New Zealand Aviation - March 2023

DavidByrne · Thu Mar 09, 2023 6:26 am

When considering whether NZ would cede routes to North America to UA, I think we also have to consider the wider strategic implications. NZ’s US strategy is based around the whole of Australasia to North America, providing a seamless connection at AKL. To cede (say) AKL-ORD in its entirety to another carrier would IMO negate this and diminish the offering - remember that the strategy is based on morning and evening hubs, with TT routes in between. I doubt UA would want to either have an aircraft sit in AKL all day or to operate TT services in its own right. And after building an image and presence in the ORD market, it would seem rather odd for NZ to then abandon it after only a few years.

I think it’s more likely that UA would see a route like CHC-SFO as an opportunity, or perhaps add more support to the NZ partnership with AKL-LAX services to complement AKL-SFO. And if NZ’s route to JFK works well, I also agree that UA could consider AKL-EWR. But I’d hate to see NZ reverse its expanding North American network by dropping existing routes. It’s current market position has been hard-won, and as I said, it’s not just about New Zealand but the whole of Australasia.

GW54 · Thu Mar 09, 2023 6:31 am

NZ516 wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:
Grant Bradley's latest (paywalled) in NZH, reporting on a speech from United's SVP of Network Planning, who's in New Zealand: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/united-airlines-working-with-air-new-zealand-on-aotearoa-expansion/54735COEWJEG7DH2OHHGHEEB3E/

- UA working to increase services to New Zealand in conjunction with NZ
- "Industry chatter" that additional services will be on UA metal
- Maybe Chicago? NZ "flies just 3 times a week to United's home base"
- UA can move quickly as didn't retire any fleet or lay off pilots during covid, now #1 on both Atlantic and Pacific from USA, first time since PanAm that an airline has had that distinction
- Ruled out DEN. Too difficult to operate long haul routes out of, New Zealand would face unacceptable payload hit
- New Zealand traditionally a "back cabin" market but now "the front cabin is packed"
- 77Es are "ideal" aircraft for UA from West Coast to New Zealand, leaves 787s for longer routes
- Supersonic "boom" planes will be for East Coast - Europe and macybe SFO-HND, but not South Pacific, too far to fly. (That's if they ever get delivered of course.)

This looks positive and really NZ don't have enough aircraft so as you suggest United could start AKL- ORD. This could be at 4 per week to allow a daily service along with the 3 pw NZ. Or perhaps they do ORD daily which will free up NZ 789s for to make JFK daily as it's really NZ1 it should be a daily service. Being the most prestigious route for NZ now with that flight number.

Interesting " 77E's are ideal aircraft" and Air New Zealand ditched theirs and they languish in the desert.

ZK-NBT · Thu Mar 09, 2023 6:34 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
... other then IAH/LAX/SFO/SIN where else will NZ need a 77W?

- Beefing up SYD/MEL/BNE capacity?
- Maybe PVG in light of JV partner CA not announcing its return to AKL yet, despite China's re-opening?
- Could the 77W make AKL-ORD, and be used to beef that up to daily? (EK has used 77Ws to the west coast of the US, on longer routes than AKL-ORD.)

I’m talking long haul, SYD/MEL/BNE will all have a daily 77W by May. They won’t take them off long haul when they don’t have enough long haul planes as it is.
While they could send a 77W to PVG, I think the yields would suffer due to the premium configuration, far better places to use them, I would be confident CA will return.
Technically the 77W could make ORD-AKL, EK used 77Ws which uplifted more pax than the 77L despite blocking seats, probably little freight.

ZK-NBT · Thu Mar 09, 2023 6:37 am

GW54 wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:
Grant Bradley's latest (paywalled) in NZH, reporting on a speech from United's SVP of Network Planning, who's in New Zealand: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/united-airlines-working-with-air-new-zealand-on-aotearoa-expansion/54735COEWJEG7DH2OHHGHEEB3E/

- UA working to increase services to New Zealand in conjunction with NZ
- "Industry chatter" that additional services will be on UA metal
- Maybe Chicago? NZ "flies just 3 times a week to United's home base"
- UA can move quickly as didn't retire any fleet or lay off pilots during covid, now #1 on both Atlantic and Pacific from USA, first time since PanAm that an airline has had that distinction
- Ruled out DEN. Too difficult to operate long haul routes out of, New Zealand would face unacceptable payload hit
- New Zealand traditionally a "back cabin" market but now "the front cabin is packed"
- 77Es are "ideal" aircraft for UA from West Coast to New Zealand, leaves 787s for longer routes
- Supersonic "boom" planes will be for East Coast - Europe and macybe SFO-HND, but not South Pacific, too far to fly. (That's if they ever get delivered of course.)

This looks positive and really NZ don't have enough aircraft so as you suggest United could start AKL- ORD. This could be at 4 per week to allow a daily service along with the 3 pw NZ. Or perhaps they do ORD daily which will free up NZ 789s for to make JFK daily as it's really NZ1 it should be a daily service. Being the most prestigious route for NZ now with that flight number.

Interesting " 77E's are ideal aircraft" and Air New Zealand ditched theirs and they languish in the desert.

What’s interesting? The 77E is great, UA have 55 of them, they need to go somewhere, fares are high they carry a decent amount of freight, right configuration and are paid off.

ZK-NBT · Thu Mar 09, 2023 6:46 am

DavidByrne wrote:
When considering whether NZ would cede routes to North America to UA, I think we also have to consider the wider strategic implications. NZ’s US strategy is based around the whole of Australasia to North America, providing a seamless connection at AKL. To cede (say) AKL-ORD in its entirety to another carrier would IMO negate this and diminish the offering - remember that the strategy is based on morning and evening hubs, with TT routes in between. I doubt UA would want to either have an aircraft sit in AKL all day or to operate TT services in its own right. And after building an image and presence in the ORD market, it would seem rather odd for NZ to then abandon it after only a few years.

I think it’s more likely that UA would see a route like CHC-SFO as an opportunity, or perhaps add more support to the NZ partnership with AKL-LAX services to complement AKL-SFO. And if NZ’s route to JFK works well, I also agree that UA could consider AKL-EWR. But I’d hate to see NZ reverse its expanding North American network by dropping existing routes. It’s current market position has been hard-won, and as I said, it’s not just about New Zealand but the whole of Australasia.

All good points David, I’m not sure where the idea of NZ ceding routes to UA came from, I can’t read the article so don’t know the context. My personal view is that NZ will find the capacity to increase ORD/JFK with the existing code 2 789s, while UA could back fill as AKL-SFO and AKL-LAX and look at CHC-SFO.

I have said it for a while i see and it makes sense for NZ ti use its JV partners more, Greg Foran said he sees a long term fleet of 23/24 wide bodies, it will be 21 in May when the last 77W returns. Some say 23/24 is optimistic, maybe eventually 25/26.

It is NW where NZ have the biggest problem, if SQ don’t bring the A380 back to AKL then I could see a 77W to SIN more, possibly at the expense of the additional 3x LAX frequencies, UA then add AKL-LAX.

SCFlyer · Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:04 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
... other then IAH/LAX/SFO/SIN where else will NZ need a 77W?

- Beefing up SYD/MEL/BNE capacity?
- Maybe PVG in light of JV partner CA not announcing its return to AKL yet, despite China's re-opening?
- Could the 77W make AKL-ORD, and be used to beef that up to daily? (EK has used 77Ws to the west coast of the US, on longer routes than AKL-ORD.)

I’m talking long haul, SYD/MEL/BNE will all have a daily 77W by May. They won’t take them off long haul when they don’t have enough long haul planes as it is.

Unlikely BNE will be increasing beyond the government funded 3x weekly 789 (with the occasional downgauge to 788). Forward schedules remain 789 with short periods of 788 downgauge.

SYD is scheduled to go double daily SFO 77W by NW.

ZK-NBT · Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:12 am

SCFlyer wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
- Beefing up SYD/MEL/BNE capacity?
- Maybe PVG in light of JV partner CA not announcing its return to AKL yet, despite China's re-opening?
- Could the 77W make AKL-ORD, and be used to beef that up to daily? (EK has used 77Ws to the west coast of the US, on longer routes than AKL-ORD.)

I’m talking long haul, SYD/MEL/BNE will all have a daily 77W by May. They won’t take them off long haul when they don’t have enough long haul planes as it is.

Unlikely BNE will be increasing beyond the government funded 3x weekly 789 (with the occasional downgauge to 788). Forward schedules remain 789 with short periods of 788 downgauge.

SYD is scheduled to go double daily SFO 77W by NW.

We were talking about NZ 77W usage to SYD/MEL/BNE, not UA.

DavidByrne · Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:37 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
I’m not sure where the idea of NZ ceding routes to UA came from

Someone earlier in the thread was suggesting that NZ should hand AKL-ORD over to UA to enable AKL-JFK to increase frequency.

I don’t think we should worry about UA taking over frequencies on AKL-LAX, as has been suggested: from NZ’s point of view the important thing is to provide that daily frequency forming part of the morning/evening departure banks. Frequency beyond that would be better deployed to other destinations IMO. There’s no strategic advantage I can see in operating ANY North American destination more than daily if you have a partner which has the fleet and willingness to operate the route.

Even if the WB fleet does top out at 25-26 aircraft, a couple more than Foran suggests, that will still mean significant constraints on future growth, given the fleet was 29-30 aircraft pre-Covid. The carrier will have to be very careful about where and how it deploys its fleet. That’s another reason I think that increasing frequency on AKL-PER and reintroducing CHC-PER would best be done with A320NEO aircraft, the only NB that could realistically work those routes. And also that’s why I also think that the carrier does need more A320NEOs for international, rather than A321s Or should retain some A320CEOs in international config to serve shorter TT routes.

Or even better, buy some A220s, but that’s another debate which we’ve already thrashed to death.

Zkpilot · Thu Mar 09, 2023 11:33 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:

- AKL/CHC-HNL - relieve NZ of 789 flying. Can be done with lower range 777/767's. CHC may help JV renewal.

Visions of UA putting their 'mature' high-density Hawaii 77As on HNL-AKL... I guess that would be just about in range given they can do HNL-GUM/ORD. Koruman's worst nightmare! Maybe a reasonable product/market fit if NZ was the brand, but I think routes dominated by NZ point of sale would continue to do best on NZ metal.

ZK-NBT wrote:
I’m not sure but the poster above seemed to think the article implied UA doing AKL-ORD, but does it mean that or does it mean the 789 is good for longer routes other than NZ while The NZ flying is suited for the 77E from the west coast.

Article isn't clear on that question, so yeah it could either mean that the 77E is suitable for New Zealand generally, therefore 77E ORD-AKL, or 787 is suitable for longer routes, therefore 789 ORD-AKL. I guess we'll find out soon enough if additional services do get announced.

What you said earlier is 77E is good for UA to NZ from west coast leaving 789s for longer routes. I would suggest UA would use a 789 for any ORD-AKL route.

DEN was one place I thought maybe UA could do with a 788, I would think ORD might have heavy restrictions on a 77E, I know they have done flights like that before EWR-BOM/HKG etc, both went 77W.

I don’t know why people keep bring up the 788. There is practically nothing the 788 can do that the 789 can’t. I expect the 788 will become a bit of a domestic bird (like 757 and 767s for the US big 3).

NZ516 · Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:09 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:

Visions of UA putting their 'mature' high-density Hawaii 77As on HNL-AKL... I guess that would be just about in range given they can do HNL-GUM/ORD. Koruman's worst nightmare! Maybe a reasonable product/market fit if NZ was the brand, but I think routes dominated by NZ point of sale would continue to do best on NZ metal.

Article isn't clear on that question, so yeah it could either mean that the 77E is suitable for New Zealand generally, therefore 77E ORD-AKL, or 787 is suitable for longer routes, therefore 789 ORD-AKL. I guess we'll find out soon enough if additional services do get announced.

What you said earlier is 77E is good for UA to NZ from west coast leaving 789s for longer routes. I would suggest UA would use a 789 for any ORD-AKL route.

DEN was one place I thought maybe UA could do with a 788, I would think ORD might have heavy restrictions on a 77E, I know they have done flights like that before EWR-BOM/HKG etc, both went 77W.

I don’t know why people keep bring up the 788. There is practically nothing the 788 can do that the 789 can’t. I expect the 788 will become a bit of a domestic bird (like 757 and 767s for the US big 3).

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

NZ516 · Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:17 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
I’m not sure where the idea of NZ ceding routes to UA came from

Someone earlier in the thread was suggesting that NZ should hand AKL-ORD over to UA to enable AKL-JFK to increase frequency.

I don’t think we should worry about UA taking over frequencies on AKL-LAX, as has been suggested: from NZ’s point of view the important thing is to provide that daily frequency forming part of the morning/evening departure banks. Frequency beyond that would be better deployed to other destinations IMO. There’s no strategic advantage I can see in operating ANY North American destination more than daily if you have a partner which has the fleet and willingness to operate the route.

Even if the WB fleet does top out at 25-26 aircraft, a couple more than Foran suggests, that will still mean significant constraints on future growth, given the fleet was 29-30 aircraft pre-Covid. The carrier will have to be very careful about where and how it deploys its fleet. That’s another reason I think that increasing frequency on AKL-PER and reintroducing CHC-PER would best be done with A320NEO aircraft, the only NB that could realistically work those routes. And also that’s why I also think that the carrier does need more A320NEOs for international, rather than A321s Or should retain some A320CEOs in international config to serve shorter TT routes.

Or even better, buy some A220s, but that’s another debate which we’ve already thrashed to death.

Actually it was me who suggested that UA may take over some of the NZ services. I agree with your idea there is no strategic advantage of going beyond daily to any US port with their very limited fleet capacity it should be deployed elsewhere. For this it should be that JFK and ORD both get to daily as soon as possible to enhance NZ's AKL hub offering.

DUDtoDFW · Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:26 pm

DavidByrne wrote:
I doubt UA would want to either have an aircraft sit in AKL all day or to operate TT services in its own right. And after building an image and presence in the ORD market, it would seem rather odd for NZ to then abandon it after only a few years.

Good point on the how UA might feed into NZs strategy. Of course UA has no interest in boosting NZ's Oz-US business so would not want to deliberately schedule into that bank. I think the most likely therefore would be enabling NZ to run more flights into that daily bank by picking up some of the second daily California flights at times that are more focused on NZ-US traffic specifically.

On your point about brand and presence in the ORD market, this convo was picked up in the Chicago thread, where someone mentioned that what they'd heard from their contacts at the airport were that the NZ flights were performing well with both passengers and freight.

Anyway, another day another paywalled Grant Bradley article, this time speaking with Hawaiian's SVP of global sales and alliances, in town to celebrate 10 years since they started AKL: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/hawaiian-airlines-the-gap-in-the-network-rebuild-and-whats-next-for-new-zealand-after-10-years-of-flying/66LNPCNCRFGGPCWFLDWWZALMCU/

- New Zealand at 3 times a week, down from 5 pre-covid and unlikely to move back up in the short term as NZers are not booking Hawaii like they used to, with the strong US dollar.
- However services over the summer have been nonetheless performed very well owing to Americans traveling to NZ for vacation, connecting in HNL
- Their top mainland connecting markets for Kiwis are (in order) LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, PHX.
- For the business as a whole, Japan is way down with Japanese not yet wanting to fly to Hawaii in the same numbers they used to, but with domestic American demand more than making up for it, way up on pre-covid levels.

ZK-NBT · Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:36 pm

NZ516 wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

What you said earlier is 77E is good for UA to NZ from west coast leaving 789s for longer routes. I would suggest UA would use a 789 for any ORD-AKL route.

DEN was one place I thought maybe UA could do with a 788, I would think ORD might have heavy restrictions on a 77E, I know they have done flights like that before EWR-BOM/HKG etc, both went 77W.

I don’t know why people keep bring up the 788. There is practically nothing the 788 can do that the 789 can’t. I expect the 788 will become a bit of a domestic bird (like 757 and 767s for the US big 3).

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:34 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
While they could send a 77W to PVG, I think the yields would suffer ... far better places to use them.

The NZ-Mainland China aviation market is in a very different position to the low yield, pre-Covid days. You only need to look at NZ's 2023 interim results investor presentation, where they single out "significant demand" for travel to China (as well as Japan and Singapore).

There's no longer Tianjin, Hainan and Sichuan trashing yields at AKL with subsidised $500 return flights. Air China has not returned to AKL, nor China Southern to CHC, and NZ is dropping CHC-CAN cargo flights. Meanwhile, two-way business/trade continues to grow.

All up, this is to say that I think the yield situation would've improved on AKL-PVG with more limited NZ-China flights than pre-Covid days, and so I wouldn't write off a 77W becoming a fixture on the route at some point (and/or on AKL-NRT and year-round on AKL-SIN).

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:46 am

DUDtoDFW wrote:
HA ...

- New Zealand at 3 times a week, down from 5 pre-covid and unlikely to move back up in the short term as NZers are not booking Hawaii like they used to, with the strong US dollar.
- However services over the summer have been nonetheless performed very well owing to Americans traveling to NZ for vacation, connecting in HNL
- Their top mainland connecting markets for Kiwis are (in order) LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, PHX.

Hopefully they can stick out the strong USD and remain at AKL. DL's impending launch of LAX-AKL may cut a chunk of that west coast traffic for HA that the non-stops on NZ/UA clearly aren't capturing all of.

Separately, interested to see SEA as the third biggest connecting market for Kiwis, and that it beat out the likes of JFK, LAS, BOS and others. Maybe DL or AA will consider a SEA-AKL service down the line?

NZ516 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:57 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
Zkpilot wrote:
I don’t know why people keep bring up the 788. There is practically nothing the 788 can do that the 789 can’t. I expect the 788 will become a bit of a domestic bird (like 757 and 767s for the US big 3).

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

Interesting for the performance of the 788 I didn't realize this. CZ use to send their 788s on CAN - CHC for a while before they upgraded the route. JQ flew AKL- SIN with their 788 for a period. Now none of them visit our shores.

NZ516 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:58 am

Delete duplicate post

SCFlyer · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:15 am

NZ516 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ516 wrote:

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

Interesting for the performance of the 788 I didn't realize this. CZ use to send their 788s on CAN - CHC for a while before they upgraded the route. JQ flew AKL- SIN with their 788 for a period. Now none of them visit our shores.

I do recall it was mostly the JQ A330 that did the SIN-AKL services (JQ operating for 3K iirc, as that carried a 3K number but under a damp-lease arrangement - JQ pilots with 3K crews). I can't recall if JQ/3K operated the 788 on this route when that was introduced into the JQ fleet.

Kiwiandrew · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:16 am

NZ516 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ516 wrote:

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

Interesting for the performance of the 788 I didn't realize this. CZ use to send their 788s on CAN - CHC for a while before they upgraded the route. JQ flew AKL- SIN with their 788 for a period. Now none of them visit our shores.

I would've sworn Jetstar used the A330 on AKL-SIN ( while they still had A330s), during what period did they run the 788 on the route?

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:22 am

Stuff opinion piece calling for NZ to update its uniforms.

... It is time for us all to say goodbye to that hideous waistcoat.

Thoughts?

https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/style/ ... r-uniforms

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:23 am

Kiwiandrew wrote:
NZ516 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

Interesting for the performance of the 788 I didn't realize this. CZ use to send their 788s on CAN - CHC for a while before they upgraded the route. JQ flew AKL- SIN with their 788 for a period. Now none of them visit our shores.

I would've sworn Jetstar used the A330 on AKL-SIN ( while they still had A330s), during what period did they run the 788 on the route?

JQ didn't use a 788 on AKL-SIN - it was always a 332 route, operated by the Singapore op.

JQ has, however, occasionally used the 788 on AKL-Australia services - e.g. on AKL-MEL.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yec4ilfztqM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m98k5XdyQIY

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:30 am

Great to see a new terminal at TUO (looks like PM Hipkins paid a visit this week), and to hear of discussions with NZ on the possibility of a TUO-CHC flight.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CpizvQCSCFC ... d=YmMyMTA2

https://simpleflying.com/taupo-airport- ... -terminal/

https://simpleflying.com/new-zealand-di ... o-flights/

zkncj · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:35 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Stuff opinion piece calling for NZ to update its uniforms.

... It is time for us all to say goodbye to that hideous waistcoat.

Thoughts?

https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/style/ ... r-uniforms

They have better things to be focusing there time and resources on e.g. getting enough crew to operate flights to start with.

a7ala · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:55 am

planemanofnz wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:
HA ...

- New Zealand at 3 times a week, down from 5 pre-covid and unlikely to move back up in the short term as NZers are not booking Hawaii like they used to, with the strong US dollar.
- However services over the summer have been nonetheless performed very well owing to Americans traveling to NZ for vacation, connecting in HNL
- Their top mainland connecting markets for Kiwis are (in order) LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, PHX.

Hopefully they can stick out the strong USD and remain at AKL. DL's impending launch of LAX-AKL may cut a chunk of that west coast traffic for HA that the non-stops on NZ/UA clearly aren't capturing all of.

Separately, interested to see SEA as the third biggest connecting market for Kiwis, and that it beat out the likes of JFK, LAS, BOS and others. Maybe DL or AA will consider a SEA-AKL service down the line?

I do wonder if they would be better to try CHC or WLG given no direct competition with an NZ nonstop to HNL, plus the international all the way US connection thats only service by FJ and via Australia.

77west · Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:14 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Stuff opinion piece calling for NZ to update its uniforms.

... It is time for us all to say goodbye to that hideous waistcoat.

Thoughts?

https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/style/ ... r-uniforms

While they might have there detractors, they have been around long enough that they are instantly recognisable, I even have spotted them driving or at the supermarket.

That said, I believe when they came out, someone in the media referred to them as looking like "heffers in tight sacks" which is perhaps a little harsh.

It probably is time for something modernised though.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:18 am

a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
DUDtoDFW wrote:
HA ...

- New Zealand at 3 times a week, down from 5 pre-covid and unlikely to move back up in the short term as NZers are not booking Hawaii like they used to, with the strong US dollar.
- However services over the summer have been nonetheless performed very well owing to Americans traveling to NZ for vacation, connecting in HNL
- Their top mainland connecting markets for Kiwis are (in order) LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, PHX.

Hopefully they can stick out the strong USD and remain at AKL. DL's impending launch of LAX-AKL may cut a chunk of that west coast traffic for HA that the non-stops on NZ/UA clearly aren't capturing all of.

Separately, interested to see SEA as the third biggest connecting market for Kiwis, and that it beat out the likes of JFK, LAS, BOS and others. Maybe DL or AA will consider a SEA-AKL service down the line?

I do wonder if they would be better to try CHC or WLG given no direct competition with an NZ nonstop to HNL, plus the international all the way US connection thats only service by FJ and via Australia.

Could a 332 do HNL-WLG-HNL?

a7ala · Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:36 am

planemanofnz wrote:
a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Hopefully they can stick out the strong USD and remain at AKL. DL's impending launch of LAX-AKL may cut a chunk of that west coast traffic for HA that the non-stops on NZ/UA clearly aren't capturing all of.

Separately, interested to see SEA as the third biggest connecting market for Kiwis, and that it beat out the likes of JFK, LAS, BOS and others. Maybe DL or AA will consider a SEA-AKL service down the line?

I do wonder if they would be better to try CHC or WLG given no direct competition with an NZ nonstop to HNL, plus the international all the way US connection thats only service by FJ and via Australia.

Could a 332 do HNL-WLG-HNL?

Yep - should be able to do a full pax load and a couple of tonnes of cargo outbound, and full payload inbound. HA is also getting B787's which would be much better.

Remember the outbound WLG will have no headwind enroute to HNL so A332 can go further than towards Asia in the other direction.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 4:34 am

a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
a7ala wrote:

I do wonder if they would be better to try CHC or WLG given no direct competition with an NZ nonstop to HNL, plus the international all the way US connection thats only service by FJ and via Australia.

Could a 332 do HNL-WLG-HNL?

Yep - should be able to do a full pax load and a couple of tonnes of cargo outbound, and full payload inbound. HA is also getting B787's which would be much better.

Remember the outbound WLG will have no headwind enroute to HNL so A332 can go further than towards Asia in the other direction.

Fascinating. The article says the airline would look to stimulate untapped segments of the Kiwi market. Maybe Wellingtonians are an 'untapped' segment? :stirthepot:

mrkerr7474 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 4:42 am

planemanofnz wrote:
a7ala wrote:
planemanofnz wrote:
Could a 332 do HNL-WLG-HNL?

Yep - should be able to do a full pax load and a couple of tonnes of cargo outbound, and full payload inbound. HA is also getting B787's which would be much better.

Remember the outbound WLG will have no headwind enroute to HNL so A332 can go further than towards Asia in the other direction.

Fascinating. The article says the airline would look to stimulate untapped segments of the Kiwi market. Maybe Wellingtonians are an 'untapped' segment?

Very fascinating and who knows, it could be. Potentially small chances of it happening but never say never. I would have thought they'd try CHC before WLG though but I'd certainly try that service if it came to WLG

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:56 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
While they could send a 77W to PVG, I think the yields would suffer ... far better places to use them.

The NZ-Mainland China aviation market is in a very different position to the low yield, pre-Covid days. You only need to look at NZ's 2023 interim results investor presentation, where they single out "significant demand" for travel to China (as well as Japan and Singapore).

There's no longer Tianjin, Hainan and Sichuan trashing yields at AKL with subsidised $500 return flights. Air China has not returned to AKL, nor China Southern to CHC, and NZ is dropping CHC-CAN cargo flights. Meanwhile, two-way business/trade continues to grow.

All up, this is to say that I think the yield situation would've improved on AKL-PVG with more limited NZ-China flights than pre-Covid days, and so I wouldn't write off a 77W becoming a fixture on the route at some point (and/or on AKL-NRT and year-round on AKL-SIN).

PVG needs 2 77Ws, SIN is the most likely IMO or NRT if it needs it, they may not have enough 787s to return to KIX or second NRT? NH could operate NRT-AKL with an NZ code.

CA will return as part of the NZ JV, the 3 smaller carriers I’m not so sure, CZ will return to CHC as well I’m quite sure, NZ dropping cargo flights to CAN is because the government subsidy ends this month, NZ need the aircraft elsewhere.

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:58 am

NZ516 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
NZ516 wrote:

The 788 might have been a typo he might have meant a 789 doing DEN to AKL for UA.

It wasn’t a typo, I thought the 788 had better hot and high performance than the 789, good for DEN? I know the 789 generally out performs it everywhere and has similar operating costs with an additional 30-40 pax.

Interesting for the performance of the 788 I didn't realize this. CZ use to send their 788s on CAN - CHC for a while before they upgraded the route. JQ flew AKL- SIN with their 788 for a period. Now none of them visit our shores.

788s have been frequent through AKL, UA and AA started with them, CZ do AKL for a few years, AC 788 when they first started.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:04 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
PVG needs 2 77Ws

I get what you mean, but it's not 2x solely dedicated frames - it's more like 1.2x? The 0.8x can be rotated through SYD/MEL, and/or a less than daily long-haul. This will be the case for all long-haul routes except SIN?

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:06 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
788s have been frequent through AKL, UA and AA started with them, CZ do AKL for a few years, AC 788 when they first started.

LA have also used them here too.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjQXMulH8hw

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:30 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
PVG needs 2 77Ws

I get what you mean, but it's not 2x solely dedicated frames - it's more like 1.2x? The 0.8x can be rotated through SYD/MEL, and/or a less than daily long-haul. This will be the case for all long-haul routes except SIN?

PVG needing 2 77Ws would mean at the expense of US frequency to LAX/SFO/IAH, NRT would probably mean one of the Tasman routes would lose the 77W, or so bad in NS in terms of fitting in but NW might be a problem?

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:30 am

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
788s have been frequent through AKL, UA and AA started with them, CZ do AKL for a few years, AC 788 when they first started.

LA have also used them here too.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjQXMulH8hw

Yes they have.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:49 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
PVG needing 2 77Ws would mean at the expense of US frequency to LAX/SFO/IAH

Potentially yes, which is where UA could step in - as per the discussion about the original NZ Herald article on UA above.

Zkpilot · Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:16 am

planemanofnz wrote:
Stuff opinion piece calling for NZ to update its uniforms.

... It is time for us all to say goodbye to that hideous waistcoat.

Thoughts?

https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/style/ ... r-uniforms

The piece is by a fashionista out of touch with the real world let alone the airline industry. Full of woke nonsense.
Do I love NZs uniform? Yes - to a point. When it first came out I wasn’t much of a fan but it’s grown on me.
It’s easily identifiable, does look smart, does the job well.
Yes the waistcoat jamble could be updated.
Uniforms are very expensive. NZ has previously looked at replacing it but have bigger priorities right now.
New uniforms typically coincide with an overall brand refresh/product refresh- so the new business class etc could be it.
There’s a saying - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

NZ516 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:01 pm

planemanofnz wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
788s have been frequent through AKL, UA and AA started with them, CZ do AKL for a few years, AC 788 when they first started.

LA have also used them here too.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bjQXMulH8hw

So there has been a lot of different 788 operators to NZ. It's hard to keep track of all of equipment changes over the years!

NZ321 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 2:06 pm

Did Brunei ever do 787 from AKL?

zkncj · Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:21 pm

NZ321 wrote:
Did Brunei ever do 787 from AKL?

No just 763s via BNE (or was it SYD), it was a while back now.

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 6:24 pm

zkncj wrote:
NZ321 wrote:
Did Brunei ever do 787 from AKL?

No just 763s via BNE (or was it SYD), it was a while back now.

Via BNE then non stop to BWN, 772s as well.

TG 788s have visited to, subs though , 789 was regular.

GW54 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 8:29 pm

I see one of the domestic new A321's is to be parked up as of yesterday so that it's engines can be removed to keep the International fleet flying. From what I am hearing it wont resume flying until June at the earliest. The issue is related to P&W. What happens if another NEO has a problem, do they cannibalize another domestic 321? You have to question what is going on in Air NZ however and the quality of the decision making. Why weren't the three delivered aircraft the same as NNA -NNG and lets hope common sense prevails and the next four are. With the domestic fleet parked up for 7-8 hours everynight the scheduling flexibility of having a common fleet speaks for it's self. Looking at FR24 if would be OYA that is going into storage as it is not scheduled for any flying into the future.

NZ801 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:05 pm

GW54 wrote:
I see one of the domestic new A321's is to be parked up as of yesterday so that it's engines can be removed to keep the International fleet flying. From what I am hearing it wont resume flying until June at the earliest. The issue is related to P&W. What happens if another NEO has a problem, do they cannibalize another domestic 321? You have to question what is going on in Air NZ however and the quality of the decision making. Why weren't the three delivered aircraft the same as NNA -NNG and lets hope common sense prevails and the next four are. With the domestic fleet parked up for 7-8 hours everynight the scheduling flexibility of having a common fleet speaks for it's self. Looking at FR24 if would be OYA that is going into storage as it is not scheduled for any flying into the future.

It’s only for a month at this stage. Delivery is out of NZ’s hands, they have to work with Airbus, they can’t dictate to the manufacturer!

NZ516 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:09 pm

Seven Sharp did a interesting story on Stewart Island flights. NZ's most loved airline. They did 16 flights in just one day! That's truly remarkable and it's such a popular route too.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/seven-shar ... ed-airline

DavidByrne · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:09 pm

Big problems with P&W engines worldwide - not just with NZ.

DavidByrne · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:18 pm

I guess the P&W facility at CHC must be working overtime?

GW54 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:31 pm

NZ801 wrote:
GW54 wrote:
I see one of the domestic new A321's is to be parked up as of yesterday so that it's engines can be removed to keep the International fleet flying. From what I am hearing it wont resume flying until June at the earliest. The issue is related to P&W. What happens if another NEO has a problem, do they cannibalize another domestic 321? You have to question what is going on in Air NZ however and the quality of the decision making. Why weren't the three delivered aircraft the same as NNA -NNG and lets hope common sense prevails and the next four are. With the domestic fleet parked up for 7-8 hours everynight the scheduling flexibility of having a common fleet speaks for it's self. Looking at FR24 if would be OYA that is going into storage as it is not scheduled for any flying into the future.

It’s only for a month at this stage. Delivery is out of NZ’s hands, they have to work with Airbus, they can’t dictate to the manufacturer!

Nobody said it was of Air NZ's making. If it is only one month, which I doubt, lets hope there is ample compensation. A significant number of A320/A321 sectors have been cancelled.

GW54 · Fri Mar 10, 2023 9:35 pm

GW54 wrote:
NZ801 wrote:
GW54 wrote:
I see one of the domestic new A321's is to be parked up as of yesterday so that it's engines can be removed to keep the International fleet flying. From what I am hearing it wont resume flying until June at the earliest. The issue is related to P&W. What happens if another NEO has a problem, do they cannibalize another domestic 321? You have to question what is going on in Air NZ however and the quality of the decision making. Why weren't the three delivered aircraft the same as NNA -NNG and lets hope common sense prevails and the next four are. With the domestic fleet parked up for 7-8 hours everynight the scheduling flexibility of having a common fleet speaks for it's self. Looking at FR24 if would be OYA that is going into storage as it is not scheduled for any flying into the future.

It’s only for a month at this stage. Delivery is out of NZ’s hands, they have to work with Airbus, they can’t dictate to the manufacturer!

Nobody said it was of Air NZ's making. If it is only one month, which I doubt as I am hearing around 10th June with engines going an a A320NEO and a A321NEO, lets hope there is ample compensation. A significant number of A320/A321 domestic sectors have been cancelled as a result.

ZK-NBT · Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:10 pm

GW54 wrote:
I see one of the domestic new A321's is to be parked up as of yesterday so that it's engines can be removed to keep the International fleet flying. From what I am hearing it wont resume flying until June at the earliest. The issue is related to P&W. What happens if another NEO has a problem, do they cannibalize another domestic 321? You have to question what is going on in Air NZ however and the quality of the decision making. Why weren't the three delivered aircraft the same as NNA -NNG and lets hope common sense prevails and the next four are. With the domestic fleet parked up for 7-8 hours everynight the scheduling flexibility of having a common fleet speaks for it's self. Looking at FR24 if would be OYA that is going into storage as it is not scheduled for any flying into the future.

It obviously makes sense for NZ to have seperate fleets, in this day of cost cutting even. The slack would be more built into the international fleet to cover domestic not vv.

planemanofnz · Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:50 pm

NZ516 wrote:
Seven Sharp did a interesting story on Stewart Island flights. NZ's most loved airline. They did 16 flights in just one day! That's truly remarkable and it's such a popular route too.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/seven-shar ... ed-airline

I do wonder if Stewart Island could see NZ service in the future once they get their electric planes that are tipped to re-launch AKL-HLZ.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net