Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:21 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 149):
AKL-RAR-LAX

This is going to 772 equipment

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 149):
AKL-HNL

This will certainly make NZ an attractive option compared to HAs new A330
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8100
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:25 am

Quoting Nouflyer (Reply 149):

Ill take a guess In order.

AKL-HNL
AKL-PPT
AKL-DPS
CHC-PER
RAR-LAX make LAX all 777 I think including this flight if it stays long term.
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:27 am

Another well known website is listing:
2 x A321Neos for delivery in 2017, 2 in 2018 and 1 in 2019 (Total 5)
 
Jetstar315
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:38 am

I should have added to my previous post:
If the 5 x B767-300s are to be retained 'for longer than expected', is it possible that these are to operate only on Trans Tasman routes, and then to be replaced with the 5 x A321 Neos as they area delivered???
 
Mr AirNZ
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:24 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:40 am

Quoting Jetstar315 (Reply 152):
Another well known website is listing:
2 x A321Neos for delivery in 2017, 2 in 2018 and 1 in 2019 (Total 5)

And what is this well known website? I ask because Airbus list only three A321NEOs for Air New Zealand still in their most recent November orders/delivery spreadsheet (Dec will of course be out in January) and I have seen no market disclosures by Air New Zealand around the NEO order since the initial announcement.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 3:32 pm

To make AKL-NRT/PVG all 789 based on the present schedule, requires something like three weekly NRT rotations at 31 hours and three at 34 hours and two PVG at ~ 26hrs. This will probably use most of the available time of the three additional frames to come in 2015. Rotation times for the city pairs mentioned in reply 151 start at 12 hrs. for PPT ~ 17 hrs. for PER and ~ 20 hrs. for HNL. Typically they are 3 or 4x weekly but they are not something that can be worked in like a TT rotation.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 150):
This is going to 772 equipment

This makes sense from a crewing viewpoint assuming the 77E and 77W flight crews are cross trained.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:46 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 147):
After many humming and haring, I've decided to book a long haul via Australia with UA. Excited to get to try the 787-9 on a real flight instead of just to Australia. Return was just under $1500. Way cheaper then the $2600 NZ

I've had an identical experience in December with QF. Didn't care about losing the star alliance status points because it was just prior to the rollover and I had Gold anyway.

The QF trip from AKL-JFK was undoubtedly my best long haul Y experience ever. Pretty much zero jet-lag either end. The timing of the flights was humane. Great service, and cheaper. If QF restarted AKL-LAX I would switch allegiance to them in a heartbeat.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:01 pm

Yet another brilliant, insightful (not) piece of aviation reporting in the NZ Herald this morning.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11381071
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8100
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:29 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 155):

To make AKL-NRT/PVG all 789 based on the present schedule, requires something like three weekly NRT rotations at 31 hours and three at 34 hours and two PVG at ~ 26hrs. This will probably use most of the available time of the three additional frames to come in 2015

?? To make NRT/PVG daily will require 1 more frame, to operate NRT 10x weekly they will need an additional frame that will have 3-4 spare days based on current schedule unless they use it for CHC-PER like the 763 is now, AKL-NRT-CHC-PER-CHC-AKL, i'm not sure CHC-PER will change over that soon and even the additional NRT may stay as a 763 for a while?

It was hinted a while back that HNL/PPT would be the next routes to go 789, next aircraft arrives in July so say an August start while NRT/PVG go daily 789 from OCT/NOV with the 5th aircraft arriving in SEPT, I wonder more where the 6th frame will go, maybe extra NRT-CHC-PER or and extra flight to PVG 2 weekly? A new route? We'll find out soon enough.

I notice CZ seem to be updating their schedules for the winter currently showing 10 weekly like last year, doesn't state aircraft type. But interesting and "odd" changes. I can only bring up so far,

CZ305 CAN 0430 AKL 2000 Daily
I'm guessing CZ306 will depart AKL same as before at 2200 arriving CAN at 0600 so I understand shortening the ground time but CAN isn't DXB is it? For a mainly O&D route with a few connections who wants to leave at 0430? And 2000 into AKL offers no connections.

CZ336 AKL 1300 CAN 2100 3 weekly
This flight in winter usually leaves at
CAN 1430 AKL 0600
AKL 0900 CAN 1730

Not to bad a bit early ex AKL for domestic connections, 1300 allows connections ex AKL but not so much ex CAN at 2100 maybe a few late flights. I'm picking this will leave CAN at 1930 arriving AKL at 1100 with a 2 hour turn.

It will be interesting to see what happens here, seems they want to shorten ground time at AKL but the potential 0430 ex CAN is odd IMO.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:15 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 157):

As bad as the NZ Herald is when it attempts anything close to "Journalism" as a pilot I actually agree with the premise that we are not learning enough, quick enough from the accidents that are occurring. I was learning about Future Air Navigation (FANS) and ADS-C etc 12 years ago when that technology was already mature and yet for the most part we are still reliant in many parts of the world on HF radio and radar transponders! (Air NZ Domestic A320's need to buddy up with other NZ flights on delivery across the tasman because they aren't fitted with HF and would be without a communication link).

Something that deeply disappoints me is just how useless the 406 MHz ELT seems to be, and I have personal experience with this disappointment also.

So, as much as Granny gets it wrong, and "Malaysia-based" is a long bow to to draw given as anyone willing to put in 20 seconds of research will know that Indonesia AirAsia is only 49% owned by AirAsia Group and is headquartered in Indonesia with aircraft registered on the Indonesian AOC, there is a legitimate point in there.

[Edited 2015-01-01 19:37:29]
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:44 am

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 159):

Your post is great; my issue with the NZ Herald editorial is that while it perhaps does make a point or two; it is fundamentally pretty facile reporting. Firstly to not include denominator data in quantifying "safety" renders the whole article pretty useless. Secondly, it makes no mention of exactly why aviation does not respond in any kind of knee jerk fashion (increases in airliner safety actually causing *more* deaths through higher fares pushing people into their cars for example).

I agree that there is scope for aviation moving quicker though. Why in 2015 I still fly an aircraft that has magnetos -ie engine technology circa 1910 - utterly bemuses me.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:58 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 156):

Yes I read your quick brief on the QF trip in the Aussie threads. I was looking at QF but was really keen to finally log a 787 trip considering my previous attempts were cancelled. QF were asking about $2000 return with AA connections which would have given my QF FF account a much needed boost but I was more interested in the NZ FF account getting a boost.

I struggle with jet lag while departing New Zealand but don't seem to struggle with it much while returning unless I'm back to work the next day, so if Boeing's claims about the Dreamliner reducing the affects on jet lag with their air pressure is true then it will be excellent. Would be so good that I might find myself booking on UA's Dreamliner in the future via Australia.
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 9:45 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 156):
The QF trip from AKL-JFK was undoubtedly my best long haul Y experience ever. Pretty much zero jet-lag either end. The timing of the flights was humane. Great service, and cheaper. If QF restarted AKL-LAX I would switch allegiance to them in a heartbeat.
Quoting 777ER (Reply 161):
I struggle with jet lag while departing New Zealand but don't seem to struggle with it much while returning unless I'm back to work the next day, so if Boeing's claims about the Dreamliner reducing the affects on jet lag with their air pressure is true then it will be excellent. Would be so good that I might find myself booking on UA's Dreamliner in the future via Australia.

Having flown the 787 several times I have yet to notice any difference in regards to being jet-lagged. Id say its placebo, those who want to believe the hype will. Its a bit like "dreamliner". Sounds fancy and special but the plane is for a passenger just the same as all other planes.
Having traveled on it a few times I see no difference, same issues Ive always had.
The dry air that makes everyone have a cold two days after long haul could be cured had every airline opted for the best product CTT Systems make. Unfortunately only a handful commercial airlines do, however heaps of corporate jets opt for it. And you can feel the difference.
I know Boeing bought some of CTT Systems techniques for the 787, but they didn't buy enough. had they done so we might have felt the difference.

I agree with you lot, the service and flights I have had on QF lately has been top notch. Real pleasure to fly with them and great pricing too. I use the ANZ platinum card that gives me QF FF points as well, its an ok card for New Zealand banks (our choices are very limited indeed, especially for those of us who by default refuse amex cards) and have spent a fair bit of money on QF the last few years. They are a very underestimated carrier who constantly delivers above expectation in the air. (Lets avoid the discussion about its Australian airports and service there because they have a long way to go there and the real estate in SYD is horrendous.)

Anyone knows what was wrong at AKL today. Arrived in the early afternoon and the processing times were about 2 hours. Queues to the dutyfree shops and it took me 45 minutes to clear immigration yet my luggage hadn't arrived...
Followed that up by close to an hour in the lovely MAF line. And no I am not and never will be a citizen (I will always fail the enough days spent in NZ criteria) so I stand with the tourists (all PR people stand there).

Why do we leave such a bad impression on visitors? Everyone in the queue was saying this was the worst they have ever experienced etc. I am appalled that it is allowed to be this bad at our primary gateway. (Staff did their best, not their fault, staffing and planning managers though need replacement if this is a regular occurrence)
I rarely arrive around these times, is this regular?
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:37 am

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Why do we leave such a bad impression on visitors? Everyone in the queue was saying this was the worst they have ever experienced etc. I am appalled that it is allowed to be this bad at our primary gateway. (Staff did their best, not their fault, staffing and planning managers though need replacement if this is a regular occurrence)
I rarely arrive around these times, is this regular?

I haven't had to que at Auckland airport customs or MPI for years, although departures is a different story. You usually breeze through, even arriving during the afternoon period, although to be honest, I don't travel through AKL nearly as much anymore so maybe it's changed recently?

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
I agree with you lot, the service and flights I have had on QF lately has been top notch. Real pleasure to fly with them and great pricing too. I use the ANZ platinum card that gives me QF FF points as well, its an ok card for New Zealand banks (our choices are very limited indeed, especially for those of us who by default refuse amex cards) and have spent a fair bit of money on QF the last few years. They are a very underestimated carrier who constantly delivers above expectation in the air. (Lets avoid the discussion about its Australian airports and service there because they have a long way to go there and the real estate in SYD is horrendous.)
Quoting gasman (Reply 156):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 147):
After many humming and haring, I've decided to book a long haul via Australia with UA. Excited to get to try the 787-9 on a real flight instead of just to Australia. Return was just under $1500. Way cheaper then the $2600 NZ

I've had an identical experience in December with QF. Didn't care about losing the star alliance status points because it was just prior to the rollover and I had Gold anyway.

The QF trip from AKL-JFK was undoubtedly my best long haul Y experience ever. Pretty much zero jet-lag either end. The timing of the flights was humane. Great service, and cheaper. If QF restarted AKL-LAX I would switch allegiance to them in a heartbeat.

Qantas and EK are both fantastic, especially in Y. The food, the service, the no bull sh#t pricing, the schedules, the FF flier program. The best economy meals I've ever had have been on these two airlines (can't say the same about business though) I'm often surprised how many NZers travel to the US via SYD or BNE on QF (and VA), although I don't know too many who choose UA!
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:45 am

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 159):
As bad as the NZ Herald is when it attempts anything close to "Journalism" as a pilot I actually agree with the premise that we are not learning enough, quick enough from the accidents that are occurring. I was learning about Future Air Navigation (FANS) and ADS-C etc 12 years ago when that technology was already mature and yet for the most part we are still reliant in many parts of the world on HF radio and radar transponders! (Air NZ Domestic A320's need to buddy up with other NZ flights on delivery across the tasman because they aren't fitted with HF and would be without a communication link).

As an industry we are also starting to forget lessons previously learned, this I find very disappointing, especially at a time when we are finding new ways to have accidents.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:32 pm

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 164):
As an industry we are also starting to forget lessons previously learned, this I find very disappointing, especially at a time when we are finding new ways to have accidents.

Agreed, and this is one of the reasons I very much dislike the process of commoditization of the flight deck through buying type ratings and paying to fly. It changes the dynamic over time in a way I believe contributes to the collective loss of memory.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:57 pm

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Why do we leave such a bad impression on visitors? Everyone in the queue was saying this was the worst they have ever experienced etc. I am appalled that it is allowed to be this bad at our primary gateway. (Staff did their best, not their fault, staffing and planning managers though need replacement if this is a regular occurrence)
I rarely arrive around these times, is this regular?

I think it depends on the times and my experience has normally been fairly expedient as a NZ passport holder using smartgate. However, I have had friends that have had terrible experiences. One took over 2 hours from landing on QF to getting to arrivals. Huge queues at the immigration counters, long wait for baggage and then huge lines a Biosecurity.

I think EK arrivals are really what jams up the place. But then so what? AIAL have consistently under-invested in AKL. That is has won any awards somewhat blows my mind. It's a hotch-potch, rabbit warren-like rubbish airport. There, I said it.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:48 pm

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Anyone knows what was wrong at AKL today. Arrived in the early afternoon and the processing times were about 2 hours. Queues to the dutyfree shops and it took me 45 minutes to clear immigration yet my luggage hadn't arrived...
Followed that up by close to an hour in the lovely MAF line. And no I am not and never will be a citizen (I will always fail the enough days spent in NZ criteria) so I stand with the tourists (all PR people stand there).

Did you arrive in EK Peak? AKL really struggles to clear the 1500 passengers of the EK Flights into AKL at once. I seems that its been pretty bad this week, with that no NZ/AU Passport holders line being outside of the pen. We're as if you arrive with an NZ/AU passport though smart gate with nothing to declare, they give you an green slip after the smart gate which is an pass to the shortcut dirrectly out line.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:49 pm

Anyone know if NZ is planning an farewell flight for the 733s? or an special 75 years flight to SYD
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:51 am

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Having flown the 787 several times I have yet to notice any difference in regards to being jet-lagged.

I did. I flew nearly consecutively for 10 days clocking up 47,000mi in April, watching the skin peel around my fingernails and my lips dry up immensely. And then I hopped on a 787 NRT-LAX and there were no issues with dryness after arriving in LAX.

The FAs on the NZ 789 delivery flight PAE-AKL can back it up. The media who were on that flight can back it up. At least one person wore contacts for the entire flight without their eyes drying up enough to have to change out of them/put drops in or anything.
 
Kashmon
Posts: 642
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:08 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 8:52 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 167):

this has happened to me as well - outside the EK peak

AKL is slowly becoming incompetent...
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:36 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 167):
Did you arrive in EK Peak? AKL really struggles to clear the 1500 passengers of the EK Flights into AKL at once. I seems that its been pretty bad this week, with that no NZ/AU Passport holders line being outside of the pen. We're as if you arrive with an NZ/AU passport though smart gate with nothing to declare, they give you an green slip after the smart gate which is an pass to the shortcut dirrectly out line.

Yeah, I Arrived after the three EK flights. Rather shocking experience.

That queue, way outside the pen, took me by surprise, I assumed the days of darkness (arriving in the Asian midday bonanza 5-10 years ago) and AKL being one of the worst experiences you could imagine as a passenger was long gone. But 2 hours processing thats completely unacceptable and whoever is in charge of planning needs a kick up his arse. Seriously its not acceptable from our only major international airport and such images of a key player in brand New Zealand is just inexcusable.

Were a nation depending on tourism and we have tourists wait two hours in queues at our major international gateway. Shakes my head in disbelief. (And again the problem wasn't staff, they worked at an acceptable pace)

[Edited 2015-01-03 03:37:20]
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 1:46 pm

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 166):
But then so what? AIAL have consistently under-invested in AKL.

It needs another take over bid to make it attractive for the municipal shareholders to cash in their interests. It has to stop being a cash cow that allows the local municipal rates (taxes) to be lower than what they should be.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4731
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 2:54 pm

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 140):
Four flights only spread over two weekends. Planned and no doubt linked with some Japanese organized travel group/tour. Similar to how the 744 still did the odd NRT even in the past year or so. 77W planning allows for a maintenance visit from Tuesday to Thursday which sees NZ7/8 at the moment operated by a 772 (it used to be NZ5/6 before the delivery of OKR/OKS).
Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 129):
NZ only have 7 77Ws enough for the most premium LAX/LHR/SFO routes and to premium for Asian services though maybe HKG could fill extra J? There are 77W to NRT on Jan 3/4 aswell not sure of the reason. NZ8 gets a 772 once a week to allow maintenance. Not sure when heavier C checks are due on the 77W fleet though.

  Thanks for the insights. Here's a photo of ZK-OKP at Narita, incase anyone is interested:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gacks/15948652019
ZK-OKN also:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ryotaro Shinozaki

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 155):
assuming the 77E and 77W flight crews are cross trained.

they are.

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Having flown the 787 several times I have yet to notice any difference in regards to being jet-lagged.

As someone who flew to PVG on one a few days ago (my third time on ZK-NZE   ), I heartily disagree! The difference between the 787 and the Dragonair A330 I flew later in the day was quite noticeable, even though the Dragonair leg was substantially shorter.

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
Id say its placebo, those who want to believe the hype will.

Those who know about the lower cabin altitude will attribute their fresher feeling and reduced jetlag to it. Those who don't know about it will attribute the lack of jetlag to luck. As an Airbus fanboy, I wanted the lower cabin altitude benefits to just be Boeing marketing BS, but it isn't.

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 162):
had every airline opted for the best product CTT Systems make. Unfortunately only a handful commercial airlines do

Which ones?

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 163):
Qantas and EK are both fantastic, especially in Y. The food, the service

TBH I've always found EK's service to be pretty average. Nowhere near the standard of QF or NZ. Though it is nice that EK have a hot towel service.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 167):
Did you arrive in EK Peak? AKL really struggles to clear the 1500 passengers of the EK Flights into AKL at once
Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 166):
But then so what? AIAL have consistently under-invested in AKL. That is has won any awards somewhat blows my mind.
Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 171):
But 2 hours processing thats completely unacceptable and whoever is in charge of planning needs a kick up his arse. Seriously its not acceptable from our only major international airport and such images of a key player in brand New Zealand is just inexcusable.

  

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 169):

+1 While the 787 isn't the be all and end all in terms of comfort, the difference in cabin altitude is certainly noticeable and makes flying much more pleasant.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 172):
that allows the local municipal rates (taxes) to be lower than what they should be.

Eh? Last time I checked, Auckland rates were plenty high enough.  





[Edited 2015-01-03 07:14:28]
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1954
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:08 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 172):
It needs another take over bid to make it attractive for the municipal shareholders to cash in their interests. It has to stop being a cash cow that allows the local municipal rates (taxes) to be lower than what they should be.

Isn't that the purpose of municipal investments in infrastructure? And is there any guarantee that a private investor would pump additional capital into the airport to ensure that the A-net wish-list could be fulfilled?

I find it quite bizarre that local (and national) government is expected to stump up mega-cash for big projects that are in the interest of the region (nation) and that no one else has the willingness/chutzpah to invest in, but that when they reach a point of maturity and profitability, there is criticism of the shareholding and strong expectation that they should be sold off to private enterprise so someone else can reap the rewards.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:46 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 172):

It needs another take over bid to make it attractive for the municipal shareholders to cash in their interests. It has to stop being a cash cow that allows the local municipal rates (taxes) to be lower than what they should be.

I think the issue is that regardless of who has financial interests in an Airport, investing in the Customs/Arrivals infrastructure will not yield returns. AKL is hardly the sole offender in this regard. Look at just about any international airport across the Tasman (with the possible exception of BNE) and also how shockingly arriving passengers have been treated at LAX for many decades. Yet we still keep coming.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:17 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 174):
And is there any guarantee that a private investor would pump additional capital into the airport to ensure that the A-net wish-list could be fulfilled?

Seems to me Infratil has more than pulled it's weight in Wellington and have developed a terminal facility there that is I'm told ,second to none.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 2:37 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 176):
Seems to me Infratil has more than pulled it's weight in Wellington and have developed a terminal facility there that is I'm told ,second to none.

How often do you use WLG? it has to be one of the most cramped Terminals in New Zealand. It's domestic gate lounges are barley useable, they are stuck in the late 90s when NZ flew 104 seat 737-200s on the main truck and before security. Now days these gates take 171 seat A320s, which share an single X-ray Machine for every two gates.

With WLG being NZ's most expensive airport (ranks very high price, word wide too) it for sure isn't work the cost. If only someone would develop PPQ more, and I'm sure we would see NZ jump to PPQ.

e.g in WLG to land and 77tone A320 at peak your looking at $392.60, then 171 passengers at $768, so you landing cost becomes $1161. Not forgetting you also have to pay an passenger terminal fee $821, plus $68 in noise fees. You're now looking at $2050 to land & unload your A320. https://www.wellingtonairport.co.nz/yk-files/48022a68a248d08df0f53c80efce5a86/WIAL%20Schedule%20of%20Charges%20-%201%20June%202014%20to%2031%20March%202019.pdf
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:30 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 177):

WLG is now expanding its domestic terminal (construction started several months ago) to include much larger departure gates and a single AVSEC area.

Gone will be the days of the most friendly passenger terminal in New Zealand in terms of allowing non passengers to spend as much time with their loved one/friends as possible before boarding the flight or waiting at the gate for them to disembark. Now WLG will become just a common airport shortly  
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:45 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 178):
Gone will be the days of the most friendly passenger terminal in New Zealand in terms of allowing non passengers to spend as much time with their loved one/friends as possible before boarding the flight or waiting at the gate for them to disembark. Now WLG will become just a common airport shortly

That's if they can afford the car-parking bill at WLG  , haven't WLG not put signs up just past the Koru Lounge Entrance saying passengers only? To be honest I find waiting family members down that area just get in the way / cause traffic follow problems.
 
CHCalfonzo
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:56 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:22 am

There seems to be something wrong with NZ837 ZK-OJH ZQN-MEL. It has diverted to CHC and is currently flying a pattern over Banks Peninsula at FL150. Very unusual, possibly the crew trouble shooting a tech fault?

http://www.flightradar24.com/ANZ837/530e019
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:34 am

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 180):
There seems to be something wrong with NZ837 ZK-OJH ZQN-MEL. It has diverted to CHC and is currently flying a pattern over Banks Peninsula at FL150. Very unusual, possibly the crew trouble shooting a tech fault?

http://www.flightradar24.com/ANZ837/530e019

Doesn't look like it squawking anything, normal possible something Medical? Looks like its now on its way to AKL or WLG.

Am I right in think NZ's A320 can't dump fuel, so have to buy it off till they reach there max landing weight?
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:35 am

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 180):
There seems to be something wrong with NZ837 ZK-OJH ZQN-MEL. It has diverted to CHC and is currently flying a pattern over Banks Peninsula at FL150. Very unusual, possibly the crew trouble shooting a tech fault?

http://www.flightradar24.com/ANZ837/530e019

Looks like it has just landed at AKL at 18:30, rather strange
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 6:05 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 179):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 178): Gone will be the days of the most friendly passenger terminal in New Zealand in terms of allowing non passengers to spend as much time with their loved one/friends as possible before boarding the flight or waiting at the gate for them to disembark. Now WLG will become just a common airport shortly That's if they can afford the car-parking bill at WLG

Clearly your getting WLG mixed up with AKL! Below is the cheapest rates at the closest parking area to the terminal for AKL, WLG and CHC

Cheapest rates for 30mins:

WLG - $4.50
AKL - $6
CHC - $4

Cheapest rates for 1 hour:

WLG - $9.50
AKL - $10
CHC - $8

Quoting zkncj (Reply 181):
Am I right in think NZ's A320 can't dump fuel, so have to buy it off till they reach there max landing weight?

Why would an aircraft not be able to dump fuel in an emergency?
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 6:27 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 182):
Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 180):
There seems to be something wrong with NZ837 ZK-OJH ZQN-MEL. It has diverted to CHC and is currently flying a pattern over Banks Peninsula at FL150. Very unusual, possibly the crew trouble shooting a tech fault?

http://www.flightradar24.com/ANZ837/530e019

Looks like it has just landed at AKL at 18:30, rather strange

Times like this we need NZ1's cellphone number. Can we, please?  
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4731
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 6:34 am

Quoting CHCalfonzo (Reply 180):

There seems to be something wrong with NZ837 ZK-OJH ZQN-MEL. It has diverted to CHC and is currently flying a pattern over Banks Peninsula at FL150. Very unusual, possibly the crew trouble shooting a tech fault?

Now on final approach to Auckland.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 181):
Am I right in think NZ's A320 can't dump fuel, so have to buy it off till they reach there max landing weight?

A320s aren't able to dump fuel. 737s can't do so either.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 183):
Why would an aircraft not be able to dump fuel in an emergency?

Because the difference between the Maximum Takeoff Weight and Maximum Landing Weight isn't so large on the narrowbodies. If necessary they can do an overweight landing, though there will need to be a maintenance check afterwards if that happens.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 6:47 am

AKL is showing with an departure time of 2000 for NZ837, looks like ZK-OJM has just left the gate as NZ6009. So maybe an replacement aircraft has been sourced?
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 173):

Those who know about the lower cabin altitude will attribute their fresher feeling and reduced jetlag to it. Those who don't know about it will attribute the lack of jetlag to luck. As an Airbus fanboy, I wanted the lower cabin altitude benefits to just be Boeing marketing BS, but it isn't.

Hmm I wouldn't be so sure about that.
Boeing has in their brochures stated that the humidity is in low double digits. (Knowing a few people, Ive heard that real tests show max 12%). Most normal planes sees it around 6-7%.
Your kiwi house is likely to have 60-70% humidity.

Ordering the full CTT System CAIR product suite would have given the 787 around 25% cabin humidity. Something LH for instance has in its first class on the A380. However we rarely hear people speak of that experience of the 25% in humidity, thats offered on airlines who have installed that system. So as an Airbus fanboy you can breathe easy. The airlines who have invested in higher humidity gets double the digits any 787 gets, yet no one seem to mention it.

Having tried the full CTT System I can vouch that it makes an enormous difference. However the 787 doesn't come close to that feeling. I still get a dry nose from the 787 and I am as jetlagged. Maybe others are different but I put it down to airline buffs and placebo effect.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:06 am

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 187):
Hmm I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Neither. Have done a bunch of flights longhaul on 788/789 services and not noticed anything different. As far as I'm concerned the biggest reason I felt so good after the NH flight was because it was 8 across, and on ET because I had bulkhead or business class and NZ because the Premium Economy is the best thing about the 789s. By the same measure my flight on NZF in Y was possibly my most miserable in in the last 200 flights. Travelling comfortably is about finding your own rhythm and combining it with a good product, not gimmicky nonsense. The cabin air that was pumped in from outside while there was still smoking sections was probably fresher than the 787s...
 
PA515
Posts: 1686
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:23 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 186):
AKL is showing with an departure time of 2000 for NZ837, looks like ZK-OJM has just left the gate as NZ6009. So maybe an replacement aircraft has been sourced?

ZK-OJF departed AKL at 2108 NZDT as NZ837 and should arrive MEL about 2310 AEDT. NZ850 MEL- WLG will be about 6 hrs late 0010/0545.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1686
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:20 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 189):

NZ850 MEL-WLG is ZK-OJK 2158/0315, so only 3 hrs 25 min late. ZK-OJF will overnight MEL.

PA515
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 12:18 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 190):

Surprised its allowed to land at 3.15am in WLG
 
zkncj
Posts: 4365
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 6:21 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 191):
Surprised its allowed to land at 3.15am in WLG

Isn't there an rule that allows an delayed flight to land after 1.00am, just you can't plan to have an flight at that time.

Anyway if there was an fine, it probably still would be cheaper than cancelling the flight.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 8:00 pm

And we still don't know what was wrong with the original 837? Would have to have been a tech issue - for medical it would make zero sense to circle over CHC and then finally divert to AKL.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:27 pm

I took a flight over Victorville yesterday and spotted the only Air NZ plane there - ZK-SUH. Engines and winglets gone and it looks like the seats are still inside.. How I wish they emptied the interior in AKL (and sold seats etc) before sending these to the desert!

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7505/15576561234_32196b6ddd_b.jpgAir New Zealand Boeing 747-400 by ANZ787900, on Flickr
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 9:38 pm

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 194):

Gut-wrenching!! A row of part-cannibalised NZ77Ws in the desert on the other hand..............
 
a7ala
Posts: 400
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:46 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 177):
e.g in WLG to land and 77tone A320 at peak your looking at $392.60, then 171 passengers at $768, so you landing cost becomes $1161. Not forgetting you also have to pay an passenger terminal fee $821, plus $68 in noise fees. You're now looking at $2050 to land & unload your A320. https://www.wellingtonairport.co.nz/yk-files/48022a68a248d08df0f53c80efce5a86/WIAL%20Schedule%20of%20Charges%20-%201%20June%202014%20to%2031%20March%202019.pdf


There appears to be differential charging for international and domestic A320 flights. For International, I suspect WLG's charging sits between AKL and CHC according to their schedules (CHC's charges look to be ramping up pretty quickly to pay for the new terminal). For domestic I would guess WLG is more expensive than the other two by a couple of $$/pax. But WLG appears to be the only NZ airport which gives published rebates to international and domestic growth (50% discount for new pax carried over previous year in the case of domestic) - further down in the charging schedule.

Finally it looks as though WLG has significantly lower charges for widebody aircraft greater than 100T (10% of the MCTOW charge than less than 100T).
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 173):
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 163):
Qantas and EK are both fantastic, especially in Y. The food, the service

TBH I've always found EK's service to be pretty average. Nowhere near the standard of QF or NZ. Though it is nice that EK have a hot towel service.

Fair enough, although I have found the opposite to be true. I was appalled by the standard of service and the quality of the meals on my last long haul NZ flights in Y. They have fallen a long way in a fairly short period of time if that experience is anywhere near their benchmark standards. Comparable trips on EK have been worlds apart, and as you mentioned, QF are even better.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 192):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 191):
Surprised its allowed to land at 3.15am in WLG

Isn't there an rule that allows an delayed flight to land after 1.00am, just you can't plan to have an flight at that time.

Anyway if there was an fine, it probably still would be cheaper than cancelling the flight.

You may land up to thirty minutes after the respective curfews (00:00 for domestic and 01:00 for international) provided the reason for the delay falls into one of the permissible categories (detailed in the AIP). If you land after this time the airline will be prosecuted so it's not a case of landing anyway and just paying the bill (as Jetconnect found out).

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 165):
Agreed, and this is one of the reasons I very much dislike the process of commoditization of the flight deck through buying type ratings and paying to fly. It changes the dynamic over time in a way I believe contributes to the collective loss of memory.

Quite agree.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:26 am

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 197):
Quoting zkncj (Reply 192):Quoting 777ER (Reply 191):Surprised its allowed to land at 3.15am in WLGIsn't there an rule that allows an delayed flight to land after 1.00am, just you can't plan to have an flight at that time. Anyway if there was an fine, it probably still would be cheaper than cancelling the flight. You may land up to thirty minutes after the respective curfews (00:00 for domestic and 01:00 for international) provided the reason for the delay falls into one of the permissible categories (detailed in the AIP). If you land after this time the airline will be prosecuted so it's not a case of landing anyway and just paying the bill (as Jetconnect found out).

Only an emergency landing or emergency departure during an emergency (national/regional) is allowed after curfew.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread 150

Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:33 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 198):
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 197):
Quoting zkncj (Reply 192):Quoting 777ER (Reply 191):Surprised its allowed to land at 3.15am in WLGIsn't there an rule that allows an delayed flight to land after 1.00am, just you can't plan to have an flight at that time. Anyway if there was an fine, it probably still would be cheaper than cancelling the flight. You may land up to thirty minutes after the respective curfews (00:00 for domestic and 01:00 for international) provided the reason for the delay falls into one of the permissible categories (detailed in the AIP). If you land after this time the airline will be prosecuted so it's not a case of landing anyway and just paying the bill (as Jetconnect found out).

Only an emergency landing or emergency departure during an emergency (national/regional) is allowed after curfew.

Kind of correct. Once the thirty minute grace period is over, if you do not have an exemption, then you cannot land without facing prosecution. I believe exemptions are/have been granted in the past to operators (mainly turbo prop air ambulance). It is also available as an alternate for international operations to New Zealand, although if you land, you can't depart until after the curfew. I would assume Head of state ops are also permissible.

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