckland airport and instead, build a heavy-rail line from Puhinui to the airport in 2026, which would later be extended to Onehunga."


Ha I've been saying that would be the best solution to this for a while, though I'd extend the Onehunga line through to the airport before connecting it up to Puhinui.

Yes, it's certainly the best solution for the Airport but it's NOT the best solution for public transport in Auckland overall, alas. Quite apart from the fact that the Puhinui connection would rip the heart out of communities in South Auckland and lead to congestion on the CRL which would impact on other services as well. It saddens me that our politicians cannot see past the airport to recognise there are other communities desperately in need of rapid transit as well. At least the extension of the Onehunga line (the original AT plan) can be constructed without stuffing the rest of the network,

And TWO heavy rail routes to the airport will soak up the very limited post-Covid capital available to the detriment of other much-needed projects. Especially wasteful when the bus rapid transit route to Puhinui is already under construction, with mega-millions being spent on the new bus-rail interchange there as well, right now. Thankfully, National seems to have little chance, so they know it's a promise they won't have to deliver on.

Even if the two lines are built its likely they'd not be a through service because extensive tunneling under the airport would be required to achieve that, vastly raising the cost. More likely they'd join east of the terminal and run on a shared alignment from there.


It’s not two heavy rails lines to the airport it’s one line from Onehunga to Puhinui which has a stop at the airport. It opens up more if Auckland to rail and would also enable direct Waikato to AKL trains.

If the Avondale to Southdown line was built then you could presumably run trains from West Auckland to the airport bypassing the CRL or going into to Mt Eden/Newmarket.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12983
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:50 am

nz2 wrote:
The "New" Mangere Bridge was built with capability for heavy rail to be installed later


Apparently that’s a bit of an urban myth. It’s one of those it can have a rail line added but not a useful rail line. From what I have read it’s suitable for a single track line at very slow speed.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:24 am

Kiwirob wrote:
It’s not two heavy rails lines to the airport it’s one line from Onehunga to Puhinui which has a stop at the airport. It opens up more if Auckland to rail and would also enable direct Waikato to AKL trains.

If the Avondale to Southdown line was built then you could presumably run trains from West Auckland to the airport bypassing the CRL or going into to Mt Eden/Newmarket.

No question that a line Onehunga-Airport-Puhinui would be better than two lines. However that would be extraordinarily expensive because it would require major tunneling under the airport. The earlier AT plan was for two surface lines meeting east of the airport and then entering the airport via a much shorter tunnel.

Waikato to AKL trains would obviously only be possible if a south-facing connection was constructed (presumably meeting the main line south of Puhinui and bypassing it) as well as a north-facing connection to the city.

I believe it's all pretty academic anyway, as few pundits think the Nats have a chance. IMHO their expansive transport policy was written with the expectation that they'd never be called upon to deliver. The Airport-Puhinui express bus has been approved by government and contracts let, including for the massive station redevelopment now well under construction. Puhinui will be the terminus for the Waikato trains when the station is complete.

Avondale to Southdown looks great as a line on the map, but the rail reserve was not drawn with topography in mind. Let's just say that it would be seriously challenging, and any benefit-cost analysis would be the likely death-nell.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:28 am

Kiwirob wrote:
nz2 wrote:
The "New" Mangere Bridge was built with capability for heavy rail to be installed later


Apparently that’s a bit of an urban myth. It’s one of those it can have a rail line added but not a useful rail line. From what I have read it’s suitable for a single track line at very slow speed.

Yes, that's my understanding too. A new bridge would be required as AT cannot run services on a major urban line with that kind of constraint. More $$$ for the Nats to find if they ever are required to deliver.
Last edited by DavidByrne on Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:35 am

Auckland to Masterton services could take flight again after $10m airport boost


A $10 million boost towards the upgrade of Masterton’s airport could be just ticket to get a new regular air service off the ground.

Domestic carrier Air Chathams said it would be interested in establishing a regular link out of Masterton once the Covid crunch eases.

Wairarapa people had been yearning for a metropolitian air service ever since Air New Zealand pulled the pin on its Masterton-Auckland link six years ago.

Air Chathams general manager Duane Emeny said the Masterton-Auckland service was being considered and the upgrade of Hood Aerodrome was a significant step.


more:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/12214830 ... port-boost

This is some positive news for the town of Masterton has been without an air service for a long time. The upgrade should allow a Saab to land at MRO and it will be a very useful asset for the district.
I wonder if other airports around the country will ask the government for funding for their's to get an upgrade so that they will be able to attract an air serice again. Perhaps Wanaka or Te Anau might want some assistance any others that might need it?
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:41 am

Not much in aviation news lately but here is a few items that might be of interest to some:

More Nelson to Wellington flights with Sounds Air
http://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.com/2020/07/ ... ights.html

Perhaps origin Air will get another Jetstream:
http://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.com/2020/07/ ... inair.html

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