Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:58 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 48):
I don't understand the obsession of some to cut and hack at the provincial network. Yes, it's more expensive to operate than the trunk routes, but if you can charge higher fares (as NZ does) then where's the problem?

To some extent that is correct, however the incorrect perspective is to view any market as unchanging, as a right or public service without giving NZ the right to independently decide whether or not serve a domestic market. NZ does not owe any market that cannot generate a profit in it's own right.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 8:23 am

Appears that CHC-PER is back again for a summer season from 10 Dec 2016 (though does not appear to be starting earlier than previous years), running PER-CHC on Mon/Fri and CHC-PER on Tue/Sat. Interestingly, the service shows in the NZ timetable as a B763, while the service that precedes it from AKL-PER is a 789. Assume that this is a mistake and that CHC-PER will also be a 789 next year?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:17 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 51):
Interestingly, the service shows in the NZ timetable as a B763, while the service that precedes it from AKL-PER is a 789. Assume that this is a mistake and that CHC-PER will also be a 789 next year?

The AKL-PER-AKL preceeding is the NZ177/178 right? It makes sense as the 763 will be occupied.
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:20 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 44):
've lost track of ATRs in The NZ fleet but MVG as delivered a while back. MVH maybe?

Should have been MVH as per Reply 30.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:48 am

Quoting SelandiaBaru (Reply 38):
At ISA conditions an ATR72-600 needs a runway of 1333m. GIS is 1310, so in Summer you would be looking at significant load reductions required to operate the ATR72-600 out of their an many other DC3/War era runways in NZ.
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43):
would have thought the ATR72 would be unlikely to have any significant problems operating from GIS with a full payload - or something not far short of it. I assume at MZFW (i.e. maximum traffic load) the required fuel for most flights to/from AKL would still leave the aircraft under MTOW or RTOW's on anything but the very hottest days, or when distant alternates are required.

1333m is at MTOW (Maximum Take Off Weight). 1175m with max pax load and fuel for 300nm.

http://www.atr-aircraft.com/datas/do...ter/27/15c2188_fiche_72_web_27.pdf

PA515
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:14 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 54):

Yeah should have checked with some ATR72 mates. I just remember there being limitations when they have operated ATR72 charters. But if a 200 kg hit was to be taken in summer then that is entirely manageable if the goal is fleet standardisation.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4744
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 7:00 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 51):
Interestingly, the service shows in the NZ timetable as a B763, while the service that precedes it from AKL-PER is a 789. Assume that this is a mistake and that CHC-PER will also be a 789 next year?
Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 52):
The AKL-PER-AKL preceeding is the NZ177/178 right?

The routing is AKL-PER-CHC-PER-AKL. This saves the aircraft flying a domestic sector from AKL to CHC and back.....a shame since that that route would have been a good way to log a few extra 767 sectors.  
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 8:41 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 56):
The routing is AKL-PER-CHC-PER-AKL.

Yes, exactly. The question is, though, given that the AKL-PER sector shows a 789, and the PER-CHC sector shows a 763, which aircraft is it? The 789, presumably. Perhaps NZ is biding its time to do a "big announcement" for the people of CHC that they will be getting the 789, and don't want to say anything too soon.
 
User avatar
SXI899
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:02 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:35 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 30):
Thanks Yorden. Will you be having Xmas in CHC courtesy of ZK-MVH?

I wish!
These two have been keeping me busy, and we still have at least one more ferry flight on the schedule for this year.
CHC won't be MVH's destination in New Zealand anyway  
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:33 pm

Work started on the city rail link today.

Just saying
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:33 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 56):
The routing is AKL-PER-CHC-PER-AKL

I know.   I'm asking about the NZ177/178 flight sectors being 787s.. I know it is on the cards with the 763 flights to DPS/SGN etc but I forgot the dates.
 
User avatar
vfw614
Posts: 4068
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:45 am

Don't see a reason for replacing the Q300s with ATR42s. Literally nobody buys ATR42 nowadays unless they are really needed because of their superior performance from shorter runways. If that is not needed, it makes more sense to go for the ATR72 as it is apparently insignificantly more expensive operation cost-wise than the ATR42. That is why the ATR72 is selling like hot bread whereas the ATR42 is selling very limited numbers. To have 30 additional seats to toy around with on the network makes a lot of sense if that flexibility incurs little additional cost.
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:29 am

ZK-MVO went KOE-TSV today. Must be getting the repaint at Flying Colours Aviation before heading over the Tasman. If painted all white, then adding the black should only take a few of days instead of the usual eleven to strip and repaint.

PA515
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:00 am

ZK-MVO is in primer with a white tail. Found this photo taken in TSV today.

http://portalgram.com/pic/1144734889599461981_12861177

PA515
 
NZ1
Head Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:15 am

Quoting SXI899 (Reply 58):

MVH and MVI, which is being delivered very shortly afterwards, are having their induction checks carried out in HLZ. Both NSN and CHC do not have any spare capacity at the moment.

NZ1
 
User avatar
SXI899
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:02 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:38 pm

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 64):

MVH and MVI, which is being delivered very shortly afterwards, are having their induction checks carried out in HLZ. Both NSN and CHC do not have any spare capacity at the moment.

I'm always careful in what I post, especially if I don't know whether certain info is already public knowledge.
MVH is due into HLZ on Christmas Eve (early evening between 1800-1900). MVI will arrive early in the new year.
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:30 pm

Quoting SXI899 (Reply 65):
I'm always careful in what I post, especially if I don't know whether certain info is already public knowledge.
MVH is due into HLZ on Christmas Eve (early evening between 1800-1900). MVI will arrive early in the new year.

Appreciate that Yorden. Delivery of ZK-MVI in Jan 2016 was mentioned in the 2014 Air NZ Annual Report.

From information in the 2015 Annual Report Analyst Presentation and Media Releases, ZK-MVJ to ZK-MVM will be delivered by 30 Jun 2016, ZK-MVN in Jul 2016 and ZK-MVP in Nov 2016. Some detail on the fourteen for delivery 2017 to 2020 should be in the 2016 Interim Report Analyst Presentation in Feb 2016.

PA515

[Edited 2015-12-21 09:39:55]
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:50 pm

An item of trivia, thus far NZ has operated -OKB, OKC and OKH to EZE. These must be three of the four brought up to EDTO 300min. standard. OKB and OKD through OKH have been used to IAH . OKA is the only 77E that has not served beyond 180-mins. thus far.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Wed Dec 23, 2015 3:44 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 67):
OKA is the only 77E that has not served beyond 180-mins. thus far.

Have noticed that OKA has been on AKL-YVR-AKL allot recently, with doing some Island trips in-between.
 
Mr AirNZ
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:24 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:19 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 67):
An item of trivia, thus far NZ has operated -OKB, OKC and OKH to EZE. These must be three of the four brought up to EDTO 300min. standard. OKB and OKD through OKH have been used to IAH . OKA is the only 77E that has not served beyond 180-mins. thus far.

OKA, OKD, OKE and OKG are 290minute birds, OKB, OKC, OKF and OKH are 330minute birds.

OKA has likely done a multitude of >180minute flying, you just don't notice it on a day to day basis e.g. Southbound flights ex LA often use 240 minutes to fly the most efficient UPR (user preferred route) on a given day.

Also, to complete your trivia set, OKF currently down to do the next EZE flight tomorrow.

[Edited 2015-12-23 13:23:29]
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:55 pm

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 69):
Southbound flights ex LA often use 240 minutes to fly the most efficient UPR (user preferred route) on a given day.

Thanks for the reminder.I had forgotten about this. I believe the further the track keeps to the east the more likely it is to be 240-min.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 9:36 am

Just saw a photo on fb from a friend on a JQ A320 (VH-VGI) to MEL this evening whose #1 engine flamed out a few min into the flight.. Safely returned to AKL.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/vh-vgi/#85ca368
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 10:25 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 71):
Just saw a photo on fb from a friend on a JQ A320 (VH-VGI) to MEL this evening whose #1 engine flamed out a few min into the flight.. Safely returned to AKL.

Isn't that the second time, in the past month JQ has diverted/returned with an flame out?
 
Andrensn
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:09 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 11:34 am

I noticed VH-XZB is operating a BNE-WLG rotation for Qantas this evening and was wondering how many of the Qantas Domestic birds are equipped to fly ETOPS sectors such as accross the Tasman and how often they perform these missions.

Also EK435 was cancelled today. Does anyone know why (I presume due to some kind of technical fault).
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 11:42 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 72):
Isn't that the second time, in the past month JQ has diverted/returned with an flame out?

I thought it was just one. However I think it never got mentioned in here?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 5:11 pm

Quoting Andrensn (Reply 73):
and was wondering how many of the Qantas Domestic birds are equipped to fly ETOPS sectors such as accross the Tasman

Is there ETOPS across the Tasman? By the time you take the allowable 60 min off both ends it leaves very little in the middle for ETOPS.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Fri Dec 25, 2015 6:02 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 75):
Is there ETOPS across the Tasman? By the time you take the allowable 60 min off both ends it leaves very little in the middle for ETOPS.

Pretty much every flight is, if an aircraft's ETOPS goes un-service able they have to track near NLK.

Don't forget the fast routes across the Tasman aren't always via the most direct route, often crews will put an track that will allow them to pickup an tail-wind. E.g its not uncommon for an SYD-AKL to track south towards NPL, then towards AKL.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:58 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 76):
if an aircraft's ETOPS goes un-service able

What do you mean by this? ETOPS is not a piece of equipment that can go U/S.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:56 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 77):
What do you mean by this? ETOPS is not a piece of equipment that can go U/S.

The MEL list must be a certain standard to operate within the category required. ie: an inoperative APU can warrant non/reduced EDTO operations
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sat Dec 26, 2015 9:42 pm

Ugh. Shame on the NZ Herald.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11566463

For any airline that isn't NZ, they will seize upon everytrivial incident, twist it, sensationalise it and present it as some sort of "there but for the grace of God" near miss.
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 2:22 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 79):

I/m surprised the pilot queried the routing. A quick look at the weather map would have given him the answer. And what about the preflight brieifing? Has that been dispensed with?

AKL-KUL and AKL-SIN usually track over BNE or SYD, but sometimes over MEL, NZ282 AKL-SIN also tracked over MEL on 27 Dec.

PA515

[Edited 2015-12-26 18:30:27]
 
Mr AirNZ
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 10:24 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 2:39 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 80):
I/m surprised the pilot queried the routing. A quick look at the weather map would have given him the answer. And what about the preflight brieifing? Has that been dispensed with?

My best stab in the dark at this (and the Herald story is really too weak to accurately get enough information) is that the flight was planned departing through one oceanic boundary point but that was different to what was actually filed. I suspect then when the aircraft was cleared direct to a waypoint by ATC that the crew did not have on their plan in front of them the conversation/clarification arose.

[Edited 2015-12-26 18:40:16]
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 2:52 am

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 81):

Found the flight. http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/9m-mtg/#85b414e

Appears to have been on an AKL-MEL track initially, but switched to WLG-SYD mid Tasman.

PA515
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:56 am

Unbelievable the hatchet job the Herald performed on MH with this.

Shameful.
 
CHCalfonzo
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:56 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 8:14 am

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 81):
My best stab in the dark at this (and the Herald story is really too weak to accurately get enough information) is that the flight was planned departing through one oceanic boundary point but that was different to what was actually filed. I suspect then when the aircraft was cleared direct to a waypoint by ATC that the crew did not have on their plan in front of them the conversation/clarification arose.

This is a really bizarre story! I wonder who had the wrong information, the pilots or Airways!? The way the article is written is really odd and makes this sound much worse than it is. The aircraft "surprised the pilot with the direction it started flying" makes it sound as if the aircraft had a mind of it's own!

The only way I could see this happening is if someone at MH dispatch adjusted the flight plan and didn't inform one of the parties involved, either the crew or Airways. It is extremely unlikely that the wrong route would be entered into the FMS unless there was a last minute change, 99% of the time entering the route is as simple as entering a company route code which loads the route from the FMS memory. Both pilots are required to check all the waypoints against the flight plan too (I assume MH does this too) which should show any discrepancies with the filed plan immediately.

Either way the crew would've been following a route towards Kuala Lumpur, obviously one just took a more southerly path. Not a big deal, ATC would've picked up on this very quickly when they took a wrong turn.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:32 pm

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 78):
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 77):
What do you mean by this? ETOPS is not a piece of equipment that can go U/S.

The MEL list must be a certain standard to operate within the category required. ie: an inoperative APU can warrant non/reduced EDTO operations

I'm pretty sure sunrisevalley is aware of this.      

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 45):
Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 43):
KKE and ROT to AKL would surely need to see a reduction in frequency if they were replaced by AT72's.

yep, among plenty of others that would drop back to a basic AM/PM arrangement. I see nothing wrong with this for business traffic.

The point is that even a "payload" restricted AT72-600 is going to a better fit for NZ than operating an additional fleet type to a marginal market or even a profitable market. Same as the reason NZ never went for A319s for the South Pacific. Sure sometimes it is tight on landing weight when loads are full for APW/RAR but for the rest of the time it is worth more to have the extra hold space for cargo that the A319 can't do. Same with EK 77W to LAX/SFO over 77L etc etc.

I didn't suggest otherwise. I agree, the fact that the ATR may have a minor RTOW (regulated take off weight) out of GIS from time to time is of little consequence. And just because it does, it doesn't necessarily mean it will affect the traffic load anyway. Such compromises are a fact of life in airline operations, a point lost to some on this forum.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 5:05 pm

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 85):
I agree, the fact that the ATR may have a minor RTOW (regulated take off weight) out of GIS from time to time is of little consequence. And just because it does, it doesn't necessarily mean it will affect the traffic load anyway. Such compromises are a fact of life in airline operations, a point lost to some on this forum.

FWIW.... a 5k wind takes GIS from a 4298ft runway to~ 4620ft. according to the CAA rule of thumb of 1.5% per knot up to 20k. Now I am not sure how typical 5k winds are at GIS. Just checking the weather for today winds are forecast up to 17km/hr or ~ 9k.
 
Unclekoru
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:22 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 86):
FWIW.... a 5k wind takes GIS from a 4298ft runway to~ 4620ft. according to the CAA rule of thumb of 1.5% per knot up to 20k. Now I am not sure how typical 5k winds are at GIS. Just checking the weather for today winds are forecast up to 17km/hr or ~ 9k.

I can't remember much specifically relating to GIS, apart from the level crossing, but there's usually a bit of wind around at NZ airports! The other factor which is not covered in those figures of course, but are there any obstacles? Even an unfortunately placed tree or TV antenna can have an impact on performance figures, further reducing payload.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:59 pm

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 87):
Even an unfortunately placed tree or TV antenna can have an impact on performance figures, further reducing payload

I remember BHE had some pine trees with the tops removed at one end of the runway. The cousin of a classmate of mine at Nelson College got tangled up in them with a Mosquito while doing a low barrel roll on a RNZAF Field Day. I will never forget the ashen color of the classmates face on the Monday morning after.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 12:24 am

Here's a fairly detailed analysis of Air NZ (long haul and Oz) in CAPA:

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...-minh-houston--buenos-aires-259432

"Air New Zealand: long haul network grows to record highs, adding Ho Chi Minh, Houston & Buenos Aires"

Mostly, t's about Vietnam - SGN - as the last obvious market of the three, but there are other goodies as well, such as the A321's on trans-Tasman.

Worth the read.

mariner
 
tealnz
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 2:11 am

Going by the fleet data in the CAPA report the only long-haul capacity growth from here to 2019 will be a net two hulls as 789s replace the 767s plus the extra capacity the 789s offer over the 767. And Luxon "does not expect to order additional widebody aircraft soon". That makes sense for the immediate future. It looks as if they have enough 787 capacity on order to cover further growth on PVG and NRT. Maybe SGN too if that works out. And enough 77Es to cover IAH and growth on EZE.

But they must be thinking hard about an eventual 77E replacement. Presumably they'll want something with a bit more capability. Luxon has said they can't do GRU with current aircraft without taking an unacceptable hit on payload. And it's not clear that the 789 will let them open new routes in inland or eastern USA with a reasonable payload. Does anyone have any idea what their timetable is for a replacement decision? Or what options are in play?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:44 pm

My thoughts on

Quoting tealnz (Reply 90):
It looks as if they have enough 787 capacity on order to cover further growth on PVG and NRT. Maybe SGN too if that works out. And enough 77Es to cover IAH and growth on EZE.

my view is that 789's will be deployed on EZE and IAH services. If so this raises the issue of where the replaced 77E's will be deployed.

Quoting tealnz (Reply 90):
Luxon has said they can't do GRU with current aircraft without taking an unacceptable hit on payload.


If the 77E has an acceptable payload IAH-AKL at 14hrs 30 min. ( about 36t) then it should be just as acceptable GRU-AKL where the sector time would be essentially the same most days . The considerably better than 20% fuel burn saving and about 3t payload advantage of the 789 on that sector time has to be attractive.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 8:21 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 91):
If the 77E has an acceptable payload IAH-AKL at 14hrs 30 min. ( about 36t) then it should be just as acceptable GRU-AKL where the sector time would be essentially the same most days .

Payload restriction GRU-AKL was not the only reason Air NZ decided against Brazil (non-stop) but it was certainly one of them:

From CAPA:

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...eshare--asiapac-connections-201852

"Air NZ looked at serving Brazil directly but would have faced payload restrictions on the return sector while Buenos Aires can be operated without any payload restrictions in either direction. Air NZ also concluded the Brazil market was fragmented and therefore would require domestic connections from Sao Paulo."

Presumably the main fragmentation is between GRU and GIG. The Indian market is similarly fragmented, in this Ministerial discussion paper about the jv with Singapore Airlines:

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/...c-Version-of-Detailed-Analysis.pdf

"Direct services between New Zealand and India would be technically feasible, but they are likely to be uneconomical due to the distance involved. India is a large and growing market, but like the South-East Asian market, it is fragmented. On its own, Air New Zealand could conceivably operate, for example, three or five services per week between Auckland and Mumbai, but as well as being significantly payload restricted, this would be of limited appeal to passengers travelling to other points in India."

GRU may be desirable, just as BOM may be desirable, but are either desirable enough - do the pros outweigh the various cons, including payload restriction if only in one direction?

mariner
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8108
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 9:01 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 91):

It would seem unlikely imo in the near future that NZ would run 789s to IAH. I'm thinking all the current aircraft on order will have the same configuration, 77Ws would seem more likely should the sector do well, weather they come from LAX or SFO or they do lease another 2 I'm not sure. EZE on the other I think will go 789 by the end of 2016 with a frequency increase.

Quoting tealnz (Reply 90):

Interesting on the fleet additions, I would think they will order a 772 replacement soonish even if delivery is several years out, it will imo be between the 789 and 778/9 the 78J only gets a look in if it becomes a 12/13 hour plane. I think there will be capacity increases on current fleet like 77W replace the Y+ space seat etc.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3676
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 9:19 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 92):
Presumably the main fragmentation is between GRU and GIG.

And NZ has codeshare connections at EZE with AR to both of these destinations, so well-done NZ again because they now serve the three largest South American destinational cities directly.

Quoting mariner (Reply 92):
GRU may be desirable, just as BOM may be desirable, but are either desirable enough - do the pros outweigh the various cons, including payload restriction if only in one direction?

And I would say either of them would be if they were just a little closer and didn't need a compromise on payload/performance so SIN and SQ, and EZE and AR.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:23 pm

Quoting tealnz (Reply 90):
And Luxon "does not expect to order additional widebody aircraft soon".

I find this interesting, because it implies that there is little further expansion in the pipeline. Looking at the current demand for the wide-body fleet:

Americas:
LAX - 2 frames
LAX-LHR - 3
SFO - 2
YVR - 2
IAH - 2
EZE - 1

Subtotal 12

Pacific:
HNL - 1
NAN, TBU, APW, RAR, PPT, RAR-LAX - accommodated by Americas frames plus 1

Subtotal 2

Asia:
NRT - 1
PVG - 2
HKG - 2
SIN - 1
DPS/SGN/add summer NRT/future poss MNL - 1

Subtotal - 7

Australia:

AKL-MEL, BNE - accommodated by Americas frames
AKL-SYD - accommodated by A321 fleet and Americas frames as required
AKL-PER - 1
Summer CHC-PER plus 3xwkly AKL-PER - 1

Subtotal - 2

Total - 23 frames required

Lots of assumptions and caveats in the above - it's just a "back-of-the -envelope" calculation based on current schedules and practices.

There are 27 frames scheduled to be in the fleet after all orders have been delivered, and allowing for (say) a couple to be out of action in maintenance or whatever, this leaves perhaps 25 to be operational.

That leaves just two frames total for growth in the next several years. Considering that the current year alone has pretty much spoken for three frames, that's not a continuation of the current rapid-growth scenario.

If it's assumed that EZE will account for a second frame within the next several years, then this leaves just one frame for "blueskies" growth. That is, daily to somewhere nearish in Asia, or thee-times weekly further afield. Even if a frame or even two could be squeezed out by rescheduling some ops to allow higher utilisation (HKG and PVG have lots of slack) that's still pretty low growth.

So, either
(a) the current flurry of new routes will prove to be a blip and the airline will experience very little growth in network or frequency over the next several years . . .
or (b) Luxon's quote saying the airline does not intend to order [my emphasis] more frames was a deliberate smokescreen, and the airline intends to continue its recent growth by leasing aircraft.

What's the scuttlebutt?
 
georgiabill
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:34 pm

I know management has said the 787-10 is not in their plans as it would not be able to do AKL-LAX or SFO. But could the 787-10 be used to add routes or replace the 772ER's from AKL to SIN,KUL,TPE,BKK or cities within China?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:42 pm

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 95):
(a) the current flurry of new routes will prove to be a blip and the airline will experience very little growth in network or frequency over the next several years . . .

After such a period of growth it is probably sensible to put the brakes on for a while, if only to let the new routes mature and to keep the balance sheet looking good.

I'm not sure what another destination (assuming it is long or long-ish haul) would do to the fleet use, and Mr. Luxon keeps saying there will be another one, but one sentence is missing from the CAPA quote.

Yes, he says he does not plan to order more additional aircraft soon, but he goes on to say:

"Mr Luxon expects Air NZ can acquire new widebody aircraft on relatively short notice given its strong financial standing: it is one of 15 investment-grade rated airlines, and in the top tier of those carriers, Mr Luxon says."

Not to be a cock-eyed optimist but if they decide they need new aircraft fairly quickly, he's saying they could get them.

mariner
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Tue Dec 29, 2015 1:48 am

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 96):
But could the 787-10 be used to add routes or replace the 772ER's from AKL to SIN,KUL,TPE,BKK or cities within China?

The 787-10 would work well on any of those 12- hr. routes . Should be good for 40t payload. Need to wait and see what the RR TEN engine fuel burn is . They might look at setting it up for about 340-seats for that market.
 
duff
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2001 10:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169

Tue Dec 29, 2015 7:09 am

There is a short notice order in the pipeline (if conjecture has any truth to it which it has in recent times)

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