Kiwings wrote:

I don't understand why so many people seem to have blindly accepted this elimination strategy without seeming to realise that sooner or later this will have to change.
Interesting that here is one of the first signs that the Gov't is starting to try to change peoples expectations. I think Hipkins also made similar comments yesterday.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/30030 ... he-bubbles

Covid will be allowed to enter the country at some stage - once 75% - 80% of the population is vaccinated.

Elimination works and continues to work until such time as it isn’t needed. When is that time? Once the majority of the population are immunised. Why? Because once that happens you reduce the level of transmission right down, you reduce the chances of Covid being fatal or severe right down so no longer causing a strain on the health system. Once that happens as others have pointed out it basically becomes like the flu. In the meantime almost every other country has taken a huge hit to their economies from Covid.

Just popped into the AKL international terminal while waiting for friend to arrive at domestic. This place is weird - almost desolate. But they haven't forgotten how to make good coffee, thankfully.

Zkpilot wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

I don't understand why so many people seem to have blindly accepted this elimination strategy without seeming to realise that sooner or later this will have to change.
Interesting that here is one of the first signs that the Gov't is starting to try to change peoples expectations. I think Hipkins also made similar comments yesterday.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/30030 ... he-bubbles

Covid will be allowed to enter the country at some stage - once 75% - 80% of the population is vaccinated.

Elimination works and continues to work until such time as it isn’t needed. When is that time? Once the majority of the population are immunised. Why? Because once that happens you reduce the level of transmission right down, you reduce the chances of Covid being fatal or severe right down so no longer causing a strain on the health system. Once that happens as others have pointed out it basically becomes like the flu. In the meantime almost every other country has taken a huge hit to their economies from Covid.

I completely agree, it's stood us very well to date. All thought I do believe the Tasman bubble was an option late last year. That aside it's hands down been far better than any other approach I've seen overseas.

The big debate and question is - how do we move out of elimination when we start getting towards heard immunity status with vaccines.

Australia has more openly broached this topic and it seems a bit taboo for us still which is concerning..

Is anyone aware if or how many of NZ's B789's have been fitted with Wifi ?

So far only one has been fitted with wifi (NZF)

Noticed that 'theaeronetwork' on twitter reported that NZ will recommence flying to TPE from July. Operating once a month initially. Can anyone elaborate on this?

NZ6 wrote:

Zkpilot wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

I don't understand why so many people seem to have blindly accepted this elimination strategy without seeming to realise that sooner or later this will have to change.
Interesting that here is one of the first signs that the Gov't is starting to try to change peoples expectations. I think Hipkins also made similar comments yesterday.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/30030 ... he-bubbles

Covid will be allowed to enter the country at some stage - once 75% - 80% of the population is vaccinated.

Elimination works and continues to work until such time as it isn’t needed. When is that time? Once the majority of the population are immunised. Why? Because once that happens you reduce the level of transmission right down, you reduce the chances of Covid being fatal or severe right down so no longer causing a strain on the health system. Once that happens as others have pointed out it basically becomes like the flu. In the meantime almost every other country has taken a huge hit to their economies from Covid.

I completely agree, it's stood us very well to date. All thought I do believe the Tasman bubble was an option late last year. That aside it's hands down been far better than any other approach I've seen overseas.

The big debate and question is - how do we move out of elimination when we start getting towards heard immunity status with vaccines.

Australia has more openly broached this topic and it seems a bit taboo for us still which is concerning..

Open to low risk countries, vaccine passports (ie no jab no travel), and initially at least a negative Covid test prior to travel.

The bigger question (or more curious) is going to be whether NZ picks up LHR again now that slots are cheap, global capacity has been slashed and some of NZs prior destinations won’t be happening again anytime soon.
I’d imagine NZ could pick up some cheap slots, just operate an extended duty with AKL crew (like how pilots used to do) to minimise costs of setting up a LHR base etc (and NZ will have cheaper cabin crew than the old contract 777 were). Still a premium route, with Covid it’s not like NZ is any weaker on the route than anyone else since they all pulled back.

Zkpilot wrote:

NZ6 wrote:

Zkpilot wrote:

Elimination works and continues to work until such time as it isn’t needed. When is that time? Once the majority of the population are immunised. Why? Because once that happens you reduce the level of transmission right down, you reduce the chances of Covid being fatal or severe right down so no longer causing a strain on the health system. Once that happens as others have pointed out it basically becomes like the flu. In the meantime almost every other country has taken a huge hit to their economies from Covid.

I completely agree, it's stood us very well to date. All thought I do believe the Tasman bubble was an option late last year. That aside it's hands down been far better than any other approach I've seen overseas.

The big debate and question is - how do we move out of elimination when we start getting towards heard immunity status with vaccines.

Australia has more openly broached this topic and it seems a bit taboo for us still which is concerning..

Open to low risk countries, vaccine passports (ie no jab no travel), and initially at least a negative Covid test prior to travel.

The bigger question (or more curious) is going to be whether NZ picks up LHR again now that slots are cheap, global capacity has been slashed and some of NZs prior destinations won’t be happening again anytime soon.
I’d imagine NZ could pick up some cheap slots, just operate an extended duty with AKL crew (like how pilots used to do) to minimise costs of setting up a LHR base etc (and NZ will have cheaper cabin crew than the old contract 777 were). Still a premium route, with Covid it’s not like NZ is any weaker on the route than anyone else since they all pulled back.

I’m generally curious why You think LHR, which routes don’t you see returning sooner than others? I’m well aware it will be a phased ‘safe’rebuilding. LHR ahead of others though? And I get your points, though I don’t know NZ will be in a hurry to bring back one stop services.

The reasons why NZ had plans to drop LHR before the pandemic surely still apply. While I'd love to see it happen it would be completely dependent on re-establishing itself as a niche carrier on LAX-LHR as it's clear that the economics did not stack up for AKL-LHR traffic (or, indeed, any one-stop services). The only other one-stop services operated (AKL-RAR-LAX and AKL-RAR-SYD) needed a Cook Islands government guarantee to make them viable.

However, in the spirit of discussion, perhaps those who think it's a possibility could expand more on how they think it could be made viable? Sure, crew rostering could be played with, but it's not just the cost side of the equation. They'd still have to contend with EK, QR, SQ, CX etc etc offering flights much more cheaply than NZ could.

The only way I could see NZ returning to LHR would be a nonstop service using the A350UUULR or the B787LLLR. Neither of which appear to be on the drawing board, nor are ever likely to be.

DavidByrne wrote:

However, in the spirit of discussion, perhaps those who think it's a possibility could expand more on how they think it could be made viable? Sure, crew rostering could be played with, but it's not just the cost side of the equation. They'd still have to contend with EK, QR, SQ, CX etc etc offering flights much more cheaply than NZ could.

The fare may not be the only consideration. The Covid-19 risk at transit points may not be acceptable to pax or governments. If testing and quarantine costs were included in the calculation, then an AKL-PER-LHR flight would be cheaper in one direction at least. If not LHR, then LGW or MAN or MUC. I'm not convinced travel risk can be successfully managed by just getting a vaccination and returning to pre Covid-19 travel patterns. Different vaccines, different mutations, and dishonest people will require changes to be made and long haul travel will be more expensive than it was.

PA515

PA515 wrote:

The fare may not be the only consideration. The Covid-19 risk at transit points may not be acceptable to pax or governments. If testing and quarantine costs were included in the calculation, then an AKL-PER-LHR flight would be cheaper in one direction at least. If not LHR, then LGW or MAN or MUC. I'm not convinced travel risk can be successfully managed by just getting a vaccination and returning to pre Covid-19 travel patterns. Different vaccines, different mutations, and dishonest people will require changes to be made and long haul travel will be more expensive than it was.

PA515

TBH I'd not given AKL-PER-LHR a single thought. It's clearly a very popular route for Australians, and QF has done very well out of East Coast-PER-LHR by all accounts. NZ would need a considerable flow of PER-originating pax to make it viable, and possibly could also encourage NZ to upgrade CHC-PER frequencies and make it year-round using an A320NEO to support it. A byproduct of the route, depending on timing, could also be to make a second AKL-PER daily service viable, which would facilitate PER connections to North America, which NZ has had ambitions to do for years (most recently being able to offer these in summer only).

But it would face stiff competition from QF, who would not take the intrusion lying down, and I'm also sceptical whether there are enough PER-originating pax to make it work (unless QF backs down on its earlier undertaking to keep the route even after Project Sunrise begins). And there's still the issue of the economics of one-stop long-haul operations to consider. But all-in-all an interesting prospect as NZ starts to build a long-haul network that may be different from the pre-pandemic network. Never say never.

DavidByrne wrote:

PA515 wrote:

The fare may not be the only consideration. The Covid-19 risk at transit points may not be acceptable to pax or governments. If testing and quarantine costs were included in the calculation, then an AKL-PER-LHR flight would be cheaper in one direction at least. If not LHR, then LGW or MAN or MUC. I'm not convinced travel risk can be successfully managed by just getting a vaccination and returning to pre Covid-19 travel patterns. Different vaccines, different mutations, and dishonest people will require changes to be made and long haul travel will be more expensive than it was.

PA515

TBH I'd not given AKL-PER-LHR a single thought. It's clearly a very popular route for Australians, and QF has done very well out of East Coast-PER-LHR by all accounts. NZ would need a considerable flow of PER-originating pax to make it viable, and possibly could also encourage NZ to upgrade CHC-PER frequencies and make it year-round using an A320NEO to support it. A byproduct of the route, depending on timing, could also be to make a second AKL-PER daily service viable, which would facilitate PER connections to North America, which NZ has had ambitions to do for years (most recently being able to offer these in summer only).

But it would face stiff competition from QF, who would not take the intrusion lying down, and I'm also sceptical whether there are enough PER-originating pax to make it work (unless QF backs down on its earlier undertaking to keep the route even after Project Sunrise begins). And there's still the issue of the economics of one-stop long-haul operations to consider. But all-in-all an interesting prospect as NZ starts to build a long-haul network that may be different from the pre-pandemic network. Never say never.

I would also question if NZ’s Dreamliners have the legs to perform such a route, given that both versions they currently operate (code 1 & 2) are more densely configured than QF’s Dreamliners, and that’s without the handicap of slightly less fuel efficient Trents hanging under the wings….!

Avtur wrote:

So far only one has been fitted with wifi (NZF)

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

V60Polestar wrote:

Avtur wrote:

So far only one has been fitted with wifi (NZF)

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

I’m not sure about NZI. Haven’t seen any tell tale bulge atop the fuselage, when I’ve been out on the apron. There were two Dreamliners parked behind each other on taxiway Delta the other day, and I don’t think NZI was either one of them. I’ll try and find out for you.

V60Polestar wrote:

Avtur wrote:

So far only one has been fitted with wifi (NZF)

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

LamboAston wrote:

V60Polestar wrote:

Avtur wrote:

So far only one has been fitted with wifi (NZF)

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

I guess you saw COVID 19 coming and would have refitted the 787 first because of it?

ZK-NBT wrote:

LamboAston wrote:

V60Polestar wrote:

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

I guess you saw COVID 19 coming and would have refitted the 787 first because of it?

Let's not cry over spilt milk folks. Nobody saw this coming - on the scale it has happened - Let's move on and work out where to next. A much more interesting conversation all round.

Avtur wrote:

I would also question if NZ’s Dreamliners have the legs to perform such a route, given that both versions they currently operate (code 1 & 2) are more densely configured than QF’s Dreamliners, and that’s without the handicap of slightly less fuel efficient Trents hanging under the wings….!

PER-MUC would be within range for the Air NZ RR (Code 2) 789s. PER-LHR would be possible with an Air NZ GE (Code 3?) 789. Air NZ has already substituted their first GE 787-10 with a GE 789 for Oct 2022 delivery, and can substitute others. Leasing is another option.

PA515

NZ321 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

LamboAston wrote:

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

I guess you saw COVID 19 coming and would have refitted the 787 first because of it?

Let's not cry over spilt milk folks. Nobody saw this coming - on the scale it has happened - Let's move on and work out where to next. A much more interesting conversation all round.

More on the lines of thinking that they knew the 772 was only a couple of years from retirement anyway with the 78X

AIAL Adrian Littlewood steps down.

Wonder what the next phase will bring

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/auc ... J3JK4JH6E/

Pretty impressive given COVID. Goes to show those that all those who make noise about ANZ and their lack of product/service etc don't reflect that of the majority.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/cor ... 4PUUW5RAM/

LamboAston wrote:

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

Not sure if this is just worded poorly or if it's meant as it's said ?

NZ wouldn't park up near new, more efficient and more approximately sized aircraft in lieu of aircraft with WIFI? Or maybe its in reflection that the 772 got WIFI but the 787's don't yet? - That just comes down to timing of MX and when the technology became available/affordable. It's unfortunate.

DavidByrne wrote:

The reasons why NZ had plans to drop LHR before the pandemic surely still apply. While I'd love to see it happen it would be completely dependent on re-establishing itself as a niche carrier on LAX-LHR as it's clear that the economics did not stack up for AKL-LHR traffic (or, indeed, any one-stop services). The only other one-stop services operated (AKL-RAR-LAX and AKL-RAR-SYD) needed a Cook Islands government guarantee to make them viable.

However, in the spirit of discussion, perhaps those who think it's a possibility could expand more on how they think it could be made viable? Sure, crew rostering could be played with, but it's not just the cost side of the equation. They'd still have to contend with EK, QR, SQ, CX etc etc offering flights much more cheaply than NZ could.

The only way I could see NZ returning to LHR would be a nonstop service using the A350UUULR or the B787LLLR. Neither of which appear to be on the drawing board, nor are ever likely to be.

I can think of many other and far more bizarre route ideas that've been tabled here before. Direct into Mexico City is still my favorite.

If NZ hadn't yet excited LHR and extension could've seriously been viable..

LamboAston wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

I guess you saw COVID 19 coming and would have refitted the 787 first because of it?

Let's not cry over spilt milk folks. Nobody saw this coming - on the scale it has happened - Let's move on and work out where to next. A much more interesting conversation all round.

More on the lines of thinking that they knew the 772 was only a couple of years from retirement anyway with the 78X

Most of the wifi on the 772 fleet was done when 2019? Probably started in 2018 so 4-5 years atleast for ROI. Anyway all good.

NZ6 wrote:

DavidByrne wrote:

The reasons why NZ had plans to drop LHR before the pandemic surely still apply. While I'd love to see it happen it would be completely dependent on re-establishing itself as a niche carrier on LAX-LHR as it's clear that the economics did not stack up for AKL-LHR traffic (or, indeed, any one-stop services). The only other one-stop services operated (AKL-RAR-LAX and AKL-RAR-SYD) needed a Cook Islands government guarantee to make them viable.

However, in the spirit of discussion, perhaps those who think it's a possibility could expand more on how they think it could be made viable? Sure, crew rostering could be played with, but it's not just the cost side of the equation. They'd still have to contend with EK, QR, SQ, CX etc etc offering flights much more cheaply than NZ could.

The only way I could see NZ returning to LHR would be a nonstop service using the A350UUULR or the B787LLLR. Neither of which appear to be on the drawing board, nor are ever likely to be.

I can think of many other and far more bizarre route ideas that've been tabled here before. Direct into Mexico City is still my favorite.

If NZ hadn't yet excited LHR and extension could've seriously been viable..

Do you mean they could have continued to serve LHR if they hadn’t already pulled out and sold the slots? Even if the plan was to pull out? I would probably agree if that was the case but now I have to be honest and think LHR via anywhere is pure fantasy. MEX lol, yeah that is an odd one, probably an O&D of 3 people a day in good times.

Air NZ A320 ZK-OXI has just had a test flight and is back in service tomorrow.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/zkoxi

It's been out of action since 07 March 2021, so not routine maintenance.

PA515

American Airlines is selling flights chc to lax direct from January. Some are only $680 one way not too bad. Just depends on the border opening which will be a challenge.

NZ516 wrote:

American Airlines is selling flights chc to lax direct from January. Some are only $680 one way not too bad. Just depends on the border opening which will be a challenge.

I hadn’t seen AA set a date for CHC, AKL-LAX from December 2021 and AKL-DFW from January 2022, still have my doubts though.

ZK-NBT wrote:

LamboAston wrote:

V60Polestar wrote:

I'm quite certain I recall NZI returning from Selatar via Rockhampton with wifi installed. Could have been a different reg since she doesn't seem to have it fitted in any images I find. Maybe nothing was installed at all.
If I remember correct NZF's was done at NZAA while she was out of operation due to RR engine troubles.

NZI does not. Pretty silly how the now retired 777 fleet had mostly wifi installed and not the 787s

I guess you saw COVID 19 coming and would have refitted the 787 first because of it?

Ah I see, my mistake. Did we end up having wifi installed on all 772s? I swear that was something that started when painting the last few.

Significant power outage at Auckland Airport. Terminals and at least some surrounding buildings affected.

V/F

V60Polestar wrote:

Ah I see, my mistake. Did we end up having wifi installed on all 772s? I swear that was something that started when painting the last few.

All except OKC.

ZK-OKA -- Apr 2020 Wifi, repaint Jun 2016
ZK-OKB -- Apr 2018 Wifi and repaint
ZK-OKC -- ---- no Wifi ----, repaint Apr 2014
ZK-OKD -- May 2018 Wifi and repaint
ZK-OKE -- Sep 2018 Wifi, repaint May 2016
ZK-OKF -- Sep 2018 Wifi and repaint
ZK-OKG -- Dec 2018 Wifi and repaint
ZK-OKH -- Oct 2018 Wifi and repaint

PA515

ZK-NBT wrote:

NZ516 wrote:

American Airlines is selling flights chc to lax direct from January. Some are only $680 one way not too bad. Just depends on the border opening which will be a challenge.

I hadn’t seen AA set a date for CHC, AKL-LAX from December 2021 and AKL-DFW from January 2022, still have my doubts though.

Here is an article on it from today:

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2 ... hurch.html

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

DavidByrne wrote:

The reasons why NZ had plans to drop LHR before the pandemic surely still apply. While I'd love to see it happen it would be completely dependent on re-establishing itself as a niche carrier on LAX-LHR as it's clear that the economics did not stack up for AKL-LHR traffic (or, indeed, any one-stop services). The only other one-stop services operated (AKL-RAR-LAX and AKL-RAR-SYD) needed a Cook Islands government guarantee to make them viable.

However, in the spirit of discussion, perhaps those who think it's a possibility could expand more on how they think it could be made viable? Sure, crew rostering could be played with, but it's not just the cost side of the equation. They'd still have to contend with EK, QR, SQ, CX etc etc offering flights much more cheaply than NZ could.

The only way I could see NZ returning to LHR would be a nonstop service using the A350UUULR or the B787LLLR. Neither of which appear to be on the drawing board, nor are ever likely to be.

And as I said in my post they don’t anymore to an extent. Roughly 1/4 of the world’s aircraft fleet have been permanently grounded - that’s a huge drop in capacity. Many airlines are really struggling so will be slow to resume services and won’t be wanting to offer bargain basement airfares.
Previously NZ operated a base in LHR which would have costed quite a lot (despite lower pay rates for crew). Likewise, they saw the opportunity to cash in their slots for a premium. Slots at LHR are now both more available and cheaper due to Covid. So not operating another base and picking up cheaper slots would certainly make LHR service more viable. Couple that with both the UK and USA being hard hit by Covid and people in both countries wanting to come not only to New Zealand but also to visit family and friends in each other’s country. The gap in service wouldn’t be missed at all due to Covid so really it’s a route that has a lot more going for it than previously.

As for another poster about routes not resuming, EZE isn’t planned to resume any time soon (if at all), ICN is unlikely for a while either is my understanding. HKG might also take a while to resume (especially with the way it’s politics have been dominated by the CCP).

VirginFlyer wrote:

Significant power outage at Auckland Airport. Terminals and at least some surrounding buildings affected.

V/F

Power came back after about 10-15 minutes. Certainly got everyone’s attention!

V/F

VirginFlyer wrote:

VirginFlyer wrote:

Significant power outage at Auckland Airport. Terminals and at least some surrounding buildings affected.

V/F

Power came back after about 10-15 minutes. Certainly got everyone’s attention!

V/F

Outgoing CEO switching the lights off.

NZ516 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

NZ516 wrote:

American Airlines is selling flights chc to lax direct from January. Some are only $680 one way not too bad. Just depends on the border opening which will be a challenge.

I hadn’t seen AA set a date for CHC, AKL-LAX from December 2021 and AKL-DFW from January 2022, still have my doubts though.

Here is an article on it from today:

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2 ... hurch.html

Thanks for that.

Kiwings wrote:

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

What is Australia’s current plan?

ZK-NBT wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

What is Australia’s current plan?

Currently not anticipating international travel until mid-2022 so I'd be surprised if NZ was months ahead of that.

DavidByrne wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

What is Australia’s current plan?

Currently not anticipating international travel until mid-2022 so I'd be surprised if NZ was months ahead of that.

Exactly that. I would see NZ and Australia being in this together, when that is exactly I don’t know but together is the thing for me.

And the process continues. A large percentage of the population is still fearful of Covid and don't understand that sooner or later it will become no different than flu or measles.
NZ Herald - sorry behind a paywall but from Budget papers - expect border to open early JAN22.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/bud ... 37M5DYCKA/

Kiwings wrote:

And the process continues. A large percentage of the population is still fearful of Covid and don't understand that sooner or later it will become no different than flu or measles.
NZ Herald - sorry behind a paywall but from Budget papers - expect border to open early JAN22.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/bud ... 37M5DYCKA/

Um… people are right to be fearful of Covid as it is literally 3000% more fatal than the flu.
Yes once most of the population is vaccinated it will become less fatal as health systems will be able to cope better but even then everyone should be getting vaccinated.
Until then (and I’d say afterwards too), keep your conspiracy/anti-vaxx opinions to yourself thanks.

Kiwings wrote:

And the process continues. A large percentage of the population is still fearful of Covid and don't understand that sooner or later it will become no different than flu or measles.
NZ Herald - sorry behind a paywall but from Budget papers - expect border to open early JAN22.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/bud ... 37M5DYCKA/

Two comments, I'm yet to believe that mass vaccine fear is a real thing and not just media headlines. Naturally there will be some who are flat out against it and that's their choice but many more will just be uncertain, cautious or even "not in a hurry" and will eventually get the shot.

As for the border timeframe. That's 100% realistic provided we stick to schedule and nothing unexpected pops up. Like I've said before, all going well. We'll have safe zone travel this calendar year. Very possibly one may open before the last quarter.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

What is Australia’s current plan?

You're assuming thst the current Australian Government has a plan?

The most recent statement was mid-2022, but there is no apparent plan to get there other than "high vaccination rates" being the trigger, yet a poor vaccination rollout.

Vaccination hesitancy seems to be an issue in both our nations. Many discussions I've seen in Australia are moving towards a reopening target being a key to vaccine uptake (NB. I had my first AZ shot on Weds - hooray!)

DavidByrne wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

The Govt. is going to come under increasing pressure to open the borders to vaccinated travelers by then. The rest of the world will be open and if they still say that the vaccine schedule is on time, then by Dec,/Jan, travel should be happening.

What is Australia’s current plan?

Currently not anticipating international travel until mid-2022 so I'd be surprised if NZ was months ahead of that.

This came from their "budget" a few weeks back. Wisely not planning for open borders as part of their budget. Not exactly the same as a dedicated border "plan" although it's been tagged as the plan. In my mind it's more a political move so that they can push the success line and reopen sooner than expected.

There is no way, once mass vaccinations are complete he'll be able to keep the border closed.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Do you mean they could have continued to serve LHR if they hadn’t already pulled out and sold the slots? Even if the plan was to pull out? I would probably agree if that was the case but now I have to be honest and think LHR via anywhere is pure fantasy. MEX lol, yeah that is an odd one, probably an O&D of 3 people a day in good times.

All I was saying was; if LHR was kept throughout COVID similar to say, LAX and if it was scheduled to be axed at the end of this year, keeping it for another 12 months could have been realistic.

A lot of IFs in there. But a safe COVID zone between NZ and the UK over the coming 12 months may have been a success even with higher airfares .

But at the end of the day, it will always be significantly cheaper to put passengers on interline carriers from the Pacific Rim hubs into Europe so IF NZ isn't interesting in keeping LAX-LHR or any other US-UK route self sustainable on it's own then whatever happens post COVID remains the same.

Zkpilot wrote:

Kiwings wrote:

And the process continues. A large percentage of the population is still fearful of Covid and don't understand that sooner or later it will become no different than flu or measles.
NZ Herald - sorry behind a paywall but from Budget papers - expect border to open early JAN22.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/bud ... 37M5DYCKA/

Um… people are right to be fearful of Covid as it is literally 3000% more fatal than the flu.
Yes once most of the population is vaccinated it will become less fatal as health systems will be able to cope better but even then everyone should be getting vaccinated.
Until then (and I’d say afterwards too), keep your conspiracy/anti-vaxx opinions to yourself thanks.

Whoa....
never said I was anti vax. I will be first in the queue to get it.

(re Australia opening borders):

Kent350787 wrote:

The most recent statement was mid-2022, but there is no apparent plan to get there other than "high vaccination rates" being the trigger, yet a poor vaccination rollout

I think people are asking a lot of any government to give a timeline as to when the borders will reopen. Given there's so much we still don't know about the future direction of the pandemic (especially about new variants and whether the current vaccines will work effectively against them), I think it's absolutely common sense that governments should not set a date or criteria and raise expectations - and then be pilloried when they have to change their position. No one at all benefits from that.

NZ6 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

Do you mean they could have continued to serve LHR if they hadn’t already pulled out and sold the slots? Even if the plan was to pull out? I would probably agree if that was the case but now I have to be honest and think LHR via anywhere is pure fantasy. MEX lol, yeah that is an odd one, probably an O&D of 3 people a day in good times.

All I was saying was; if LHR was kept throughout COVID similar to say, LAX and if it was scheduled to be axed at the end of this year, keeping it for another 12 months could have been realistic.

A lot of IFs in there. But a safe COVID zone between NZ and the UK over the coming 12 months may have been a success even with higher airfares .

But at the end of the day, it will always be significantly cheaper to put passengers on interline carriers from the Pacific Rim hubs into Europe so IF NZ isn't interesting in keeping LAX-LHR or any other US-UK route self sustainable on it's own then whatever happens post COVID remains the same.

I have to say, that I agree with NZ6. Nobody really saw COVID coming, and couldn’t have predicted what effect it would go on to have in the airline industry. Hindsight is always a wonderful thing. I personally think that there are opportunities to come out of this. Let me explain: the UK has had BREXIT, and is keen to strengthen its ties with “the commonwealth”. Australia and New Zealand have had better success dealing with COVID than many of the nation’s that lay in between there and the UK. Those two factors, and the desire of people to travel again (avoiding what could be perceived as “troubled nations”) could provide a steady stream of pax and cargo wishing to travel between the countries. Obviously QF have the advantage with the non stop PER-LHR route, where as NZ would have to stop somewhere, and finding that “somewhere” that is considered safe could be a challenge. It should be noted that New Zealand’s first case of Covid-19, and many others since have arrived here on middle eastern carriers…..!

DavidByrne wrote:

(re Australia opening borders):

Kent350787 wrote:

The most recent statement was mid-2022, but there is no apparent plan to get there other than "high vaccination rates" being the trigger, yet a poor vaccination rollout

I think people are asking a lot of any government to give a timeline as to when the borders will reopen. Given there's so much we still don't know about the future direction of the pandemic (especially about new variants and whether the current vaccines will work effectively against them), I think it's absolutely common sense that governments should not set a date or criteria and raise expectations - and then be pilloried when they have to change their position. No one at all benefits from that.

A challenge we have in both our nations with reopning borders and restarting internataionl air travel is that neither country yet has "vaccines for all".

Once supply exceeds demand, I can see both Governments being more prepared to set a target, providing an extra impetus for people to vaccinate. There are many this side of the ditch adopting an "I can't travel so why would I bother yet" position.

Does anyone have load data for trans-Tasman flights. I know a few people who have visited NZ or are actively planning to, and there appear to be plenty of flights, but are they actually filling?