Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
a7ala
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:54 pm

Looks like normal domestic operations set to resume at WLG from 4Feb, with NZ jets operating again from the South-West pier, and the regional lounge re-opening (weekdays only).

I've heard NZ's domestic capacity at WLG will be back to 90% of pre-Covid for the month of Feb.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:11 am

zkncj wrote:
After my flight back from ZQN last night, I’m wondering at what point does intoxicated passengers become an AVSEC issue?

The was an family last night that made it to the gate lounge, with the to adults highly intoxicated and kids separated them self for the parents ending up delaying departure by close to an hour.

Made me think, how on earth did these people even get past the AVSEC screening point? Surely it would of been highly noticeable that they were intoxicated. You would of though it was in the interest of passenger safety and security that they were not allowed airside. It was rather obviously that they were intoxicated, and was made most people in the gate lounge un-comfortable.

Then to make things worse the kids had separated from
there parents, and managed to board the aircraft by them self. Obviously then later in the boarding process the parents got refused travel at the gate.

The whole situation seemed like an huge mess, and resulted in an police call out to the aircraft. The hold being open multiple times to remove bags then refilling paper work after of loading 6 passengers. We almost closed the front door with the kids on board...

It felt like this groups of passengers should of been offloaded well before boarding. Who is responsible for drunk and disorderly passengers? Does it just come down to the airline.


A question (as I don't know). Do the AVSEC guys have the authority to stop anyone on these grounds? Maybe that's the function of the airline to refuse travel and then the Police if things get messy?

Genuinely don't know if Aviation Security can say, sorry you're too pissed you're not flying today.
 
geardown
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 6:01 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 3:12 am

Did ANZ posponed or cancelled stopping in Honolulu on the way to/from the US West Coast so the crew don't have to stay in California? I thought it was supposed to start this week?
 
mrkerr7474
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:10 am

a7ala wrote:
Looks like normal domestic operations set to resume at WLG from 4Feb, with NZ jets operating again from the South-West pier, and the regional lounge re-opening (weekdays only).

I've heard NZ's domestic capacity at WLG will be back to 90% of pre-Covid for the month of Feb.


I read that earlier on as well and was wondering what the reason behind it was. Seems like the use of the international terminal just now would be best to continue with the jet services for Air NZ.

Anyone have an idea what the reason is for this is?
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 1:01 pm

geardown wrote:
Did ANZ posponed or cancelled stopping in Honolulu on the way to/from the US West Coast so the crew don't have to stay in California? I thought it was supposed to start this week?


It's still happening,

11th Jan - Cargo
2nd Feb - Pax

Here's a media release

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... n-honolulu
 
geardown
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 6:01 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:56 pm

I have been looking at Flightradar24 this week. When you click on the aircraft, it shows the destination as HNL but it is actually flying direct either to LAX or AKL.
ANZ1003 flew direct LAX-AKL.
ANZ1007 flew direct SFO-AKL.
Are those pax flights? So that's why they have not stopped in HNL yet?
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:03 pm

mrkerr7474 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Looks like normal domestic operations set to resume at WLG from 4Feb, with NZ jets operating again from the South-West pier, and the regional lounge re-opening (weekdays only).

I've heard NZ's domestic capacity at WLG will be back to 90% of pre-Covid for the month of Feb.


I read that earlier on as well and was wondering what the reason behind it was. Seems like the use of the international terminal just now would be best to continue with the jet services for Air NZ.

Anyone have an idea what the reason is for this is?


Flights were moved to the International Gates, to allow AVSEC to complete an upgrade of security equipment.

All the domestic jet services are getting upgraded equipment, to bring them in line with the system installed at AKL international a few years back.
 
mrkerr7474
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:09 pm

zkncj wrote:
mrkerr7474 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Looks like normal domestic operations set to resume at WLG from 4Feb, with NZ jets operating again from the South-West pier, and the regional lounge re-opening (weekdays only).

I've heard NZ's domestic capacity at WLG will be back to 90% of pre-Covid for the month of Feb.


I read that earlier on as well and was wondering what the reason behind it was. Seems like the use of the international terminal just now would be best to continue with the jet services for Air NZ.

Anyone have an idea what the reason is for this is?


Flights were moved to the International Gates, to allow AVSEC to complete an upgrade of security equipment.

All the domestic jet services are getting upgraded equipment, to bring them in line with the system installed at AKL international a few years back.


That makes total sense, especially having seen the new security section in the international area saying goodbye to friends last week. Looks like it will be a lot nicer here in WLG, so will be interested to see the whole area after it's upgrade. Thanks for the reply!
 
a7ala
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 11:04 pm

zkncj wrote:
mrkerr7474 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
Looks like normal domestic operations set to resume at WLG from 4Feb, with NZ jets operating again from the South-West pier, and the regional lounge re-opening (weekdays only).

I've heard NZ's domestic capacity at WLG will be back to 90% of pre-Covid for the month of Feb.


I read that earlier on as well and was wondering what the reason behind it was. Seems like the use of the international terminal just now would be best to continue with the jet services for Air NZ.

Anyone have an idea what the reason is for this is?


Flights were moved to the International Gates, to allow AVSEC to complete an upgrade of security equipment.

All the domestic jet services are getting upgraded equipment, to bring them in line with the system installed at AKL international a few years back.


My understanding is that it was actually requested by Air NZ - with reduced staffing levels it made sense to consolidate operations on one pier.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Jan 29, 2021 11:52 pm

a7ala wrote:
zkncj wrote:
mrkerr7474 wrote:

I read that earlier on as well and was wondering what the reason behind it was. Seems like the use of the international terminal just now would be best to continue with the jet services for Air NZ.

Anyone have an idea what the reason is for this is?


Flights were moved to the International Gates, to allow AVSEC to complete an upgrade of security equipment.

All the domestic jet services are getting upgraded equipment, to bring them in line with the system installed at AKL international a few years back.


My understanding is that it was actually requested by Air NZ - with reduced staffing levels it made sense to consolidate operations on one pier.


Also probably provided much better opinions for social distancing than the main domestic pier as there is allot more spare to spread out.

Along with arriving / departing passengers being seperated, that International exit ramps NZ was using was an great short cut to the ground floor.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4573
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:42 am

NZ6 wrote:
zkncj wrote:
After my flight back from ZQN last night, I’m wondering at what point does intoxicated passengers become an AVSEC issue?

The was an family last night that made it to the gate lounge, with the to adults highly intoxicated and kids separated them self for the parents ending up delaying departure by close to an hour.

Made me think, how on earth did these people even get past the AVSEC screening point? Surely it would of been highly noticeable that they were intoxicated. You would of though it was in the interest of passenger safety and security that they were not allowed airside. It was rather obviously that they were intoxicated, and was made most people in the gate lounge un-comfortable.

Then to make things worse the kids had separated from
there parents, and managed to board the aircraft by them self. Obviously then later in the boarding process the parents got refused travel at the gate.

The whole situation seemed like an huge mess, and resulted in an police call out to the aircraft. The hold being open multiple times to remove bags then refilling paper work after of loading 6 passengers. We almost closed the front door with the kids on board...

It felt like this groups of passengers should of been offloaded well before boarding. Who is responsible for drunk and disorderly passengers? Does it just come down to the airline.


A question (as I don't know). Do the AVSEC guys have the authority to stop anyone on these grounds? Maybe that's the function of the airline to refuse travel and then the Police if things get messy?

Genuinely don't know if Aviation Security can say, sorry you're too pissed you're not flying today.

Yes AvSec can and do remove people on these grounds (and others) but in reality it is in combination with police. AvSec are responsible for the safety of aviation (which a drunk passenger may impact on), being drunk in public is also a public nuisance so the police can of course detain someone for that.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Jan 30, 2021 7:51 am

Zkpilot wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
zkncj wrote:
After my flight back from ZQN last night, I’m wondering at what point does intoxicated passengers become an AVSEC issue?

The was an family last night that made it to the gate lounge, with the to adults highly intoxicated and kids separated them self for the parents ending up delaying departure by close to an hour.

Made me think, how on earth did these people even get past the AVSEC screening point? Surely it would of been highly noticeable that they were intoxicated. You would of though it was in the interest of passenger safety and security that they were not allowed airside. It was rather obviously that they were intoxicated, and was made most people in the gate lounge un-comfortable.

Then to make things worse the kids had separated from
there parents, and managed to board the aircraft by them self. Obviously then later in the boarding process the parents got refused travel at the gate.

The whole situation seemed like an huge mess, and resulted in an police call out to the aircraft. The hold being open multiple times to remove bags then refilling paper work after of loading 6 passengers. We almost closed the front door with the kids on board...

It felt like this groups of passengers should of been offloaded well before boarding. Who is responsible for drunk and disorderly passengers? Does it just come down to the airline.


A question (as I don't know). Do the AVSEC guys have the authority to stop anyone on these grounds? Maybe that's the function of the airline to refuse travel and then the Police if things get messy?

Genuinely don't know if Aviation Security can say, sorry you're too pissed you're not flying today.

Yes AvSec can and do remove people on these grounds (and others) but in reality it is in combination with police. AvSec are responsible for the safety of aviation (which a drunk passenger may impact on), being drunk in public is also a public nuisance so the police can of course detain someone for that.


Is it a case of they raise a potential issue to the airline/police vs actually having the legal power to do something?

I don't see anything here
https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ ... 17494.html

On the AVSEC website it refers to the Crew's opinion as well
https://www.aviation.govt.nz/passenger- ... assengers/
 
Deepinsider
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:32 pm

In my view, AVSEC should have full powers, pretty well same as the Police.
Then, if they encounter a threat, it can be dealt with immediately.
It wouldn't really be too hard to spell out a protocol for this use of the power.
Having the power to say to the drunk/disorderly person, 'not right now mate'
just seems so obvious.

In the UK, one of the most frustrating causes of tedious holdups is that
the moment a security person detects a threat (i.e. an image of a possible
weapon on a scan) everything totally halts at that checkpoint until the police
arrive to deal with it.

I don't know too much about the powers given to Customs, but it seems they
are even more powerful than police with draconian detention etc.
So what we probably need is a Border/Airport force covering all of the above!
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Jan 30, 2021 9:25 pm

Deepinsider wrote:
In my view, AVSEC should have full powers, pretty well same as the Police.
Then, if they encounter a threat, it can be dealt with immediately.
It wouldn't really be too hard to spell out a protocol for this use of the power.
Having the power to say to the drunk/disorderly person, 'not right now mate'
just seems so obvious.

In the UK, one of the most frustrating causes of tedious holdups is that
the moment a security person detects a threat (i.e. an image of a possible
weapon on a scan) everything totally halts at that checkpoint until the police
arrive to deal with it.

I don't know too much about the powers given to Customs, but it seems they
are even more powerful than police with draconian detention etc.
So what we probably need is a Border/Airport force covering all of the above!


I don't necessarily disagree...

I'm just not sure if there's any legal power for them to refuse travel. Zkpilot is saying they can, I'm not sure and I can't find anything to suggest they can.

Airlines can for legal reasons but also as part of their own conditions of carriage, 10.3 for Air NZ's case.
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/conditi ... 1605424893

Ultimately though, here's the legislation which says it's the Pilot in Command or Senior cabin crew member authorised by them...

65IIntoxicated persons on aircraft
(1)
Every person (except a person under medical care) commits an offence who—
(a)
is intoxicated and boards an aircraft; or
(b)
becomes intoxicated on an aircraft.

For the purposes of this section, a person is intoxicated if the pilot-in-command (or senior flight attendant authorised by the pilot-in-command for this purpose) has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is under the influence of alcohol (within the meaning of section 5(1) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012) or an intoxicating substance to such an extent as to

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ ... 17123.html

Unless they're so drunk and disruptive they don't complete security screening I can't see where they're able to refuse travel. I'd imagine there's a good working relationship around the country at each station and everyone would work together.
 
bonzolab
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:38 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Jan 31, 2021 8:00 am

Avsec can stop you at screening points if you refuse to undergo screening. That’s about it.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1380
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:50 pm

Any news on NZ resuming SIN?
Plane mad!
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4573
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Jan 31, 2021 8:30 pm

NZ6 wrote:
Deepinsider wrote:
In my view, AVSEC should have full powers, pretty well same as the Police.
Then, if they encounter a threat, it can be dealt with immediately.
It wouldn't really be too hard to spell out a protocol for this use of the power.
Having the power to say to the drunk/disorderly person, 'not right now mate'
just seems so obvious.

In the UK, one of the most frustrating causes of tedious holdups is that
the moment a security person detects a threat (i.e. an image of a possible
weapon on a scan) everything totally halts at that checkpoint until the police
arrive to deal with it.

I don't know too much about the powers given to Customs, but it seems they
are even more powerful than police with draconian detention etc.
So what we probably need is a Border/Airport force covering all of the above!


I don't necessarily disagree...

I'm just not sure if there's any legal power for them to refuse travel. Zkpilot is saying they can, I'm not sure and I can't find anything to suggest they can.

Airlines can for legal reasons but also as part of their own conditions of carriage, 10.3 for Air NZ's case.
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/conditi ... 1605424893

Ultimately though, here's the legislation which says it's the Pilot in Command or Senior cabin crew member authorised by them...

65IIntoxicated persons on aircraft
(1)
Every person (except a person under medical care) commits an offence who—
(a)
is intoxicated and boards an aircraft; or
(b)
becomes intoxicated on an aircraft.

For the purposes of this section, a person is intoxicated if the pilot-in-command (or senior flight attendant authorised by the pilot-in-command for this purpose) has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is under the influence of alcohol (within the meaning of section 5(1) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012) or an intoxicating substance to such an extent as to

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ ... 17123.html

Unless they're so drunk and disruptive they don't complete security screening I can't see where they're able to refuse travel. I'd imagine there's a good working relationship around the country at each station and everyone would work together.

AvSec can remove you/stop you etc but if an actual arrest is needed or physical restraint then that is a police matter.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Jan 31, 2021 8:34 pm

NZ321 wrote:
Any news on NZ resuming SIN?


Isn't SQ currently a daily into AKL, and a couple times an week into CHC?

Don't see NZ needing to operate SIN in in the near future.
 
duff
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2001 10:29 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Jan 31, 2021 10:18 pm

NZ6 wrote:
geardown wrote:
Did ANZ posponed or cancelled stopping in Honolulu on the way to/from the US West Coast so the crew don't have to stay in California? I thought it was supposed to start this week?


It's still happening,

11th Jan - Cargo
2nd Feb - Pax

Here's a media release

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... n-honolulu


Not happening as advertised. It’s a work in process
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Mon Feb 01, 2021 12:09 am

Zkpilot wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Deepinsider wrote:
In my view, AVSEC should have full powers, pretty well same as the Police.
Then, if they encounter a threat, it can be dealt with immediately.
It wouldn't really be too hard to spell out a protocol for this use of the power.
Having the power to say to the drunk/disorderly person, 'not right now mate'
just seems so obvious.

In the UK, one of the most frustrating causes of tedious holdups is that
the moment a security person detects a threat (i.e. an image of a possible
weapon on a scan) everything totally halts at that checkpoint until the police
arrive to deal with it.

I don't know too much about the powers given to Customs, but it seems they
are even more powerful than police with draconian detention etc.
So what we probably need is a Border/Airport force covering all of the above!


I don't necessarily disagree...

I'm just not sure if there's any legal power for them to refuse travel. Zkpilot is saying they can, I'm not sure and I can't find anything to suggest they can.

Airlines can for legal reasons but also as part of their own conditions of carriage, 10.3 for Air NZ's case.
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/conditi ... 1605424893

Ultimately though, here's the legislation which says it's the Pilot in Command or Senior cabin crew member authorised by them...

65IIntoxicated persons on aircraft
(1)
Every person (except a person under medical care) commits an offence who—
(a)
is intoxicated and boards an aircraft; or
(b)
becomes intoxicated on an aircraft.

For the purposes of this section, a person is intoxicated if the pilot-in-command (or senior flight attendant authorised by the pilot-in-command for this purpose) has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is under the influence of alcohol (within the meaning of section 5(1) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012) or an intoxicating substance to such an extent as to

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ ... 17123.html

Unless they're so drunk and disruptive they don't complete security screening I can't see where they're able to refuse travel. I'd imagine there's a good working relationship around the country at each station and everyone would work together.

AvSec can remove you/stop you etc but if an actual arrest is needed or physical restraint then that is a police matter.


I'm not sure, I can't find a thing about it on their website or in the legislation. It's probably a "flag it to the airline, stall them at security" scenario. The Airline then makes the decision.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Mon Feb 01, 2021 12:09 am

duff wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
geardown wrote:
Did ANZ posponed or cancelled stopping in Honolulu on the way to/from the US West Coast so the crew don't have to stay in California? I thought it was supposed to start this week?


It's still happening,

11th Jan - Cargo
2nd Feb - Pax

Here's a media release

https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... n-honolulu


Not happening as advertised. It’s a work in process


Is that 100% yet?
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:43 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
NZ6 wrote:
Deepinsider wrote:
In my view, AVSEC should have full powers, pretty well same as the Police.
Then, if they encounter a threat, it can be dealt with immediately.
It wouldn't really be too hard to spell out a protocol for this use of the power.
Having the power to say to the drunk/disorderly person, 'not right now mate'
just seems so obvious.

In the UK, one of the most frustrating causes of tedious holdups is that
the moment a security person detects a threat (i.e. an image of a possible
weapon on a scan) everything totally halts at that checkpoint until the police
arrive to deal with it.

I don't know too much about the powers given to Customs, but it seems they
are even more powerful than police with draconian detention etc.
So what we probably need is a Border/Airport force covering all of the above!


I don't necessarily disagree...

I'm just not sure if there's any legal power for them to refuse travel. Zkpilot is saying they can, I'm not sure and I can't find anything to suggest they can.

Airlines can for legal reasons but also as part of their own conditions of carriage, 10.3 for Air NZ's case.
https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/conditi ... 1605424893

Ultimately though, here's the legislation which says it's the Pilot in Command or Senior cabin crew member authorised by them...

65IIntoxicated persons on aircraft
(1)
Every person (except a person under medical care) commits an offence who—
(a)
is intoxicated and boards an aircraft; or
(b)
becomes intoxicated on an aircraft.

For the purposes of this section, a person is intoxicated if the pilot-in-command (or senior flight attendant authorised by the pilot-in-command for this purpose) has reasonable grounds to believe that the person is under the influence of alcohol (within the meaning of section 5(1) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012) or an intoxicating substance to such an extent as to

https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/ ... 17123.html

Unless they're so drunk and disruptive they don't complete security screening I can't see where they're able to refuse travel. I'd imagine there's a good working relationship around the country at each station and everyone would work together.

AvSec can remove you/stop you etc but if an actual arrest is needed or physical restraint then that is a police matter.


This topic has got the better of me. Like I originally said, I don't know the answer, so I have tried to find out, not to be argumentative but to find out the fact. There's been conflicting answers here.

Anyway I did some more bedtime reading last night.

This topic arose from drunk passengers which likely falls under Part 5A (Unruly passenger offences).

Here's my interpterion, I'm not a lawyer but I must say, being drunk at security isn't exactly "boarding an aircraft", especially if you're there 60minutes before your fight.

- It's an offence to be intoxicated and board an aircraft or to become intoxicated on one.
- A person authorized by the director is the Aviation Security Officer as well as others, obvious example would be the Police
- The determination of intoxicated can only come from the PIC or Senior Cabin crew member.
- Under 65P the person authorized by the director (AvSec) can issued a ticket as per (65Q)

So, put simply, if you're pissed and try board a plane, the captain says no. It's technically it's an offence and AvSec staff could issue a ticket?

Of course, there are other issues under part 5A but most appear to be on the plane issues vs terminal or potential issues.

It would be good if someone here worked at AvSec and could highlight their powers and what Act or section they use if they do. I can't actually recall a case of someone being denied boarding due to AVSEC saying they're too intoxicated.

Key points..

  • 65I Intoxicated persons on aircraft
  • 65A (6) For the purposes of this Part, person authorised by the Director includes (but is not limited to) an aviation security officer authorised by the Director.
  • 65QForm of infringement notice.
  • 65Q (2) (a)in the case of an offence against section 65I(1)(a), $1,000:
  • 65Q (2)(b)in the case of an offence against section 65I(1)(b), $600:
  • 65P (1-3) below

  • (1)If any offence specified in section 65Q(2) is alleged to have been committed by any person (in this section, the defendant), the pilot-in-command of the aircraft at the time of the alleged offence may, by any available means, notify, or cause to be notified,—
  • (a)the Director; or
  • (b) a person authorised by the Director.
  • (2) If the Director or a person authorised by the Director has reason to believe that a defendant has committed any offence specified in section 65Q(2),—
  • (a) the defendant may be proceeded against by filing a charging document under section 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011; or
  • (b)the Director or the person authorised by the Director may issue an infringement notice in respect of the alleged offence.

https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/pub ... #DLM217142
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:40 pm

On another repetitive topic, the bubble. There were a few comments made yesterday which in my mind was a clear sign from the government that there is a dwindling interest in forming a two-way bubble anytime soon.

The Americold cluster, Victoria, Central Coast, Northland, Auckland, Perth... it's abundantly clear, it's a continuous war of improvements and tweaks to keep this Virus out. A bubble can't work if we all lock down immediately when there's a case out there. PER is in a 5 day lockdown on one case. OZ closed the bubble immediately after we had 3 cases linked to MIQ and admittedly we all moved to the edge of our seat blew the dust of the COVID tracer app and pretended we're all model citizens in fear of another lockdown...

Until we have a border force on both sides completely vaccinated AND with enough early evidence to give confidence you can't carry and spread the virus after vaccination there's really no chance.... even then while we have people in quarantine there's a risk until we have most of the country vaccinated.

We're already over a 1/3 of the way into the first quarter. Blink and it'll be Easter and vaccination will hopefully be underway or imminent.
 
mrkerr7474
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:55 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:48 am

It wouldn't surprise me if there was no two way bubble until both Australia and NZ was completely vaccinated, of which Australia hopes to be the whole country by October this year. You'd like to hope if that was the case that NZ would get vaccinating quicker as well when the vaccine arrives. But I can see that's how it pans out, especially seeing as places are locking down after a single case or two over in OZ and them cutting NZ off after a couple of cases here
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:02 am

I suspect part of the reason Perth is having a lockdown is that they've had very little practical contact tracing experience in the last many months - even if everything should be set up (hopefully it is), it's better to be over-cautious and relax once they know they were, or have fixed teething troubles.

Don't expect a lockdown the next time something like this happens.

I'm surprised I haven't seen any consideration of a 3-4 day mini-quarantine for an Aus bubble. You would still need separate flights, but if you essentially waited until a day 0 test was clear for everyone on the flight, then took a test as they exited quarantine, you would still at least know if anyone had anything, and should catch the vast majority of the extremely few cases before they exit quarantine.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Tue Feb 02, 2021 9:31 am

NZ6 wrote:
On another repetitive topic, the bubble. There were a few comments made yesterday which in my mind was a clear sign from the government that there is a dwindling interest in forming a two-way bubble anytime soon.

The Americold cluster, Victoria, Central Coast, Northland, Auckland, Perth... it's abundantly clear, it's a continuous war of improvements and tweaks to keep this Virus out. A bubble can't work if we all lock down immediately when there's a case out there. PER is in a 5 day lockdown on one case. OZ closed the bubble immediately after we had 3 cases linked to MIQ and admittedly we all moved to the edge of our seat blew the dust of the COVID tracer app and pretended we're all model citizens in fear of another lockdown...

Until we have a border force on both sides completely vaccinated AND with enough early evidence to give confidence you can't carry and spread the virus after vaccination there's really no chance.... even then while we have people in quarantine there's a risk until we have most of the country vaccinated.

We're already over a 1/3 of the way into the first quarter. Blink and it'll be Easter and vaccination will hopefully be underway or imminent.


It is an interesting one, 6 months ago I would of said that New Zealand’s views more aligned with QLD/WA when it came to COVID-19. Now I would say New Zealand is some sense is more aligned with NSW on managing COVID.

Look at the last two small outbreaks the Pullman, and the defence force cluster both didn’t result in any boarder closures or lockdowns.

NZ/NSW seem to be taking the approach that it’s better to keep the economy open, then use contract tracing and testing to prevent the further spread.

I would almost say that New Zealand is now ‘happy’ with small community out breaks from time to time (the election is over, so that probably helps).

I could see an NZ/NSW bubble working, I could see an WA/QLD bubble ending up with people stuck on the wrong side of the Tasman without any notice.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1380
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Tue Feb 02, 2021 11:25 am

NZ6 wrote:
On another repetitive topic, the bubble.....

Until we have a border force on both sides completely vaccinated AND with enough early evidence to give confidence you can't carry and spread the virus after vaccination there's really no chance.... even then while we have people in quarantine there's a risk until we have most of the country vaccinated.

We're already over a 1/3 of the way into the first quarter. Blink and it'll be Easter and vaccination will hopefully be underway or imminent.


Latest from New Scientist is that the vaccine reduces your chances of spreading the virus but it doesn't eliminate it. What does this mean for the future of international travel, I wonder?
Plane mad!
 
NZ516
Posts: 597
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:21 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Feb 05, 2021 3:16 am

I think we need to start a February thread?
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13406
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Feb 05, 2021 7:30 am

NZ6 wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
Wow - I didn’t realise that my occasional posts put me into the ”constant negativity” category. Where I come from it’s called ”expressing a more realistic point of view”. But whatever.

Of course this is par for the course for A-net. I recall the derision my views received when I dared to suggest early last year that the pandemic would NOT be over in three months, and that it would fundamentally change international travel. Here’s another prediction: it will still be years more until NZ (and international travel generally) get back to the levels experienced in 2019. If indeed they ever do, given the increasingly apocalyptic news on the climate front, the strong likelihood of another GFC-scale economic crisis with the current ridiculously-priced stock market and the fomenting of political instability in almost all corners of the planet.

I wish it were not so and that aviation in general and NZ in particular come through this intact and prosperous. But there’s no point deluding ourselves: the world has changed and all bets are off.

A lot of the discussion on the AKL domestic terminal seems to focus on AIAL putting its hand in its pocket, borrowing up large and building a new facility. I desperately wish they would - I used the terminal twice last week and it’s frankly embarrassing - especially that trek out to the stands for the regional flights. But from the shareholders’ perspective I seriously doubt there is any appetite right now to do that. If you can squeeze profits out of the existing facility for a few more years why wouldn’t you? Especially given the absolutely disastrous year that was 2020.

Which reinforces another point - it’s privately owned. Government is not going to step up and commit gazillions to build the new terminal. It’s ironic, isn’t it, that when a facility like that is state-owned there’s a clamour to have it run by private interests for the sake of “efficiency”, but as soon as it’s privatised and the realities of extracting profits becomes apparent, everyone wants to see it back in state hands. Ah the inconsistencies of the human mind . . .

But in general, let’s not label dissenting points of view as ”negative“ just because they’re different from our own, or attempt to view issues in a more realistic light. Sometimes the rose-tinted environment that is A-net seems to operate in some kind of alternative reality.


In a constructive response.

Sometimes it's just hard to hear worst case scenario over and over that's all. Even if it could very well end up be fact. Does that make one negative? Not in itself no.

As for your predictions early 2020, I've often thought back to those posts. I do recall them which we all washed away as doomsday predictions. But you were right. However, not that it's a defense, many many people, and people in senior positions in various industries didn't predict it. Lucky guess, gut instinct or just more onto it than most - whatever way it is. You were right.

As for how international travel returns. Well it'll all depends how the pandemic phases out. There's a lot of opinion out there that it'll rebound bigger than before after a slow restart. It's too early to tell. But it's not going to go back to 2019 with the flick of a switch. On the hand, I've been told it'll be 6 years before we have fully open borders again. No one really knows the truth as it's still evolving.

I did see today QF is revisiting project sunrise though....

As for AKLD. They are truly overdue to put their hands in their pocket. They've made hundreds of millions year on year and have spent two thirds of nothing on the domestic terminal even though domestic passenger growth over the last 2 decades has increased by insane amounts.

They're a service provider who is delivering a sub-standard product. If there were competition they'd be up that famous creak.

Do you know AKLD losses bags or bags don't get on flights simply because the baggage belt becomes congested and overloaded on a regular basis? - It's simple math, too many flight movements, with bigger aircraft meaning there's way too many passengers moving through the terminal for what it can simply handle.

It should have been replaced by 2005ish at it's latest.

As for "gazillions", a couple of hundred million would allow for significant economic growth and a vastly improved customer experiences. And it's not like they money isn't going to be spent at some point. It has to be, so what are they waiting for? The 10th edition of the international retail refurbishment? .. gee now I'm sounding negative.


Covid 19 and it's fallout are IMO the perfect storm for the government to buy up AKL and any other privately owned airport in NZ folding them into one operating company, the template for this already exists, they simply need to copy the Avinor playbook. It works in Norway, air transport infrastructure her is a long way ahead of what NZ has.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:19 pm

https://australianaviation.com.au/2021/ ... o-flights/

Spotted this a couple of days ago. Made me wonder whether there is potential for these flights to continue longer-term as pax-cargo flights. Sure, CZ had a strong grasp on the market pre-pandemic, but they have continued operations throughout and yet NZ finds it useful to compete on the cargo front irrespective. If a strong cargo base can be established now, could that make it easier for the carrier to add passengers at a later stage?

My view is that the carrier’s network post-pandemic is not at all guaranteed to be the same as pre-pandemic. Could this be the first of several changes?

On the same front, I note that Aussie politicians are still promoting AKL-HBA flights as potentially starting “next month”. While I’m sceptical about the starting date given the current pandemic border gyrations, it’s gratifying that it really does seem this time that it’s going to happen. What has never been stated however is what carrier will serve the route. Logic suggests that NZ, eventually able to offer multiple connections to North (and one day, again, South?) America and the Pacific, would offer the best chance of success on a route that will be a bit of a gamble. But with the Federal and State governments kicking in $A60m to make it happen, could we see QF, JQ or VA being the carriers in the running? Or does the SAM put NZ on equal footing (à la SYD/BNE-NLK) when it comes to government largesse?

Either way, another visit to HBA is on the cards for me as soon as it becomes practical. And a direct flight to HBA would just make my day.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:54 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
On the same front, I note that Aussie politicians are still promoting AKL-HBA flights as potentially starting “next month”. While I’m sceptical about the starting date given the current pandemic border gyrations, it’s gratifying that it really does seem this time that it’s going to happen. What has never been stated however is what carrier will serve the route. Logic suggests that NZ, eventually able to offer multiple connections to North (and one day, again, South?) America and the Pacific, would offer the best chance of success on a route that will be a bit of a gamble. But with the Federal and State governments kicking in $A60m to make it happen, could we see QF, JQ or VA being the carriers in the running? Or does the SAM put NZ on equal footing (à la SYD/BNE-NLK) when it comes to government largesse?

Either way, another visit to HBA is on the cards for me as soon as it becomes practical. And a direct flight to HBA would just make my day.


They seem to be spending allot of money advertising Tasmania too around New Zealand. It almost seems like in every LED billboard in New Zealand there is an Tasmania in the rolling loop of adverts.

I would suspect any service would be Government funded to start with.

I was wondering if it might be QQ (Alliance) with there new e190 fleet. They now also have wet lease agreements in place for both QF and VA to use there e190s.

The 100 seats of an e190 would probably be an good size for starting an HBA service, and maybe allow to grow beyond AKL. For example 700 seats weekly each way seems achievable 3x AKL, 2x WLG, 2x CHC.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:23 am

co
zkncj wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
On the same front, I note that Aussie politicians are still promoting AKL-HBA flights as potentially starting “next month”. While I’m sceptical about the starting date given the current pandemic border gyrations, it’s gratifying that it really does seem this time that it’s going to happen. What has never been stated however is what carrier will serve the route. Logic suggests that NZ, eventually able to offer multiple connections to North (and one day, again, South?) America and the Pacific, would offer the best chance of success on a route that will be a bit of a gamble. But with the Federal and State governments kicking in $A60m to make it happen, could we see QF, JQ or VA being the carriers in the running? Or does the SAM put NZ on equal footing (à la SYD/BNE-NLK) when it comes to government largesse?

Either way, another visit to HBA is on the cards for me as soon as it becomes practical. And a direct flight to HBA would just make my day.


They seem to be spending allot of money advertising Tasmania too around New Zealand. It almost seems like in every LED billboard in New Zealand there is an Tasmania in the rolling loop of adverts.

I would suspect any service would be Government funded to start with.

I was wondering if it might be QQ (Alliance) with there new e190 fleet. They now also have wet lease agreements in place for both QF and VA to use there e190s.

The 100 seats of an e190 would probably be an good size for starting an HBA service, and maybe allow to grow beyond AKL. For example 700 seats weekly each way seems achievable 3x AKL, 2x WLG, 2x CHC.

The Federal government is contributing $A50m and the state government $A10m to allow specifically three flights a week in summer and two in winter (130 flights a year). Presumably this is covering the capital costs of purchasing and installing AvSec equipment, smart gates etc and also the costs of operating the border force two or three times a week. I doubt the Federal government is interested in subsidising or guaranteeing the actual flights themselves, though the State government may have offered some sweetening $$$.

I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that the carrier to open the route would be QQ. If you were a small carrier contemplating opening a solitary Transtasman route between two ports that you don't currently even operate to at all, you'd want to be VERY careful to pick a route that has a much lower risk profile than anywhere in NZ to HBA. I figure that whichever is the carrier that will operate the route is already known within the industry and it's just a matter of pressing the "go" button as soon as there's a satisfactory travel bubble between Australia and NZ. Any rumours out there? As for the prospects of WLG or CHC to HBA being added - IMO highly unlikely unless your business model is akin to Ryanair's or Easyjet's. At least not until an AKL service had reached daily status - which in the case of HBA will be a long time coming, at least with A320-sized aircraft.

As an afterthought, the costs of security etc would be less with NZ than with an Australian carrier, because the whole business would be done in a couple of hours in the late morning, while an Australian-based aircraft would require two bites at the security cherry - in the morning and late afternoon. Unless of course the route is operated with an AKL origin by an Aussie airline, but that potentially brings its own complications unless you already have an NZ-based fleet.

It's for routes like AKL-HBA (and long thin domestic routes) that I'd really like to see NZ get some A220s for. I could see a handful (say four) for Tasman and Pacific routes plus perhaps 10 or so domestically for high-frequency or long AT7 routes (such as AKL-NSN, HLZ-CHC, TRG-CHC, PMR-CHC) and low-frequency A320- routes (Transtasman like AKL-HBA, MCY, CNS, plus NTL, TSV, CBR etc also possibilities, Pacific routes like AKL-IUE, TBU, VLI, NOU, and domestic routes like AKL-IVC). But I'm not holding my breath on that score.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:39 am

DavidByrne wrote:

I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that the carrier to open the route would be QQ. If you were a small carrier contemplating opening a solitary Transtasman route between two ports that you don't currently even operate to at all, you'd want to be VERY careful to pick a route that has a much lower risk profile than anywhere in NZ to HBA. I figure that whichever is the carrier that will operate the route is already known within the industry and it's just a matter of pressing the "go" button as soon as there's a satisfactory travel bubble between Australia and NZ. Any rumours out there? As for the prospects of WLG or CHC to HBA being added - IMO highly unlikely unless your business model is akin to Ryanair's or Easyjet's. At least not until an AKL service had reached daily status - which in the case of HBA will be a long time coming, at least with A320-sized aircraft.


I wasn't meaning QQ marketing the services, QQ has signed E190 wet-lease deals with both VA ad QF recently.

DavidByrne wrote:

As an afterthought, the costs of security etc would be less with NZ than with an Australian carrier, because the whole business would be done in a couple of hours in the late morning, while an Australian-based aircraft would require two bites at the security cherry - in the morning and late afternoon. Unless of course the route is operated with an AKL origin by an Aussie airline, but that potentially brings its own complications unless you already have an NZ-based fleet.

It's for routes like AKL-HBA (and long thin domestic routes) that I'd really like to see NZ get some A220s for. I could see a handful (say four) for Tasman and Pacific routes plus perhaps 10 or so domestically for high-frequency or long AT7 routes (such as AKL-NSN, HLZ-CHC, TRG-CHC, PMR-CHC) and low-frequency A320- routes (Transtasman like AKL-HBA, MCY, CNS, plus NTL, TSV, CBR etc also possibilities, Pacific routes like AKL-IUE, TBU, VLI, NOU, and domestic routes like AKL-IVC). But I'm not holding my breath on that score.


Security staffing wouldn't be an major cost, it would just be worked in with the domestic flights.

I would think it would operate the same as OOL, Domestic/Intl share an common screening point then an small LAG screeinng point just before the gate louge.
 
NZ6
Posts: 1803
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Feb 06, 2021 10:06 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
co
zkncj wrote:
DavidByrne wrote:
On the same front, I note that Aussie politicians are still promoting AKL-HBA flights as potentially starting “next month”. While I’m sceptical about the starting date given the current pandemic border gyrations, it’s gratifying that it really does seem this time that it’s going to happen. What has never been stated however is what carrier will serve the route. Logic suggests that NZ, eventually able to offer multiple connections to North (and one day, again, South?) America and the Pacific, would offer the best chance of success on a route that will be a bit of a gamble. But with the Federal and State governments kicking in $A60m to make it happen, could we see QF, JQ or VA being the carriers in the running? Or does the SAM put NZ on equal footing (à la SYD/BNE-NLK) when it comes to government largesse?

Either way, another visit to HBA is on the cards for me as soon as it becomes practical. And a direct flight to HBA would just make my day.


They seem to be spending allot of money advertising Tasmania too around New Zealand. It almost seems like in every LED billboard in New Zealand there is an Tasmania in the rolling loop of adverts.

I would suspect any service would be Government funded to start with.

I was wondering if it might be QQ (Alliance) with there new e190 fleet. They now also have wet lease agreements in place for both QF and VA to use there e190s.

The 100 seats of an e190 would probably be an good size for starting an HBA service, and maybe allow to grow beyond AKL. For example 700 seats weekly each way seems achievable 3x AKL, 2x WLG, 2x CHC.

The Federal government is contributing $A50m and the state government $A10m to allow specifically three flights a week in summer and two in winter (130 flights a year). Presumably this is covering the capital costs of purchasing and installing AvSec equipment, smart gates etc and also the costs of operating the border force two or three times a week. I doubt the Federal government is interested in subsidising or guaranteeing the actual flights themselves, though the State government may have offered some sweetening $$$.

I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that the carrier to open the route would be QQ. If you were a small carrier contemplating opening a solitary Transtasman route between two ports that you don't currently even operate to at all, you'd want to be VERY careful to pick a route that has a much lower risk profile than anywhere in NZ to HBA. I figure that whichever is the carrier that will operate the route is already known within the industry and it's just a matter of pressing the "go" button as soon as there's a satisfactory travel bubble between Australia and NZ. Any rumours out there? As for the prospects of WLG or CHC to HBA being added - IMO highly unlikely unless your business model is akin to Ryanair's or Easyjet's. At least not until an AKL service had reached daily status - which in the case of HBA will be a long time coming, at least with A320-sized aircraft.

As an afterthought, the costs of security etc would be less with NZ than with an Australian carrier, because the whole business would be done in a couple of hours in the late morning, while an Australian-based aircraft would require two bites at the security cherry - in the morning and late afternoon. Unless of course the route is operated with an AKL origin by an Aussie airline, but that potentially brings its own complications unless you already have an NZ-based fleet.

It's for routes like AKL-HBA (and long thin domestic routes) that I'd really like to see NZ get some A220s for. I could see a handful (say four) for Tasman and Pacific routes plus perhaps 10 or so domestically for high-frequency or long AT7 routes (such as AKL-NSN, HLZ-CHC, TRG-CHC, PMR-CHC) and low-frequency A320- routes (Transtasman like AKL-HBA, MCY, CNS, plus NTL, TSV, CBR etc also possibilities, Pacific routes like AKL-IUE, TBU, VLI, NOU, and domestic routes like AKL-IVC). But I'm not holding my breath on that score.


NZ intend to fly AKL-HBA. Nothing official until (if/when) a bubble is opened. There's still not enough clarity on key aspects of how it will work or when from both sides so formalize anything.

Will QF/JQ follow? Who knows.

QQ - they have no market presence in NZ or Tasmania. There's almost nothing to support why they'd even think about it let alone do it.
ZL - They're embarking on domestic Oz trunk routes so too much risk in expanding elsewhere at the same time
VA - Unlikely. They'll recommence and focus on core OZ-NZ operations first.
Pasifika - why not :lol:

I think it's safe to assume there'll be a large window between Tasman flights opening and the return of the full range of long-haul destinations. This opens a window where, to use an a.net term - "the pent up demand" will want to travel somewhere.

There's also a question of, will NZ/TAS open a two way bubble given it's an isolated island state. Personally, I can't see Jacinda's team approving anything given it'll be very simple to travel into TAS from the mainland and then onto NZ even if you "cheated" the system and flew under different names domestically. Besides you can enter TAS via regular sea services too.

We will know more, when we get greater clarity on a bubble which we know won't be before any Vaccination of border workers Mar/Apr

It'll be interesting to see, what changes are made for incoming passengers if the elect to have a vaccine on or before arrival down the track. For example, if you receive it, will you become lower risk and therefore remain in a standard isolation facility otherwise be moved into a tier two higher risk facility (sitting between the normal isolation facilities and the quarantine facility in the Jet Park.

Obvious issue here is the PR nightmare as New Zealanders sitting at home "waiting" for a vaccine being moved down the queue for "returnees" but once normal roll out occurs mid year..
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:56 pm

NZ6 wrote:
NZ intend to fly AKL-HBA. Nothing official until (if/when) a bubble is opened. There's still not enough clarity on key aspects of how it will work or when from both sides so formalize anything.

Will QF/JQ follow? Who knows.

To me, it's entirely logical that NZ should fly the route. Any other carrier would have to rely solely on end-to-end demand, as none of the other potential operators have long-haul connections out of HBA or AKL, and going by NZ's success in attracting Australian traffic onto their North American flights there's no reason to think HBA will be different. Additionally, there may be a real novelty for Tasmanians flying to the Americas to arrive home in Tasmania on a proper international flight, and a real desire by many to support this service because of the potential it offers the state. After all, to lose a connection to New Zealand twice would be devastating to many, including people I know personally in Tasmania who have for years been lobbying the state government and (specifically) Air NZ for the service to start.

NZ6 wrote:
I think it's safe to assume there'll be a large window between Tasman flights opening and the return of the full range of long-haul destinations. This opens a window where, to use an a.net term - "the pent up demand" will want to travel somewhere.

At risk of raising the "constant negativity" banner again, I'm a bit sceptical about "pent up demand". Domestically, the tourist industry has had an adequate season but the signs are already there that it may not last into winter - at least not in sufficient numbers to make up for the loss of international visitors. I think that some international destinations will bounce back relatively fast, but I would not count on NZ operating to ALL of LAX, SFO, YVR, IAH, ORD and EWR for a couple of years yet, at least. The USA must surely represent easily a good 50% of the carrier's long-haul traffic, so that could be a significant dent in capacity offered. Even if the pandemic is "over" there will be many who will baulk at visiting a country where the virus will likely continue to spread for a good period given the number of conspiracy theorists, anti-maskers, ant-vaxxers etc who seem to hold huge influence in one of the major political parties. Even if we ourselves get a vaccine uptake of 70% plus, and even if the vaccine is 80-90% effective. That still leaves a lot of leeway for ongoing infection (herd immunity notwithstanding) - especially given that we still don't know how long the vaccine will continue to be effective for. Time will tell.

The other piece of intriguing news was the announcement that NZ was operating cargo flights to CAN, some of them at least via CHC. Twice weekly flights are apparently set to continue. Could this presage a second passenger destination in China? Any scuttlebutt on that score?
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8424
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Feb 07, 2021 2:48 am

DavidByrne wrote:
At risk of raising the "constant negativity" banner again, I'm a bit sceptical about "pent up demand". Domestically, the tourist industry has had an adequate season but the signs are already there that it may not last into winter

The other piece of intriguing news was the announcement that NZ was operating cargo flights to CAN, some of them at least via CHC. Twice weekly flights are apparently set to continue. Could this presage a second passenger destination in China? Any scuttlebutt on that score?


The domestic market was never going to absorb the international traveller's desire to travel nor have any impact on the VFR market (we go where our relatives are). Any initial spike in demand was a kneejerk desire to escape after incarceration and stagnation, that once the itch is scratched many people lose interest and a population of 5 million is not going a sustain demand for long. Most working people are already stockpiling leave again since the vaccine announcements in anticipation of access to the international market.

I am now sitting on a pile of leave that I am chomping at the bit to use, and I know of a number of people with similar mindset and position. Open the border, and I will be out within the first 2 weeks. If that doesn't happen before the end of the year I will continue to stockpile leave until such time as it is/until I have enough to justify the quarantine prison time/expense on my return. Most people are not prepared to spend their holiday budgets on quarantine and getting rid of that restriction alone would be enough for a big chunk of demand to return.
However that pent up demand will not be accessible for a while because airlines will spend a year rehiring, training new staff, reactivating fleets, adhering to a multitude of global govt restrictions and the ability to release capital at the right time. They will limit frequency and therefore seats available to boost yields. The transfer booking options will be limited for all but the EK/QR/TKs of the world that feed massive hubs in countries that are more open to the outside world and with better border protocols for maintaining air travel The developing world will be the first to return to normality because they are both ready and willing to open up, they're better value and also perceived as lower risk than Western Europe/USA.

CAN Freighters for Chinese New Year demand for fresh seafood, I daresayit may get extended, but I don't think it's going to become a passenger market with CZ already operating.
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.
 
wstakl
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:51 am

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Feb 07, 2021 6:39 am

aerorobnz wrote:
I am now sitting on a pile of leave that I am chomping at the bit to use, and I know of a number of people with similar mindset and position. Open the border, and I will be out within the first 2 weeks


I'm in a similar position, unfortunately the rather large NZ company I work for is cracking down on large leave balances and asking us to get it down to a certain threshold. I refuse to sit at home and do nothing and have already done an expensive 'experience your own backyard' trip.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4165
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Feb 07, 2021 8:08 am

wstakl wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
I am now sitting on a pile of leave that I am chomping at the bit to use, and I know of a number of people with similar mindset and position. Open the border, and I will be out within the first 2 weeks


I'm in a similar position, unfortunately the rather large NZ company I work for is cracking down on large leave balances and asking us to get it down to a certain threshold. I refuse to sit at home and do nothing and have already done an expensive 'experience your own backyard' trip.


Same problem here, I had to take 160hours leave over January. I could say I’m over taking holidays in New Zealand, there is only so much you can do local. I ended up going to ZQN twice, for something todo.

I could of spent an weeks in the Cook Islands, if we had to sorted out stuff out before Christmas with select Pacific Islands.

The biggest issue I’ve found with hoildaying New Zealand, is it is so expensive. 1 weeks food in New Zealand, is close to what you get for approximately 4 weeks in Asia. Also even though there are many deals out there, many attractions in New Zealand are well over priced.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10134
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Re: New Zealand Aviation Thread - January 2021

Sun Feb 07, 2021 9:33 am

February 2021 thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1457521
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