777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 18, 2015 12:50 am

Welcome to the 166th edition of the New Zealand Aviation Threads.

Link to part #165 New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 165 (by 777ER Sep 9 2015 in Civil Aviation)
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:50 pm

Does anyone have any news on -OKN yet?
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 18, 2015 9:17 pm

Quoting 77west (Reply 1):
Does anyone have any news on -OKN yet?

I wonder what had to be dismantled to get at the trouble . If assemblies had to be removed and replaced that could be quite a task.
 
rendezvous
Posts: 541
Joined: Sun May 20, 2001 9:14 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:26 am

Coolian2: I could have sworn I saw the Star Alliance bird wearing a plain rudder during the week - did my eyes deceive?

Yes it has a white rudder at the moment.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:47 am

Qantas is set to inspire a fresh wave of Australian aviation nostalgia with a second Boeing 737-800 to be painted in a retro livery as part of celebrations marking the national carrier’s 95th Birthday.


“The Retro Roo II livery is part of celebrations for our 95th anniversary and it’s also a good contrast to the innovation happening at Qantas, particularly as we start to prepare for our first B787 Dreamliners in 2017”.


The new livery will be chosen from the 12 liveries that Qantas has had since its first aircraft in 1920. It will be applied to one of Qantas’ existing 67 Boeing 737 aircraft, which are undergoing a refurbishment program in Brisbane and Sydney.


Once the cabin refresh is completed, the aircraft will be flown to Townsville to be repainted in a classic new livery – a process which is expected to take four days, before entering service on flights across Australia and the Tasman to New Zealand.

http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/med...-announces-plans-for-retro-roo-ii/

Anyone know which Jetconnect aircraft is currently undergoing/about to under go a refit?
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4040
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:45 am

Ex VH-TJG has been registered to Airwork (ZK-TLJ).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/21914813829

Ex ZK-SUI getting parted out:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/22169434982

Quote:
Whilst I'm out of the loop on some things (I initially thought OKN was overseas just for painting), I do know OKP has had a reprieve of sorts and will no longer be painted in Nov. Still a paint slot booked, its just changed to a -200 (OKG last I knew).

Great news!

Quote:
Same as the A380 - it's the slab sides that makes for a more appealing cabin. The A350 has smaller versions of the A380 windows which are average

Ah right. I do like the vertical cabin walls of the A380's lower deck.

Quote:
The A350 window is marginally wider than the 787 though not as deep so I don't really understand what you're saying here.

The A380 has quite a deep window socket.

Quote:
Well a CV 748F with minimum separation above and beside my flight FRA-DOH for example..

That's very fortunate.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8330
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:22 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 4):
Anyone know which Jetconnect aircraft is currently undergoing/about to under go a refit?

It doesn't say anything about jetconnect, and in fact there are 67 VH- aircraft in the fleet as the article mentions. The 8 ZK- are not included. Now that 707JT has been grounded I expect it vill be that V jet livery.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:21 pm

It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
User avatar
csturdiv
Posts: 1974
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:33 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:02 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 5):
Ex VH-TJG has been registered to Airwork (ZK-TLJ).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/21914813829

Will this be operating for AirFreight NZ as they phase out their Convairs in favour of B737 freighters?
An American expat from the ORD area living and working in SYD
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:47 am

CX 197 diverted to SYD today due to a problem with an engine.. Surprised the media isn't all over this. Maybe they handled it better. AFAIK, it's still in SYD.. Crew would have timed out too. Can't wait for the 77W to start - hopefully it'll mean a more reliable service along with the better seats.

[Edited 2015-10-20 00:47:35]
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1180
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:47 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 9):
Can't wait for the 77W to start -

I thought the A340s will be replaced by A350s on the Auckland run?

Cheers
micha
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:51 am

Quoting ZKEOJ (Reply 10):

The 77W is being used this summer on CX197/8. And the flight looks like it'll return to the 343 before the likely A350 EIS onto long haul routes in May (I think that was the plan).
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1180
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:18 am

ah, that makes sense   Thanks for the update!

Just did AKL-HKG-AKL on NZ on the refurbished 77E last week, and it wasn't too bad. Out in Y and back in PE. I somehow found 10 abreast in Y less bad than on the 77W, which shows how it is a personal feeling, since the seats and fuselage width are the same... Both flights were packed to the last seat in all classes!
 
User avatar
SXI899
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:02 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:25 am

Quoting csturdiv (Reply 8):
Will this be operating for AirFreight NZ as they phase out their Convairs in favour of B737 freighters?

Being in Toll colours and having been delivered to BNE, I doubt it.
I believe that the Air Freight B737 are due early next year.
We deliver......
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4040
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:30 am

Quoting csturdiv (Reply 8):
Will this be operating for AirFreight NZ as they phase out their Convairs in favour of B737 freighters?

That's the plan. Admittedly, you might see them swapped with ZK-JTQ (Australian based) occasionally when maintenance comes up.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 4):
Once the cabin refresh is completed, the aircraft will be flown to Townsville to be repainted in a classic new livery – a process which is expected to take four days, before entering service on flights across Australia and the Tasman to New Zealand.

What they're referring to here is that over summer, a few of the additional QF trans-tasman services are operated by mainline, rather than JetConnect which means that Retro Roo II might have a chance of visiting. As it stands, Retro Roo I has only visited once (subbing for ZK-ZQC when it was in maintenance). Mendoowoorrji has visited more often, but still only a handful of times.

It would be awesome if a JetConnect aircraft was painted in a retro livery....even awesomer if Air New Zealand would take the plunge and do one.
First to fly the 787-9
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1500
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 1:18 pm

""Hawaiian Air today at its media day event pulled the wraps off its rumored lie-flat premium product for its A330 fleet."

HA Announces A330 Lie-flat Seat Product (by LAXintl Oct 19 2015 in Civil Aviation)

looks interesting and will put some pressure on NZ to upgrade the HNL route to a 787 quicker maybe? but lets hope they take the 763 off it and make it 772/787 split.
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
Thai77w
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 10:56 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 1:24 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 4):
Qantas is set to inspire a fresh wave of Australian aviation nostalgia with a second Boeing 737-800 to be painted in a retro livery as part of celebrations marking the national carrier’s 95th Birthday.


“The Retro Roo II livery is part of celebrations for our 95th anniversary and it’s also a good contrast to the innovation happening at Qantas, particularly as we start to prepare for our first B787 Dreamliners in 2017”.


The new livery will be chosen from the 12 liveries that Qantas has had since its first aircraft in 1920. It will be applied to one of Qantas’ existing 67 Boeing 737 aircraft, which are undergoing a refurbishment program in Brisbane and Sydney.


Once the cabin refresh is completed, the aircraft will be flown to Townsville to be repainted in a classic new livery – a process which is expected to take four days, before entering service on flights across Australia and the Tasman to New Zealand.

http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/med...-announces-plans-for-retro-roo-ii/

Anyone know which Jetconnect aircraft is currently undergoing/about to under go a refit?

From BNE at least VH registered aircraft have been operating AKL flights at least once a week. Usually Saturday.
Aircraft types I've been on: PA31,Q300,AT75,AT76,717,733,738,739ER,763,772,77E,773,77W,788,789,744,319,320,332,333,346,359,380
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:17 pm

Small Fry stuff:

Kiwi Regional is "unhappy" with Queenstown Airport because of their gate allocation and because bookings for DUD-ZQN suck:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7301...ueenstown-airport-and-ticket-sales

"Kiwi Regional Airlines unhappy with Queenstown Airport and ticket sales

Kiwi Regional Airlines chief executive Ewan Wilson is disappointed with tickets sales and treatment by Queenstown Airport.

Airline chief executive Ewan Wilson said "overall we've been very disappointed with ticket sales (between Dunedin and Queenstown). We have been really surprised how poor they have been."

He said they were also "very unhappy" it had been allocated Gate 1 at Queenstown Airport, which was "miles away from the terminal" and unclearly marked for passengers."


Meanwhile, Barrier Airlines service Kaitaia-AKL is in trouble:

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/new...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11531954

"Last ditch bid to save Kaitaia air service

Barrier Air has told Far North Holdings and the Far North District Council that it intends to withdraw its daily service between Kaitaia and Auckland at the end of January, unless it can boost passenger numbers."


More posiively, perhaps, Polynesian Airlines plans to start APW-AKL "next month":

http://news.pngfacts.com/2015/10/polynesian-airlines-to-start.html

"Polynesian Airlines starts its international flights from Apia to Auckland next month.

Long term, there are plans for Tonga, Brisbane and Sydney, Australia. The man behind the plan is Polynesian Airlines Chief Executive Officer, Seiuli Alvin Tuala."

Tuala told the Sunday Samoan that strategies were now in place to minimize the risks, which put the company in the red in the past. The issuing of free tickets, as well as cargo being flown despite not having been paid for, had caused issues then, he said.

“All of those things have been eliminated. There are going to be no free tickets. There are going to be no upgrades and none of the things that we had in the past. You’ve got to control that."

The jet will be code shared with Solomon Airlines and flown by two local pilots, Dean Sefo and Su’a Vincent Mene.

They trained on an intensive course in New Zealand to qualify to fly the A-320 aircraft. The crew come from Solomon Airlines and will gradually include Samoans.


The A320, then, and not the 727 in the photo with the article.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2715
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:54 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 5):
Ah right. I do like the vertical cabin walls of the A380's lower deck.

I find the lower deck cabin totally sub-par - curved walls so window seat pax can't lean against them, itsy-bitsy windows. Upper deck is great, but that's probably also because you're usually in a premium calss for that experience.

Quoting mariner (Reply 17):
Small Fry stuff:

Great update, thanks.

KRA - boo hoo. As if DUD-ZQN was ever a goer.

Kaitaia: A real shame. Maybe they reduce to 5 weekly first? I hope this survives.

Polynesian: I'm not sure whether to laugh at them identifying free upgrades/tickets/cargo as "problems" or the fact they can name the two (just two?!) pilots more. Or maybe cry? What kind of two-bit operation is this going to be? Is it a lease from Solomon Airlines? Why not just lease in their air crews as well? And I still don't understand how this gels with the Virgin deal. It would be great to see some actual competition on NZ-Samoa flights (the Virgin-NZ stitch up - ostensibly not applying to the Pacific - is a joke) but I'm not holding my breath.
 
aklrno
Posts: 1537
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:22 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 17):
Airline chief executive Ewan Wilson said "overall we've been very disappointed with ticket sales (between Dunedin and Queenstown). We have been really surprised how poor they have been."

He said they were also "very unhappy" it had been allocated Gate 1 at Queenstown Airport, which was "miles away from the terminal" and unclearly marked for passengers."

Has this guy ever been to a real airport? Even to AKL? Queenstown is tiny, it's a short walk to any gate. Would he like his passengers to go through outbound security for no reason at all? Maybe he just wants to feel like a big airline, parking next to the jumbo A320's. I think gate 1 is an advantage. He just has to advertise it as the quickest gate (arriving or departing) at the airport.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:37 pm

Quoting aklrno (Reply 19):
it's a short walk to any gate.

The airport noted that in their response:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7301...ueenstown-airport-and-ticket-sales

"However, Airport Corporation operations general manager Mike Clay said Gate 1 was assigned to the airline as it was "specifically designed for Turboprop aircraft".

"The gate is designated for passengers not required to be screened for domestic flights (under 90 seats) and is conveniently located next to Airspresso café in the main terminal concourse.

"It's approximately an extra 10 metre walk for passengers from the aircraft to the terminal."


mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Sylus
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:27 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 18):
KRA - boo hoo. As if DUD-ZQN was ever a goer.

They would be better with DUD-IVC. Bigger permanent population and plenty of people connecting to the University and the two affiliated hospitals. Never really thought DUD-ZQN was going to work, HLZ-AKL would of been my first choice.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:47 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 20):
"It's approximately an extra 10 metre walk for passengers from the aircraft to the terminal."

Is that all? I mean yeah if it was 50 metres or something maybe he'd have a point, 10m is no problem at all. I think he's just trying to use it all as a diversion from the fact that the bookings for the route are not what he wanted. But, 6 days until lift-off apparently, the website still reads "subject to regulatory approval"...
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6875
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:40 am

Some of the Q300's now have a refreshed cabin with black seats and carpet, looks pretty damn cool tbh. The whole fleet is being 'upgraded' to these new interiors
 
Sylus
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 4:57 am

KRA have just successfully received their air operators certificate (as seen on their Facebook page) meaning they are first airline in over 10 years to be issued one from the CAA.

Turns out they will make the 27th so good luck I guess!.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:41 pm

In Stuff today:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/733063...with-singapore-hong-kong-and-dubai

While I support the runway extension for reasons of safety and flexibility, I think the council officials need to stop making it out that all these airlines are lining up to fly to Wellington once the runway extension is finished. It is well-documented that no airline has offered any solid intention to fly long-haul from Wellington, insinuating that they have is dishonest and makes this whole extension look like a council prestige project.

Quoting Sylus (Reply 24):

Will be very interesting to see how Wilson does this time, while I'm not holding out much hope of it being here in the long-run, it will be nice to have a Saab back in the skies here.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3377
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:48 pm

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 25):
While I support the runway extension for reasons of safety and flexibility, I think the council officials need to stop making it out that all these airlines are lining up to fly to Wellington once the runway extension is finished. It is well-documented that no airline has offered any solid intention to fly long-haul from Wellington, insinuating that they have is dishonest and makes this whole extension look like a council prestige project.

My concern with this is the lack of uptake by Intentional airlines, will effectively put extra cost of domesitc passengers and if anything hurt WLG.

$300million will take along time to pay of, with an A320/738 landings.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3377
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:52 pm

Quoting aklrno (Reply 19):
Has this guy ever been to a real airport? Even to AKL? Queenstown is tiny, it's a short walk to any gate. Would he like his passengers to go through outbound security for no reason at all? Maybe he just wants to feel like a big airline, parking next to the jumbo A320's. I think gate 1 is an advantage. He just has to advertise it as the quickest gate (arriving or departing) at the airport.

His past airline "Kiwi Intentional Airlines" operated out of secondary airports like HLZ, we're he though he would be safe from the big guys. Which result in NZ leasing an 757, and starting Freedom Air.

Don't see what his problem is with gate one in ZQN? NZ uses it for its ATR72-500/600 services into ZQN.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:16 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 26):
My concern with this is the lack of uptake by Intentional airlines, will effectively put extra cost of domesitc passengers and if anything hurt WLG.

$300million will take along time to pay of, with an A320/738 landings.

You are right in this regard, but the council is making it clear that this extension will go ahead, for better or worse, if the relevant consents are granted. I'm mainly worried that they're selling it to ratepayers as a means of ending the AKL hegemony on long-haul flights, which is very unlikely to be the truth. I know it's a tall order for council officials to be up-front and realistic, but this will lead to a lot of very disgruntled ratepayers when it's finished and Wellingtonians will still have to fly through AKL, CHC or Australia to get to most (if not all) long haul destinations. I'm happy they're doing this to future proof the airport and not put themselves in an AKL situation where they wait until the airport is bursting at the seams for them to do something about it, but they're selling it as a sure fire way to link Wellington to numerous long haul destinations, which just isn't the short-medium term outcome, maybe not even long term.
 
aklrno
Posts: 1537
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:59 pm

All these posts suggest that it's the council's decision to make for the runway lengthening. Isn't the airport owned by Infratil (2/3) and the council (1/3)? As an Infratil shareholder I ought to know what's going on, but I don't. Is the runway ownership separate from the terminal and parking?

I don't care if the council wants to waste some money, but I assume Infratil (the majority owner) would not extend the runway as a matter of prestige or competition with AKL, but only if it will generate a profit. Anyone know Infratil's position?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8330
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:28 pm

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 28):
Wellingtonians will still have to fly through AKL, CHC or Australia to get to most (if not all) long haul destinations

I never understood why people fly to AKL to fly an airline like SQ/CZ when they can fly from CHC. So much easier. Also, when you have a 3rd flight anyway it has got to be better to pick up your longhaul out of SYD anyway.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 27):
Don't see what his problem is with gate one in ZQN? NZ uses it for its ATR72-500/600 services into ZQN.

Yep. his argument is null and void. I have departed from that gate a number of times on NZ flights and never thought of it being worthy of complaint. The problem with Wilson is that he is a whiner. His airline is under the pump and can't sell enough tickets and yet he is moaning about freaking gates.

Quoting Sylus (Reply 24):
Turns out they will make the 27th so good luck I guess!.

Anyone with bookings up until about 3rd Nov should still be good to add another airline/type to the logbook. After that it's anyone's guess...

Quoting mariner (Reply 17):
Barrier Air has told Far North Holdings and the Far North District Council that it intends to withdraw its daily service between Kaitaia and Auckland at the end of January, unless it can boost passenger numbers."

Thus vindicating NZ's decision to pull out. A total waste of time and money and KAT is certainly not worthy of daily air service. If CHT can service 3 flights a week total to AKL/WLG/CHC then KAT should only feasibly muster 1 a week in winter 2 a week in Summer. The Council should discuss which day of the week they want and what time of day to allow for maximum connections. A milk run to KAT via AKL-WRG/KKE-KAT might be better, but in all likelihood they just need to focus on other things.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:23 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 26):
My concern with this is the lack of uptake by Intentional airlines

Do you really expect an airline to announce a new route several years in advance? No one knows (except WIAL) what airlines they have spoken to, or what airlines have expressed interest or not.
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2715
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:26 am

Quoting aklrno (Reply 29):
I don't care if the council wants to waste some money, but I assume Infratil (the majority owner) would not extend the runway as a matter of prestige or competition with AKL, but only if it will generate a profit. Anyone know Infratil's position?

The runway extension will bolster the capital value of the airport, regardless of the uptake from long haul carriers. So they can then justify increasing charges to existing users of the airport. Long haul flights would just be extra cream for Infratil.

It happened in Australia where certain states allowed electricity transmitters (the dudes who own the powerlines) to over invest in their infrastructure, supposedly in an attempt to prepare for massive increases in power demand. The demand never materialised, but they were left with massively over-capable infrastructure. Since then they've been allowed to increase their charges to retailers and ultimately consumers by 20 per cent a year. So no matter what, consumers pay and the people who took the risk got off scott free. When in real;ity they should have suffered the losses themselves.


It's an accounting exercise that will rort local ratepayers.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3377
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:52 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 31):
Do you really expect an airline to announce a new route several years in advance? No one knows (except WIAL) what airlines they have spoken to, or what airlines have expressed interest or not.

When public money being spent, you'd at least expect the council to have proof that some would use the investment. It would be like building an stadium, then hoping that someone books at event.

The Wellington council area has around 200,000 people, so $300million is around $1500/head. Surely there better use of rate payers money?

We've already got two full International Airports, for an country of 4million thats plenty.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4040
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:13 am

The final 737 has left the country. ZK-NGI departed on Wednesday and appears to have found a new owner in Canada.

A passenger died aboard FJ430 (DQ-FJF) this morning.  

Also it appears that last night's HA446 service was cancelled. N389HA just departed back home as HA9980. Not sure if it has pax aboard or not.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 18):
As if DUD-ZQN was ever a goer.

   Can't say I'm surprised.

Quoting mariner (Reply 20):
"It's approximately an extra 10 metre walk for passengers from the aircraft to the terminal."

  

Quoting Sylus (Reply 24):
KRA have just successfully received their air operators certificate (as seen on their Facebook page) meaning they are first airline in over 10 years to be issued one from the CAA.

Credit where credit is due; that is quite an achievement. The amount of paperwork involved in such an exercise is mind boggling.

Quoting rendezvous (Reply 3):
Yes it has a white rudder at the moment.
http://instagram.com/p/9HOecHqx80/

Quoting zkncj (Reply 33):
The Wellington council area has around 200,000 people, so $300million is around $1500/head. Surely there better use of rate payers money?

$300,000,000 for 300 meters of additional length. I know this is New Zealand, but that seems excessively costly.

[Edited 2015-10-22 21:15:14]
First to fly the 787-9
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:23 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 33):

Just remember that this extension isn't yet 100% confirmed. WIAL are apparently giving a presentation to the Council shortly with more information. Due to the nature of the presentation I suspect it will be confidential.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 33):
The Wellington council area has around 200,000 people

And the rest! The Wellington Council population area is around 449,000, take into account the population for the wider Wellington region (which will most likely be included in paying as I know my local council has approved funding) and your looking at around a population of 800,000+
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
Mr AirNZ
Posts: 914
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:24 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:36 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 35):
And the rest! The Wellington Council population area is around 449,000, take into account the population for the wider Wellington region (which will most likely be included in paying as I know my local council has approved funding) and your looking at around a population of 800,000+

Can you provide a breakdown of your figures? Because yours differs markedly from what Statistics New Zealand and the relevant councils think.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 33):
The Wellington council area has around 200,000 people

Agreed. That's certainly what the council themselves think their population is http://forecast.idnz.co.nz/wellington/home
Latest data is not even 500,000 for the entire region http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/...dex.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLECODE7501
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:41 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 31):
Quoting zkncj (Reply 26):
My concern with this is the lack of uptake by Intentional airlines

Do you really expect an airline to announce a new route several years in advance? No one knows (except WIAL) what airlines they have spoken to, or what airlines have expressed interest or not.

I went to the meeting.

The main point of it was for the av research firm (commissioned by WLG) to present its new findings on the commercial viability for the runway extension - and if it could/would succeed in attracting a non-stop long-haul service from WLG.

Alex Welch from InterVISTAS flew in from YVR to say that that greater WLG currently provides enough traffic for a thrice weekly A359/789 service to/from HKG or SIN.

By 2019, when the extension is projected to be completed, the projected traffic will be enough for a daily service to either of these ports.

He and WLG CEO Steven Sanderson told Councillors that airlines will not commit to their own full analysis until WLG commits to the extension, in turn, they will not commit publicly until 6-12 months out from service.

Welch told me separately that SQ and CX were the most likely contenders with A359's.

Dep Mayor Justin Lester brought up John Key's recent announcement of a predicted increase of 1-million tourists a year by 2030 with 650K arriving from China.

Sanderson said this accounts for 60-80 extra weekly flights to New Zealand and that WLG and CHC should benefit from this too.

Sanderson also said discussions are ongoing with specific airlines (presumably SQ, CX and EK) and MH mentioned as a possibility.

Other points of interest in the preso...
* WLG travel times to HKG or SIN decrease by 39%
* travel times to Europe decrease by 19%
* daily flights expected to stimulate inbound market by up to 30%
* current outbound WLG long-haul travellers 750/day
* refrigerated freight links to Asia
* funding model not discussed
* Clr Helene Ritchie said "if it's clearly so commercially viable, why doesn't the airport pay for for it?"
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4387
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:02 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 34):

$300,000,000 for 300 meters of additional length. I know this is New Zealand, but that seems excessively costly.


Good point it does seem a tad over priced. I know it is into the sea and all but that's still pricey.
64 types. 44 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8330
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:53 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 38):
I know it is into the sea and all but that's still pricey.

It's normal for the marked up ripoff that New Zealand has become in recent times for everything.
Flown to 147 Airports in 62 Countries on 83 Operators and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:16 am

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 37):

So the general consensus appears to be: 'The numbers theoretically stack up in favour of one long-haul route only, but there are no guarantees'

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 37):
* funding model not discussed
* Clr Helene Ritchie said "if it's clearly so commercially viable, why doesn't the airport pay for for it?"

Thant's a bit of a shame, but I imagine they don't even know themselves the ratio of who will fund what. Clearly this is a very expensive project, so yeah, I think Ritchie does have a valid point there; the airport itself has been rather silent on why they can't (help) fund it. As it will be the airport that stands to benefit from all the long haul airlines these councillors talk about, right?

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 37):
Welch told me separately that SQ and CX were the most likely contenders with A359's.

I just wonder what the opportunity cost is, of all the other routes they could send the latest A359, when it might just end up cannibalising their AKL and in SQ's case, CHC operations. Ah well, we'll have to find out once/if WLG commits to the extension.
 
axio
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:49 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 38):
Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 34):

$300,000,000 for 300 meters of additional length. I know this is New Zealand, but that seems excessively costly.

Good point it does seem a tad over priced. I know it is into the sea and all but that's still pricey.

I've always wondered about the cost of earthworks in NZ - they do seem to end up being quite high.

This is back of the envelope stuff for the fill...

Runway 34's elevation is 24 feet. Assuming the slope continues we could say the average height of the extension is about 7m, length is 300m, and width I guess around 100m, then we're talking 210,000 cubic metres of fill, plus whatever needs to go into the sea. For a really cheap fill at $20 per cube you're talking $4 million. Then you've got the cost of actually getting it to the site (unless they've got a nearby hill to move) 40 cubes at a time: ~5000 trips - 3 return trips a day from Belmont is 1700 trip-days, so the labour and machinery costs for moving the fill shouldn't be massive.

I'm sure the surface layers will require plenty of attention, and the runway and base itself will be much more expensive, but it is hard to see where the extra order of magnitude comes in.
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:52 am

Designing and implementing it such that the first strong southerly storm doesn't wash it away. This will be sitting pretty exposed to the full fury of the Cook Strait so building it right the first time is important. And doing it right will take time and effort. Plus you've got the tunnel you'll have to put under. Then all the other services. And any other runway infrastructure upgrades that are needed. I imagine the glideslope equipment will need to be moved. Plus insurance. Plus earthmoving equipment hire. PR and neighbor relations. It all adds up quickly.

If you want to half ass it then yeah, it can be done cheap. But given how much people complain when things are done ugly and cheap that then need massive remediation work later to fix the initial quick and dirty. Well you can understand aiming to do it right the first time.

And as for Infratil. If they're unwilling to throw in to help build the extension then I'd say the council should make an agreement that any extra profit from the landing fees from the larger planes goes straight to the council for x number of years.

For the record I'm a Wellingtonian who's warily supportive of the extension. One stop to LHR via SIN would be amazing.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:27 pm

Quoting axio (Reply 41):
Runway 34's elevation is 24 feet. Assuming the slope continues we could say the average height of the extension is about 7m, length is 300m, and width I guess around 100m, then we're talking 210,000 cubic metres of fill, plus whatever needs to go into the sea. For a really cheap fill at $20 per cube you're talking $4 million. Then you've got the cost of actually getting it to the site (unless they've got a nearby hill to move) 40 cubes at a time: ~5000 trips - 3 return trips a day from Belmont is 1700 trip-days, so the labour and machinery costs for moving the fill shouldn't be massive.

On this note, I read a 'letter to the editor' recently in the Dom-Post with a great suggestion from a reader. There are three big-ticket items that Wellington City and Wellington Region will potentially be contributing to in coming years:
* The airport runway extension
* Transmission Gully, and
* The second Mt Vic tunnel

The last of these will involve the removal of bored rock, essentially quarried stone, from Mt Vic. The reader suggested that this would be a no-brainer as southern extension fill. I concur.

The Transmission Gully project will offer other opportunities too.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 42):
And as for Infratil. If they're unwilling to throw in to help build the extension then I'd say the council should make an agreement that any extra profit from the landing fees from the larger planes goes straight to the council for x number of years.

I think that if they really believe in this and can put up an EVA positive outlook for the project, they should look at doing a bond or share issue to support it. I think the two owners of the airport should each pay their way, councils and Infratil.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 42):
For the record I'm a Wellingtonian who's warily supportive of the extension. One stop to LHR via SIN would be amazing.

Me too. And as a ratepayer I think we should pay for part of it but only if due diligence can show a good case for it and that we may financially benefit from it.

The 1972 runway extension proved a boon for business previously and I think direct links to PER and either SIN or HKG would be great for the city and region. Existing airlines QF, VA, JQ, FJ and NZ will also benefit by not having any limitations on their international narrow body operations.
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4387
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 11:40 am

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 43):
The 1972 runway extension proved a boon for business previously and I think direct links to PER and either SIN or HKG would be great for the city and region. Existing airlines QF, VA, JQ, FJ and NZ will also benefit by not having any limitations on their international narrow body operations.

And this is where the airport can charge a bit more... Tasman flights... If the airlines want to make use of the extensions to have better payload then they can pay for it. Domestically it won't be needed except for safety. Something WLG could get is CBR flights seeing as how most pax would be government types anyway. Mini-WLG hub...
64 types. 44 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:04 pm

Anyone know how much before flight time the NZ YVR check in desk opens ? Can't find a phone number that seems to work.

Thanks
 
zkncj
Posts: 3377
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:23 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 44):
And this is where the airport can charge a bit more... Tasman flights... If the airlines want to make use of the extensions to have better payload then they can p

The thing is do the airlines want it though? you'd think if they wanted it they would be crying out for it.

All would come down to how much the extra cost was, vs extra reneve.

NZ,QF,VA all seem to do fine out of WLG
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4387
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:44 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 46):
The thing is do the airlines want it though? you'd think if they wanted it they would be crying out for it.

in terms of their own operations they would use it however they see it as opening the door to competition (using freedom rights ex oz for example). They also don't want to have to pay for it even if they would benefit.
64 types. 44 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:02 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 42):
For the record I'm a Wellingtonian who's warily supportive of the extension. One stop to LHR via SIN would be amazing.

It would make a certain amount of sense. If there was a WLG-SIN service it would end up taking a fair chunk of New Zealand's eastbound long haul traffic, certainly for anyone living south of Palmerston North (an easy drive to WLG) and also the South Island. Probably justifying NZ or SQ switching an AKL flight to WLG.

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 34):
$300,000,000 for 300 meters of additional length. I know this is New Zealand, but that seems excessively costly.

Seven figures per metre of runway does seem up there, I must admit. But in overall terms - $300 million is a piddling sum. It's the cost of one long haul wide body aircraft. It's $75 for every resident of the country. It's the sort of money a government can find, if it needs to, with a few clicks on a spreadsheet. It's the politics which are the hurdle.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3377
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 166

Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:12 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 48):
Seven figures per metre of runway does seem up there, I must admit. But in overall terms - $300 million is a piddling sum. It's the cost of one long haul wide body aircraft. It's $75 for every resident of the country. It's the sort of money a government can find, if it needs to, with a few clicks on a spreadsheet. It's the politics which are the hurdle.

But why should the government be paying for it? WLG is partly owned by an private investment company, and the council.

AKL is owned privately, and partly by Auckland council. We don't see the government and council spending $300million on AKL do we? which probably derives its more than WLG in terms of return to the country. AKL is solely funded as an user pays method, in which if the user wants something they must pay. For example NZ wanted more domestic gates, they had to pay an large amount of the building cost for this project.

Don't see why as someone living in Auckland, I should be funding WLG for Long Haul flights. When also barely anyone from AKL would fly via WLG.-

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