Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4321
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:51 pm

You raise some valid points. It will be interesting to see how the premium market rebounds post COVID. America is key to NZ returning to good health so I fully expect both ORD, EWR to open, although we're a long way away from our next peak season. That'll be NW21/22.

The issue with code-3 will be cost, can NZ afford to refit any -9's? or are they better off using the code-2 with a mask overlay restricting sales for the lighter load. Obviously without additional premium seats that's flushing potential revenue down the drain and increasing your operating cost.

Cost also raises the question around -10 payments and can NZ afford the delivery timeline they currently have or will they need to be deferred.


In my mind the 787-10 is somewhat of a natural replacement for much of the Code1 787 flying (PER, HNL, SIN). So as they are delivered, Code 1 aircraft could be converted to the rumored Code 3. Of course that does assume that the airline plans to take them as scheduled.


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


Well that was foresightful!

DavidByrne wrote:
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.


Honestly, I feel that LR along Dominion Road is probably something that will have to happen anyway, simply because the bus corridor is going to reach peak capacity in a few years time. People talk about LR "killing two birds with one stone" in this regard, but I feel that having traffic between the airport and city on the same LR line will just lead to un-needed congestion, especially at rush hour.

Ideally it should be HR, underground, but obviously that's not going to happen in NZ.

DavidByrne wrote:
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.

:checkmark: Especially considering how many of our cases in isolation are people who transited Doha on the way back from Europe/Pakistan/India yet didn't have it on departure.....

Kiwirob wrote:
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.


:checkmark: It's crazy how someone going between Manukau and Glen Eden has to go via Newmarket.
First to fly the 787-9
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:27 pm

777ER wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
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

The J32 might already be here as last week there was a flight aware routing for a Jetstream on a facebook page


It is strange that my post on this from the previous page seems to have disappeared or dropped off the bottom.

I wonder if Origin plans to expand to take over former Kiwi Regional routes such as Nelson to Hamilton and Nelson to Dunedin with this new aircraft.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12974
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 7:20 am

This is an interesting proposition.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300063 ... nal-option

Christchurch Airport is eyeing up the Queenstown tourist market, announcing plans to build a terminal with international flight capacity just an hour up the road.

The airport company said on Wednesday discussions were under way for a “world-class sustainable airport” on 750 hectares of land near Tarras in Central Otago.

About $45 million has been spent on the project to date, which includes buying the land bordered by state highways 8 and 8A.


If we built infrastructure properly in NZ this new airport would be linked to Queenstown with a railway line. You could have stops at Cromwell and Arrowtown, thinking even further into the future the line could extend to Wanaka.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4521
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 7:45 am

"Lawyer must pay Air NZ $30k in court costs after failed bid to remove flying ban"
"A Nelson lawyer will have to pay more than $30,000 after she failed to lift her travelling ban with Air New Zealand after a dispute over entry into the Koru Lounge.

Earlier this year, Anjela Sharma failed to overturn a one-year ban imposed by Air New Zealand.

Her application was dismissed by Justice Paul Davison in February and now he's ordered Sharma to pay Air New Zealand $30,114 for costs and $3,657.21 in disbursements."

Good decision. This lady sounds like an absolute nightmare. I'm glad that NZ staff and the airline itself stood up to her and that the courts agreed.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/122 ... flying-ban
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4521
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 7:51 am

Kiwirob wrote:
This is an interesting proposition.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300063 ... nal-option

Christchurch Airport is eyeing up the Queenstown tourist market, announcing plans to build a terminal with international flight capacity just an hour up the road.

The airport company said on Wednesday discussions were under way for a “world-class sustainable airport” on 750 hectares of land near Tarras in Central Otago.

About $45 million has been spent on the project to date, which includes buying the land bordered by state highways 8 and 8A.


If we built infrastructure properly in NZ this new airport would be linked to Queenstown with a railway line. You could have stops at Cromwell and Arrowtown, thinking even further into the future the line could extend to Wanaka.

That would be nice!
I'm not quite sure why CHC has decided to do this unless they know something we don't?
ZQN is fine for what it is and WKA is ready to be expanded if needed. So unless they expect ZQN to be shut down (noise/safety?) and WKA to be barred from expanding, this doesn't make a lot of sense. The only other thought is that this has the potential to be a full size runway possibly? I don't think either ZQN or WKA can be expanded to take widebodies (but they shouldn't need to either).
I still think there should be rail connecting at least Queenstown to the rest of the country (Dunedin as originally planned), Wanaka should probably be included in that too.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Toenga
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 8:46 am

Zkpilot wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
This is an interesting proposition.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300063 ... nal-option

Christchurch Airport is eyeing up the Queenstown tourist market, announcing plans to build a terminal with international flight capacity just an hour up the road.

The airport company said on Wednesday discussions were under way for a “world-class sustainable airport” on 750 hectares of land near Tarras in Central Otago.

About $45 million has been spent on the project to date, which includes buying the land bordered by state highways 8 and 8A.


If we built infrastructure properly in NZ this new airport would be linked to Queenstown with a railway line. You could have stops at Cromwell and Arrowtown, thinking even further into the future the line could extend to Wanaka.

That would be nice!
I'm not quite sure why CHC has decided to do this unless they know something we don't?
ZQN is fine for what it is and WKA is ready to be expanded if needed. So unless they expect ZQN to be shut down (noise/safety?) and WKA to be barred from expanding, this doesn't make a lot of sense. The only other thought is that this has the potential to be a full size runway possibly? I don't think either ZQN or WKA can be expanded to take widebodies (but they shouldn't need to either).
I still think there should be rail connecting at least Queenstown to the rest of the country (Dunedin as originally planned), Wanaka should probably be included in that too.


Railways need serious load densities to be justified, A few cases of wine, some seasonal stone fruit, and some self loading cargo that wants soft seats and windows just won't cut it in the foreseeable future in that sort of terrain.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 9:30 am

Zkpilot wrote:
"Lawyer must pay Air NZ $30k in court costs after failed bid to remove flying ban"
"A Nelson lawyer will have to pay more than $30,000 after she failed to lift her travelling ban with Air New Zealand after a dispute over entry into the Koru Lounge.

Earlier this year, Anjela Sharma failed to overturn a one-year ban imposed by Air New Zealand.

Her application was dismissed by Justice Paul Davison in February and now he's ordered Sharma to pay Air New Zealand $30,114 for costs and $3,657.21 in disbursements."

Good decision. This lady sounds like an absolute nightmare. I'm glad that NZ staff and the airline itself stood up to her and that the courts agreed.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/122 ... flying-ban


Hopefully she gets an 12month extension, since 2020 is turning out to be an non flying year.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12974
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 10:07 am

Toenga wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
This is an interesting proposition.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300063 ... nal-option



If we built infrastructure properly in NZ this new airport would be linked to Queenstown with a railway line. You could have stops at Cromwell and Arrowtown, thinking even further into the future the line could extend to Wanaka.

That would be nice!
I'm not quite sure why CHC has decided to do this unless they know something we don't?
ZQN is fine for what it is and WKA is ready to be expanded if needed. So unless they expect ZQN to be shut down (noise/safety?) and WKA to be barred from expanding, this doesn't make a lot of sense. The only other thought is that this has the potential to be a full size runway possibly? I don't think either ZQN or WKA can be expanded to take widebodies (but they shouldn't need to either).
I still think there should be rail connecting at least Queenstown to the rest of the country (Dunedin as originally planned), Wanaka should probably be included in that too.


Railways need serious load densities to be justified, A few cases of wine, some seasonal stone fruit, and some self loading cargo that wants soft seats and windows just won't cut it in the foreseeable future in that sort of terrain.


I wouldn't need to be heavy rail, a metro service would be more than sufficient for moving people from this potential new airport to Queenstown and Wanaka. IMO ZQN is nearing the end, it's a waste of land being used as an airport when it could be used for other far more beneficial purposes.
 
Whoopeecock
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:35 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 10:54 am

Toenga wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
This is an interesting proposition.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300063 ... nal-option



If we built infrastructure properly in NZ this new airport would be linked to Queenstown with a railway line. You could have stops at Cromwell and Arrowtown, thinking even further into the future the line could extend to Wanaka.

That would be nice!
I'm not quite sure why CHC has decided to do this unless they know something we don't?
ZQN is fine for what it is and WKA is ready to be expanded if needed. So unless they expect ZQN to be shut down (noise/safety?) and WKA to be barred from expanding, this doesn't make a lot of sense. The only other thought is that this has the potential to be a full size runway possibly? I don't think either ZQN or WKA can be expanded to take widebodies (but they shouldn't need to either).
I still think there should be rail connecting at least Queenstown to the rest of the country (Dunedin as originally planned), Wanaka should probably be included in that too.


Railways need serious load densities to be justified, A few cases of wine, some seasonal stone fruit, and some self loading cargo that wants soft seats and windows just won't cut it in the foreseeable future in that sort of terrain.


Perhaps CHC do know something we don’t? Seems the outgoing WKA manager doesn’t think the expansion will happen anytime soon. https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/wanaka/di ... be-leaving
 
fkfnz
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
I still think there should be rail connecting at least Queenstown to the rest of the country (Dunedin as originally planned), Wanaka should probably be included in that too.


There used to be rail Dunedin-Cromwell. It wasn't that many years ago it was ripped out to Middlemarch, and just recently the Middlemarch-Dunedin part has been mothballed. The maintenance costs are very high due to terrain and lack of regular use. And getting rail from Queenstown to anywhere would be hugely expensive.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:13 pm

zkojq wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
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.

Honestly, I feel that LR along Dominion Road is probably something that will have to happen anyway, simply because the bus corridor is going to reach peak capacity in a few years time. People talk about LR "killing two birds with one stone" in this regard, but I feel that having traffic between the airport and city on the same LR line will just lead to un-needed congestion, especially at rush hour.

Ideally it should be HR, underground, but obviously that's not going to happen in NZ.


Not sure if you're quoting me or others but I really like the idea of LR on Dominion Road. I just don't think it's an Airport solution and a Dominion Road solution in one. That's where I think they've killed two birds with one stone.

I have said previously, I can just imagine passengers coming in off NZ1, 5, 7, 27, 29 between 0500-0700, jumping on a LR carriage lugging behind them their suitcases duty free and various other personal items including mandatory neck cushion and walking stick. I can already picture the congestion inside by the time the train turned down Dominion Road ready to pick up the wealthy inner city cooperates heading into the office during their peak morning commute.

While we can quickly argue HR may be no different. The whole design of carriages and their wider doors, more space inside, larger platforms with longer dwell times and fewer stops all lead to a more tolerable experience when moving airline passengers around.

By the way, I don't live anywhere near either the LR or HR routes.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:31 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
"Lawyer must pay Air NZ $30k in court costs after failed bid to remove flying ban"
"A Nelson lawyer will have to pay more than $30,000 after she failed to lift her travelling ban with Air New Zealand after a dispute over entry into the Koru Lounge.

Earlier this year, Anjela Sharma failed to overturn a one-year ban imposed by Air New Zealand.

Her application was dismissed by Justice Paul Davison in February and now he's ordered Sharma to pay Air New Zealand $30,114 for costs and $3,657.21 in disbursements."

Good decision. This lady sounds like an absolute nightmare. I'm glad that NZ staff and the airline itself stood up to her and that the courts agreed.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/122 ... flying-ban


FANTASTIC outcome!

Sends a clear message to all industries. You can't bully and bulldoze your way through life and get away with it.

They make up a small percentage but there's always a small group of recidivist moaners who seem to bully, complain or find in anything then put their hand out for "compensation".
 
bevan7
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:44 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:55 am

I just saw an Emirates plane land at Christchurch. I looked up and saw it was from Sydney. Anybody know what it's doing here? I thought they were only flying to Auckland? https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/ ... /YSSY/NZCH
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:59 am

NZ6 wrote:
While we can quickly argue HR may be no different. The whole design of carriages and their wider doors, more space inside, larger platforms with longer dwell times and fewer stops all lead to a more tolerable experience when moving airline passengers around.

I don't want to reignite the whole HR vs LR to the airport debate, but a couple of points:

The carriage internal layout for a LR vehicle is totally negotiable with the manufacturer. It's absolutely envisaged that a LR vehicle serving the airport will be properly designed for the service and equipped for baggage. The doors? At this stage we have no idea how wide they'd be, so it's impossible to say that they'd be too narrow. Platform size: again, we don't know how big they'll be, but you can be sure that there will be plenty of space at the critical stop, the airport itself. Dwell times: the most serious criticism of the current heavy rail operations is that the dwell times are too LONG already, and there is a lot of pressure the reduce them. Dwell time on LR will be whatever is needed to board and disembark passengers, and won't be predetermined. Fewer stops: yes, HR does have fewer stops to the airport (approx three fewer to K Rd according to my quick count. And don't forget that HR to the city from the airport will almost certainly have to travel via Panmure and terminate at Britomart because of the capacity restrictions on the CRL, so a change of train will be required to get anywhere else on the CRL.

The CRL will have a serious capacity restraint in that peak hour use from the beginning will be 15 trains per hour (one every four minutes average). With modest frequency increases foreshadowed for the future, there will not be the space on the CRL for an additional line to use it (hence the expectation it will have to terminate at Britomart). AT is not going to reduce frequencies on other lines just to accommodate the airport link - that would be foolhardy.

Having said that, there's no doubt that HR to the airport would be great outcome. But sadly, it faces many, many obstacles which can be more quickly and cheaply overcome by using another mode.

Personally, I think that rapid transit to the airport is now further away than it has ever been. National won't win the election, so write off their HR proposal. Labour have already shown they won't support NZ First's similar HR approach. Labour seems fixated on light metro now, which to my mind will be a complete non-starter for reasons of cost, complexity, disruption (pretty much tunnelled all the way from the city to Mt Roskill - just ain't going to happen, despite being an excellent solution) and angst about foreign control. If the Greens stick with light rail and still have influence overt Labour after the election, then there's still a chance for light rail. But my money would be on the "do nothing option" being the outcome. Sadly, this is what happens once politicians start ignoring expert advice and decide their own positions based on prejudice, ignorance and perceptions of electoral advantage.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
bevan7
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:44 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:06 am

bevan7 wrote:
I just saw an Emirates plane land at Christchurch. I looked up and saw it was from Sydney. Anybody know what it's doing here? I thought they were only flying to Auckland? https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/ ... /YSSY/NZCH


Done some more research and apparently it looks like it's cargo only
 
NZ6
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 3:29 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
While we can quickly argue HR may be no different. The whole design of carriages and their wider doors, more space inside, larger platforms with longer dwell times and fewer stops all lead to a more tolerable experience when moving airline passengers around.

I don't want to reignite the whole HR vs LR to the airport debate, but a couple of points:

The carriage internal layout for a LR vehicle is totally negotiable with the manufacturer. It's absolutely envisaged that a LR vehicle serving the airport will be properly designed for the service and equipped for baggage. The doors? At this stage we have no idea how wide they'd be, so it's impossible to say that they'd be too narrow. Platform size: again, we don't know how big they'll be, but you can be sure that there will be plenty of space at the critical stop, the airport itself. Dwell times: the most serious criticism of the current heavy rail operations is that the dwell times are too LONG already, and there is a lot of pressure the reduce them. Dwell time on LR will be whatever is needed to board and disembark passengers, and won't be predetermined. Fewer stops: yes, HR does have fewer stops to the airport (approx three fewer to K Rd according to my quick count. And don't forget that HR to the city from the airport will almost certainly have to travel via Panmure and terminate at Britomart because of the capacity restrictions on the CRL, so a change of train will be required to get anywhere else on the CRL.

The CRL will have a serious capacity restraint in that peak hour use from the beginning will be 15 trains per hour (one every four minutes average). With modest frequency increases foreshadowed for the future, there will not be the space on the CRL for an additional line to use it (hence the expectation it will have to terminate at Britomart). AT is not going to reduce frequencies on other lines just to accommodate the airport link - that would be foolhardy.

Having said that, there's no doubt that HR to the airport would be great outcome. But sadly, it faces many, many obstacles which can be more quickly and cheaply overcome by using another mode.

Personally, I think that rapid transit to the airport is now further away than it has ever been. National won't win the election, so write off their HR proposal. Labour have already shown they won't support NZ First's similar HR approach. Labour seems fixated on light metro now, which to my mind will be a complete non-starter for reasons of cost, complexity, disruption (pretty much tunnelled all the way from the city to Mt Roskill - just ain't going to happen, despite being an excellent solution) and angst about foreign control. If the Greens stick with light rail and still have influence overt Labour after the election, then there's still a chance for light rail. But my money would be on the "do nothing option" being the outcome. Sadly, this is what happens once politicians start ignoring expert advice and decide their own positions based on prejudice, ignorance and perceptions of electoral advantage.


Re the LR carriages, I'm not expert but I've been on plenty of examples overseas and I'm yet to see anything which offers similar space that HR offers. Even if our HR gauge is narrower than most other countries.

I'm sure there's some good examples out there which are open plan but we also need to remember they're navigating urban and inner city streets so they couldn't be that wide.

But I agree, I think it'll be 2040-2050 before we see any form of rail to AIAL. In the meantime we'll sit back and rely on the ol "Sky Bus" which isn't a horrible service to be fair. Although I would prefer a more express service, perhaps Britomart > Sky City > NW Motorway - Waterview > Airport vs the Mt Eden Road route. If it still does that.

MEL has this express Airport - CBD Depot approach and very frequent services which is makes for a effortless trip.
 
Toenga
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:02 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
While we can quickly argue HR may be no different. The whole design of carriages and their wider doors, more space inside, larger platforms with longer dwell times and fewer stops all lead to a more tolerable experience when moving airline passengers around.

I don't want to reignite the whole HR vs LR to the airport debate, but a couple of points:

The carriage internal layout for a LR vehicle is totally negotiable with the manufacturer. It's absolutely envisaged that a LR vehicle serving the airport will be properly designed for the service and equipped for baggage. The doors? At this stage we have no idea how wide they'd be, so it's impossible to say that they'd be too narrow. Platform size: again, we don't know how big they'll be, but you can be sure that there will be plenty of space at the critical stop, the airport itself. Dwell times: the most serious criticism of the current heavy rail operations is that the dwell times are too LONG already, and there is a lot of pressure the reduce them. Dwell time on LR will be whatever is needed to board and disembark passengers, and won't be predetermined. Fewer stops: yes, HR does have fewer stops to the airport (approx three fewer to K Rd according to my quick count. And don't forget that HR to the city from the airport will almost certainly have to travel via Panmure and terminate at Britomart because of the capacity restrictions on the CRL, so a change of train will be required to get anywhere else on the CRL.

The CRL will have a serious capacity restraint in that peak hour use from the beginning will be 15 trains per hour (one every four minutes average). With modest frequency increases foreshadowed for the future, there will not be the space on the CRL for an additional line to use it (hence the expectation it will have to terminate at Britomart). AT is not going to reduce frequencies on other lines just to accommodate the airport link - that would be foolhardy.

Having said that, there's no doubt that HR to the airport would be great outcome. But sadly, it faces many, many obstacles which can be more quickly and cheaply overcome by using another mode.

Personally, I think that rapid transit to the airport is now further away than it has ever been. National won't win the election, so write off their HR proposal. Labour have already shown they won't support NZ First's similar HR approach. Labour seems fixated on light metro now, which to my mind will be a complete non-starter for reasons of cost, complexity, disruption (pretty much tunnelled all the way from the city to Mt Roskill - just ain't going to happen, despite being an excellent solution) and angst about foreign control. If the Greens stick with light rail and still have influence overt Labour after the election, then there's still a chance for light rail. But my money would be on the "do nothing option" being the outcome. Sadly, this is what happens once politicians start ignoring expert advice and decide their own positions based on prejudice, ignorance and perceptions of electoral advantage.


Adding to David's excellent analysis.
The not infrequent suburban rail total shutdowns in both Wellington and Auckland recently show the wisdom of having the resilience of having two totally independent PT paths from the airport, to both the rest of the PT network, and the CBD.
Light rail, plus frequent expedited bus to join the existing heavy rail passenger network at Puhanui.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:54 am

NZ6 wrote:
Re the LR carriages, I'm not expert but I've been on plenty of examples overseas and I'm yet to see anything which offers similar space that HR offers. Even if our HR gauge is narrower than most other countries.

I was reasonably impressed by the Edinburgh Airport light rail, which did not seem too cramped, and did have luggage space. Re the gauge for the light rail - it could be whatever AT wants as it would be a brand new network. There would also be very few 90 deg corners on an Auckland Airport line, and most of them would be on relatively wide streets, so I'd not be too worried about that. Narrower the gauge, the tighter corners can be negotiated. But even on our narrow HR gauge the ex-BR carriages caused no problems once the bogies were converted.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Toenga
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 7:19 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Re the LR carriages, I'm not expert but I've been on plenty of examples overseas and I'm yet to see anything which offers similar space that HR offers. Even if our HR gauge is narrower than most other countries.

I was reasonably impressed by the Edinburgh Airport light rail, which did not seem too cramped, and did have luggage space. Re the gauge for the light rail - it could be whatever AT wants as it would be a brand new network. There would also be very few 90 deg corners on an Auckland Airport line, and most of them would be on relatively wide streets, so I'd not be too worried about that. Narrower the gauge, the tighter corners can be negotiated. But even on our narrow HR gauge the ex-BR carriages caused no problems once the bogies were converted.


The Auckland Transport Proposal for LRT was to standardise rolling stock with the most prevalent LRT systems overseas. These use standard gauge 1435mm.
This is actually wider then NZ Rail standard gauge of 1067mm.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1216
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:01 pm

Article on Simple Flying on an incident involving a 777 and 787 bumping into one another in the hanger at AKL and causing damage to both frames. I don't recall seeing this posted or in the media before now. Is this for real and if so, do we know which frames?
Plane mad!
 
torin
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:53 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:34 pm

bevan7 wrote:
bevan7 wrote:
I just saw an Emirates plane land at Christchurch. I looked up and saw it was from Sydney. Anybody know what it's doing here? I thought they were only flying to Auckland? https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/ ... /YSSY/NZCH


Done some more research and apparently it looks like it's cargo only


Thats correctly, once weekly DXB-SYD-CHC-SYD-DXB on Thursdays. Arrives 2pm departs 4pm - always leaves before scheduled, and always early.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 24, 2020 12:17 am

https://i.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/122236171/air-new-zealand-boosts-domestic-capacity

From August NZ’s Domestic capacity is now back up to 70% of pre-covid levels. With more use of larger aircraft helping with increased demand for domestic travel. Looks like the a321NEO’s will still be getting put to good use of the next few months.

Wonder if JQ will look at sending some a321’s over, most of them are currently parked up in storage in Australia.

If VA hadn’t fired all of its New Zealand based staff, it would of made sense for them to send 5x 738s over and give New Zealand Domestic ago again.
 
anstar
Posts: 3278
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 24, 2020 6:00 am

zkncj wrote:
Wonder if JQ will look at sending some a321’s over, most of them are currently parked up in storage in Australia.
.


JQ's NZ based pilots and cabin crew aren't trained on the 321 so I doubt we will see them operating NZ domestic at least in the short term.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 24, 2020 6:55 am

anstar wrote:
zkncj wrote:
Wonder if JQ will look at sending some a321’s over, most of them are currently parked up in storage in Australia.
.


JQ's NZ based pilots and cabin crew aren't trained on the 321 so I doubt we will see them operating NZ domestic at least in the short term.


Wouldn't the A320/321 be the same type ratting for the pilots?

Then the cabin crew would just ned an familiarisation on the differences with the A321?
 
anstar
Posts: 3278
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 24, 2020 8:55 am

zkncj wrote:
anstar wrote:
zkncj wrote:
Wonder if JQ will look at sending some a321’s over, most of them are currently parked up in storage in Australia.
.


JQ's NZ based pilots and cabin crew aren't trained on the 321 so I doubt we will see them operating NZ domestic at least in the short term.


Wouldn't the A320/321 be the same type ratting for the pilots?

Then the cabin crew would just ned an familiarisation on the differences with the A321?


It has differences and and there is a cost to training. I'd say wait for JQ to be back to 100% capacity in NZ and see what happens after that.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12974
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:36 am

DavidByrne wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
While we can quickly argue HR may be no different. The whole design of carriages and their wider doors, more space inside, larger platforms with longer dwell times and fewer stops all lead to a more tolerable experience when moving airline passengers around.

I don't want to reignite the whole HR vs LR to the airport debate, but a couple of points:

The carriage internal layout for a LR vehicle is totally negotiable with the manufacturer. It's absolutely envisaged that a LR vehicle serving the airport will be properly designed for the service and equipped for baggage. The doors? At this stage we have no idea how wide they'd be, so it's impossible to say that they'd be too narrow. Platform size: again, we don't know how big they'll be, but you can be sure that there will be plenty of space at the critical stop, the airport itself. Dwell times: the most serious criticism of the current heavy rail operations is that the dwell times are too LONG already, and there is a lot of pressure the reduce them. Dwell time on LR will be whatever is needed to board and disembark passengers, and won't be predetermined. Fewer stops: yes, HR does have fewer stops to the airport (approx three fewer to K Rd according to my quick count. And don't forget that HR to the city from the airport will almost certainly have to travel via Panmure and terminate at Britomart because of the capacity restrictions on the CRL, so a change of train will be required to get anywhere else on the CRL.

The CRL will have a serious capacity restraint in that peak hour use from the beginning will be 15 trains per hour (one every four minutes average). With modest frequency increases foreshadowed for the future, there will not be the space on the CRL for an additional line to use it (hence the expectation it will have to terminate at Britomart). AT is not going to reduce frequencies on other lines just to accommodate the airport link - that would be foolhardy.

Having said that, there's no doubt that HR to the airport would be great outcome. But sadly, it faces many, many obstacles which can be more quickly and cheaply overcome by using another mode.

Personally, I think that rapid transit to the airport is now further away than it has ever been. National won't win the election, so write off their HR proposal. Labour have already shown they won't support NZ First's similar HR approach. Labour seems fixated on light metro now, which to my mind will be a complete non-starter for reasons of cost, complexity, disruption (pretty much tunnelled all the way from the city to Mt Roskill - just ain't going to happen, despite being an excellent solution) and angst about foreign control. If the Greens stick with light rail and still have influence overt Labour after the election, then there's still a chance for light rail. But my money would be on the "do nothing option" being the outcome. Sadly, this is what happens once politicians start ignoring expert advice and decide their own positions based on prejudice, ignorance and perceptions of electoral advantage.


I've used the Edinburgh Airport to city tram twice, the first time was awful, but being a glutton for punishment I thought I would try it again to see if my first experience was a one off, it wasn't. Never again, I use taxis now, it's much quicker, the Edinburgh trams aren't grade separated the entire rout, in some parts they mix with traffic, which would be like the line running down Dominion Rd.

I agree with your they won't do anything approach, light rail in Auckland is dead and so is any decent HR solution to AKL. The busway to Puhinui is also a typical Kiwi half baked she'll be good enough solution.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 25, 2020 5:46 am

's
Kiwirob wrote:
I've used the Edinburgh Airport to city tram twice, the first time was awful, but being a glutton for punishment I thought I would try it again to see if my first experience was a one off, it wasn't. Never again, I use taxis now, it's much quicker, the Edinburgh trams aren't grade separated the entire rout, in some parts they mix with traffic, which would be like the line running down Dominion Rd.

No one is suggesting that light rail to the airport will be the solution for every customer. That's why we have taxis, shuttles and Skybus now. In Auckland the airport link will be tailored for the mass market - as it should be, not for corporate high-fliers. And not everyone stresses about how long the journey to the city will take - when I travel that's almost the least of my concerns.

In Edinburgh, light rail costs 6.50 pounds to the city, a taxi about 20.00 pounds; but in Auckland (on today's prices) the differential will be much more extreme because our taxi costs are amongst the highest in the world. The AT HOP card fare is $5.00 (approx 45 min by LR), while the cost of a taxi can range from $38 to $75 (approx 30 min trip). Even at the lower end of the taxi fare price range, this 15 min saving would cost you $33 ($133 extra cost per hour saved). For the higher end of the taxi fare range you would save $70 ($280 extra cost per hour saved) using light rail. That may be fine if you're earning $133-$280/hour (a salary of $250,000 to $600,000-ish), or if your company is funding your excesses, but most people certainly aren't and don't. In any event, people earning $250,000 plus are not the target market catchment for AKL rapid transit.

And for those who do hate the prospect of light rail: continue to use Skybus, a shuttle or a taxi if it suits your needs better. The rapid transit option will only be there for the people who want it. AKL gets (got) 21 million pax a year and around 15,000 people work there. If 5% of each group used light rail, the total number carried per year would be about 1.4 million per year (700,000 each direction). That's about 17 pax per service (assuming 18 hours a day, six services per hour), which is probably a little more than Skybus gets from casual observation, according to my back-of-envelope calculations. For a single stop on the network, that would be right up there, and a significant contributor to patronage on the overall light rail line. So I'm pretty confidently predicting that a single-seat rapid transit ride to the airport would attract a good number of airport users, even if it's light rail which some posters seem to hate with a passion, and claim they're prepared to pay up to about 15x the light rail fare to avoid it.

The same numbers could be applied to any rapid transit mode serving AKL, but given (1) National isn't going to win the election, and (2) NZ First certainly isn't going to win the election, then the decision is really between light rail and light metro.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11126
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 25, 2020 5:51 am

Air New Zealand 77W ZK-OKR positioned LAX-VCV for storage

https://twitter.com/philipkirk6/status/ ... 85568?s=20
Forum Moderator
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 25, 2020 5:54 am

qf789 wrote:
Air New Zealand 77W ZK-OKR positioned LAX-VCV for storage

https://twitter.com/philipkirk6/status/ ... 85568?s=20


Understand that OKR is one of the two leased 77W's, thinking maybe they are arranging to return it to the leaser?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7500
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:58 am

zkncj wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Air New Zealand 77W ZK-OKR positioned LAX-VCV for storage

https://twitter.com/philipkirk6/status/ ... 85568?s=20


Understand that OKR is one of the two leased 77W's, thinking maybe they are arranging to return it to the leaser?


I think there are 3 leased 77Ws, OKR and OKS I think are 2 of them. I don't think any decision has been made regards the 77W fleet yet. I understand 3-4 will go to VCV while the others will remain in AKL for now? They have been back flying a little in the last week or so.
 
PA515
Posts: 1606
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Sat Jul 25, 2020 9:43 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
I think there are 3 leased 77Ws, OKR and OKS I think are 2 of them. I don't think any decision has been made regards the 77W fleet yet. I understand 3-4 will go to VCV while the others will remain in AKL for now? They have been back flying a little in the last week or so.


That's correct, three leased 77Ws. ZK-OKR and ZK-OKS are leased from ALC and both of these appear to have had early lease termination options for FY2019 and FY2020, but I don't know when the early lease termination option has to notified. Air NZ would probably have passed that date by March 2020 and be looking at a FY2021 early lease termination. The other leased 77W is either ZK-OKN or ZK-OKO. Initially both were leased but one had been purchased by 20 Oct 2016. I suspect ZK-OKN was purchased as part of an insurance write down after it had some corrosion removal done by Boeing at VCV 08 Oct to 28 Nov 2015.

PA515
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:24 am

Airlines not set for take-off

Wairarapa politicians are ready to fly from Hood Aerodrome, but airlines are not set for take-off.

Wednesday’s announcement of a multi-million-dollar investment in the airstrip relaunched talk of a Masterton-Auckland commuter trip.

Councillors, MPs, and officials seem keen to attract commuter flights back to the airfield.

But with airlines reeling from the covid-19 lockdown, big city arrivals are not imminent, says the company most often linked with running the service.

A $17 million local and national government pledge will pay for runway widening and lengthening, and infrastructure upgrade


more:
https://times-age.co.nz/airlines-not-set-for-take-off/

Seems that a runway upgrade may not be enough at Masterton airport to attract in Air Chats. The Council may have to underwrite an Auckland service and/or offer zero landing fees for a year etc to get a deal signed up.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:52 am

NZ516 wrote:
Airlines not set for take-off

Wairarapa politicians are ready to fly from Hood Aerodrome, but airlines are not set for take-off.

Wednesday’s announcement of a multi-million-dollar investment in the airstrip relaunched talk of a Masterton-Auckland commuter trip.

Councillors, MPs, and officials seem keen to attract commuter flights back to the airfield.

But with airlines reeling from the covid-19 lockdown, big city arrivals are not imminent, says the company most often linked with running the service.

A $17 million local and national government pledge will pay for runway widening and lengthening, and infrastructure upgrade


more:
https://times-age.co.nz/airlines-not-set-for-take-off/

Seems that a runway upgrade may not be enough at Masterton airport to attract in Air Chats. The Council may have to underwrite an Auckland service and/or offer zero landing fees for a year etc to get a deal signed up.


With International tourism being off the cards for the next 2-5 years, this were New Zealand’s one major domestic airline is going to bite us back hard. Look at what has happened to everyone that has tired to take on NZ on its home turf. JQ has done ok on the main trunks, but failed on regional due to NZ over competing. Anyone who though AKL-NSN for $39 was an great price, fails to see the damage that causes.

Problem being that NZ is around 50% Government owners, and they have an instant credit line should they ever need it (basically they will never be allowed to go out of Business).

Really that model shouldn’t be allow to exist, more than ever we need domestic tourism in New Zealand. Apart of that requires an strong second domestic airline, that is able to help drive invovation and market development.

Right now that can’t happen, because anyone that tires to will just end up in an race to the bottom with NZ.

Ultimately JQ Regional should of never been allowed to pull out of the market, if anything it should of been offered an public/private partnership to help build regional travel.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 6:01 am

zkncj wrote:
With International tourism being off the cards for the next 2-5 years, this were New Zealand’s one major domestic airline is going to bite us back hard. Look at what has happened to everyone that has tired to take on NZ on its home turf. JQ has done ok on the main trunks, but failed on regional due to NZ over competing. Anyone who though AKL-NSN for $39 was an great price, fails to see the damage that causes.

Problem being that NZ is around 50% Government owners, and they have an instant credit line should they ever need it (basically they will never be allowed to go out of Business).

Really that model shouldn’t be allow to exist, more than ever we need domestic tourism in New Zealand. Apart of that requires an strong second domestic airline, that is able to help drive invovation and market development.

Right now that can’t happen, because anyone that tires to will just end up in an race to the bottom with NZ.

Ultimately JQ Regional should of never been allowed to pull out of the market, if anything it should of been offered an public/private partnership to help build regional travel.

I'm trying hard, but I can't really figure out what you're saying here. Air Chathams is not going to compete with NZ on MRO-AKL if it takes up the route. No way would it be trying to take on NZ on its "home turf".

Then you suggest that "JQ Regional should of (sic) never been allowed to pull out of the market", and propose a kind of public-private partnership - in effect, just like NZ is now. But then you go on to say that such a business model (in NZ's case anyway) "shouldn't be allowed to exist". Are you saying that the government should have sold its shareholding in NZ and then invest in JQ to support a second carrier?

I'm truly confused! If you're saying what I think you're saying, I think it's a truly terrible idea. And I don't think that New Zealand could support two full trunk-and-regional domestic carriers. Look how hard it has been in Australia, a far larger market, to make two carriers work.
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

Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:20 am

zkncj wrote:
With International tourism being off the cards for the next 2-5 years.


You lost me here....

Where's this bold prediction coming from. Do you honestly think we'll have no international touriusm until 2025?
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4521
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:50 am

NZ6 wrote:
zkncj wrote:
With International tourism being off the cards for the next 2-5 years.


You lost me here....

Where's this bold prediction coming from. Do you honestly think we'll have no international touriusm until 2025?

Same here. 2 years at most unless the world economy totally crashes and Covid goes completely out of control.

As for the JQ stuff, they have massive backing of QF behind them (3.5x the size of NZ and too big to fail so in effect has govt backing). If they couldn’t make it work then that tells you it simply isn’t that profitable.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12974
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:40 pm

A question on the Air NZ 772's, these were the longhaul work horse of the fleet, did they have a lot of life left in them or were they pretty high cycle aircraft and nearing the end of their economic life?
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:58 pm

zkncj wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
Airlines not set for take-off

Wairarapa politicians are ready to fly from Hood Aerodrome, but airlines are not set for take-off.

Wednesday’s announcement of a multi-million-dollar investment in the airstrip relaunched talk of a Masterton-Auckland commuter trip.

Councillors, MPs, and officials seem keen to attract commuter flights back to the airfield.

But with airlines reeling from the covid-19 lockdown, big city arrivals are not imminent, says the company most often linked with running the service.

A $17 million local and national government pledge will pay for runway widening and lengthening, and infrastructure upgrade


more:
https://times-age.co.nz/airlines-not-set-for-take-off/

Seems that a runway upgrade may not be enough at Masterton airport to attract in Air Chats. The Council may have to underwrite an Auckland service and/or offer zero landing fees for a year etc to get a deal signed up.


With International tourism being off the cards for the next 2-5 years, this were New Zealand’s one major domestic airline is going to bite us back hard. Look at what has happened to everyone that has tired to take on NZ on its home turf. JQ has done ok on the main trunks, but failed on regional due to NZ over competing. Anyone who though AKL-NSN for $39 was an great price, fails to see the damage that causes.

Problem being that NZ is around 50% Government owners, and they have an instant credit line should they ever need it (basically they will never be allowed to go out of Business).

Really that model shouldn’t be allow to exist, more than ever we need domestic tourism in New Zealand. Apart of that requires an strong second domestic airline, that is able to help drive invovation and market development.

Right now that can’t happen, because anyone that tires to will just end up in an race to the bottom with NZ.

Ultimately JQ Regional should of never been allowed to pull out of the market, if anything it should of been offered an public/private partnership to help build regional travel.


Yes I also don't really understand your reply as it was not relevant to my discussion on the challenges of reinstating services to Masterton. I don't see Air NZ returning to the town and will leave the small markets for the likes of Air Chathams if they decide to give it a go. Regarding Air NZ pushing out JQ regional that is not the case. They didn't turn a profit with their low pricing so it's not NZ's fault.
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Tue Jul 28, 2020 6:32 pm

Air New Zealand resumes San Francisco service from late-July 2020

Air New Zealand last week resumed Auckland – San Francisco service, after nearly 4 months of service suspension. Since 21JUL20, Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft operates this route 3 times weekly.

NZ008 AKL2230 – 1545SFO 789 246
NZ007 SFO2150 – 0545+2AKL 789 246

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... july-2020/


Good to see another route is coming back and with new timings perhaps Vancouver might return in the near future as well.
 
User avatar
AVENSAB727
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:02 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 29, 2020 12:34 am

NZ516 wrote:
Air New Zealand resumes San Francisco service from late-July 2020

Air New Zealand last week resumed Auckland – San Francisco service, after nearly 4 months of service suspension. Since 21JUL20, Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft operates this route 3 times weekly.

NZ008 AKL2230 – 1545SFO 789 246
NZ007 SFO2150 – 0545+2AKL 789 246

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... july-2020/


Good to see another route is coming back and with new timings perhaps Vancouver might return in the near future as well.

Looking forward to seeing IAH return!
Always look on the bright side of Life!
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2538
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 29, 2020 12:42 am

Kiwirob wrote:
A question on the Air NZ 772's, these were the longhaul work horse of the fleet, did they have a lot of life left in them or were they pretty high cycle aircraft and nearing the end of their economic life?

They weren't particularly old or high cycle but 77Es are more expensive to operate than their newer generation replacements such as 789s and given the collapse in international demand were the first to go. There is little or no market for preowned 77Es with most of the retired aircraft from all airlines going to scrappers. The fate of 77Es is worsened as there is no freight conversion program available for them; I believe this revolves around floor strength making conversion uneconomically complicated.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
NZ321
Posts: 1216
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 29, 2020 9:13 am

AVENSAB727 wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
Air New Zealand resumes San Francisco service from late-July 2020

Air New Zealand last week resumed Auckland – San Francisco service, after nearly 4 months of service suspension. Since 21JUL20, Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft operates this route 3 times weekly.

NZ008 AKL2230 – 1545SFO 789 246
NZ007 SFO2150 – 0545+2AKL 789 246

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... july-2020/


Good to see another route is coming back and with new timings perhaps Vancouver might return in the near future as well.

Looking forward to seeing IAH return!


Eventually - but I'd rather wait until the present Covid crisis situation in Texas has abated somewhat wouldn't you?
Plane mad!
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8346
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:32 am

Kiwirob wrote:
A question on the Air NZ 772's, these were the longhaul work horse of the fleet, did they have a lot of life left in them or were they pretty high cycle aircraft and nearing the end of their economic life?


They are the amongst the last 772s off the production line along with OZ/KL. They also have low utilization because NZ has always insisted on night time departures ex NZ and Asia/USA which has meant 12h transits at destinations like LAX/SFO/YVR/HKG for example. Compared to KL, which has similar flights you see how they turn aircraft around straight away within 2-3h. As a result in a 48h window NZ might fly AKL-LAX-AKL and KL would have flow AMS-HKG-AMS-ORD-AMS
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.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 30, 2020 9:21 pm

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12352484

JQ is increasing its domestic schedule back to 90% of pre COVID-19 levels, from August.

Jetstar's domestic schedule from August:
• Auckland to Christchurch (30 weekly return flights, up from 24 in July)
• Auckland to Dunedin (7 return weekly flights, up from 3 in July)
• Auckland to Wellington (27 return weekly flights)
• Auckland to Queenstown (19 return weekly flights, up from 14 in July)
• Christchurch to Wellington (14 return weekly flights, up from 7 in July)
• Wellington – Queenstown (7 return weekly flights, up from 0 in July)
 
Toenga
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:03 pm

With this increase in services, how does the Jetstar NZ operation compare with Jetstar services currently running in the rest of their networks?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:19 pm

Toenga wrote:
With this increase in services, how does the Jetstar NZ operation compare with Jetstar services currently running in the rest of their networks?


The majority of Jetstar Asia services are currently suspend until 31 Augusts (At least), in Australia things were picking up although now starting to drop back on some routes e.g. MEL related. Also from 1am on Saturday anyone in the greater Sydney Area no longer can travel to QLD so this would have an decent impact on JQ East Coast passengers in the short-term.

The type of domestic travel we are currently seeing in New Zealand, is very different to allot of other counties right now.
 
NZ516
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:33 am

Auckland Airport busier than Changi Airport and Hong Kong

Auckland Airport was busier than Singapore's Changi and Hong Kong Airport in June as domestic flights in this country bounced back more quickly than expected.

Auckland was also busier than the big Australian airports and was zeroing in on London Heathrow, according to figures released today.

In June Auckland Airport had 231,600 travellers through its international and domestic terminals, a fraction of the 1.5 million last year but still ahead of other big Australian and Asian hubs

more:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12352625

Well that is quite something its lucky for NZ that domestic travel is nearly back to normal. SIN and HKG rely 100% on international traffic which will be suppresed for some time.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 31, 2020 3:16 am

NZ516 wrote:
Auckland Airport busier than Changi Airport and Hong Kong

Auckland Airport was busier than Singapore's Changi and Hong Kong Airport in June as domestic flights in this country bounced back more quickly than expected.

Auckland was also busier than the big Australian airports and was zeroing in on London Heathrow, according to figures released today.

In June Auckland Airport had 231,600 travellers through its international and domestic terminals, a fraction of the 1.5 million last year but still ahead of other big Australian and Asian hubs

more:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12352625

Well that is quite something its lucky for NZ that domestic travel is nearly back to normal. SIN and HKG rely 100% on international traffic which will be suppresed for some time.


Hopefully will be of some motivation to the AKL EXEC Team to progress with building that new domestic terminal.

With NZ back to 70%, and JQ at 90% by August, along with NZ making the most out of the a321NEOs.

That terminal is going to be beyond capacity, should the boarders not open for the December / January Holidays.

How well could AKL handle an domestic only summer holiday period?
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10110
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - July 2020

Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:03 pm

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

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