Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10117
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:54 am

Welcome to the 170th edition of the New Zealand Aviation Threads. Link to part 169 New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 169 (by ZKOJH Dec 15 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
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 13085
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:00 am

The biggest problem with the AKL IMO is that it was privatised, the airport should have remained in council or govt ownership.

If I was the govt I'd nationalise it ASAP. To do it properly it's going to cost a couple of billion if not more, AIAL doesn't have the financial backing to do this.
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:16 pm

Wellington to get their international flight?

http://www.ausbt.com.au/singapore-ai...onal-flights-from-canberra-airport

Rumours of 4x weekly SQ A330 flights operating SIN-CBR-WLG
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/-88/CRJ-700/-900
 
xiaotung
Posts: 1087
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:22 pm

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 2):
Rumours of 4x weekly SQ A330 flights operating SIN-CBR-WLG

This is huge. This will be the first time a Star carrier crosses the Tasman since TG left the market. I wonder if NZ or VA will codeshare on that. It will be interesting to see what Airpoints earns.
 
User avatar
SelandiaBaru
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:39 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:22 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):

The biggest problem with the AKL IMO is that it was privatised, the airport should have remained in council or govt ownership.

Even though I am an investor in AIAL I actually quite agree. As a user of AIAL I find it crap. It's obvious there has been little thought into the flow of the place and of all the international airports I've travelled around the world it's one of my most disliked and I worked in Indonesia for 7 years!

I invested in AIAL because it is the major international gateway for New Zealand and is a major growth asset. As a shareholder I think they could be developing more to protect growth but obviously the current meek approach to capital investment has supported the good performance of the share price and healthy dividends. In many ways that puts AIAL at odds with national interest.

Look at that beacon of capitalism, the US, private ownership of airports almost isn't even a thing.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:30 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):

If I was the govt I'd nationalise it ASAP.

Well they blocked the sale to that Canadian Super Fund, which are actually more desirable owners given their very long-term perspectives. I think renationalisation is waaaay overkill - the airport actually operates fairly well, bar the overcrowding with gate space and apparent lack of foresight. As with every plan they've ever produced, I expect them to revise their timelines.

The lack of a unified vision, piecemeal development and ultra-drawn out timeframes is frustrating for us, but AIAL is still delivering a reasonable, if imperfect, service. I just think they're going to stretch it a little too far and be caught out by unexpected growth. Then again, a rapid China slowdown this year is well on the cards, so... hmmmm.

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 2):
Rumours of 4x weekly SQ A330 flights operating SIN-CBR-WLG

Sooooo still no need for that longer runway then.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:25 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 5):

Sooooo still no need for that longer runway then.

No but a step in that direction.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):
nationalise it ASAP

And the way to do it would be to buy it back on the market.
come visit the south pacific
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:29 pm

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 3):

NZ annnnnnnd VA, I would say!? This is huge news... fingers crossed!
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:55 pm

If true, SIN-CBR-WLG would be a great strategic move for SQ, NZ and VA; it keeps a new long-haul competitor out of both CBR and WLG, it provides a service to SIN and to CBR from WLG - both which have been off touted as viable; it provides a less risky way of testing the possibility of an eventual non-stop.

Exciting!
come visit the south pacific
 
ycp81
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 2:08 pm

Just curious, can WLG support the A330 with its 2000m runway? Seems to be cutting it very close...
My past and future travels - http://www.ba97.com/ba97/calendar/report.asp?handle=ycp81
 
antskip
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:53 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 2:16 pm

Great news! I am sure the SQ A330 linking WLG, CBR and SIN will be very popular. http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-window...lights-to-canberra-20160111-gm3dju
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:48 pm

Quoting ycp81 (Reply 9):
Just curious, can WLG support the A330 with its 2000m runway? Seems to be cutting it very close...

WLG can handle B767 and A330 sized aircraft. My understanding is that it's just with a hefty payload penalty. However a quick hop across the Tasman and a gas up in CBR should work fine.

As a Wellingtonian such a route would be neat and I'd love to see a new airline with jets come into the capital. However I'm still holding out hope for the WLG-SIN direct route should the council and airport successfully extend the runway.
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:53 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 12):
However I'm still holding out hope for the WLG-SIN direct route should the council and airport successfully extend the runway.

They would need a lot more than 300m extension to get an A330 out direct SIN. A B788 might make it on 2300m but even thats pushing it.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:26 pm

Quoting 77west (Reply 13):

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 12):
However I'm still holding out hope for the WLG-SIN direct route should the council and airport successfully extend the runway.

They would need a lot more than 300m extension to get an A330 out direct SIN. A B788 might make it on 2300m but even thats pushing it.

Well if SQ eventually do operate non-stop, it will be with an A350-900 as that will soon be their work-horse and smallest aeroplane.
come visit the south pacific
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:32 pm

Quoting 77west (Reply 13):
They would need a lot more than 300m extension to get an A330 out direct SIN. A B788 might make it on 2300m but even thats pushing it.

They're looking at a 355m extension, not 300m. Take a look at the study documents they released a while ago. They looked at what planes could make what distances with specific payloads. IIRC SIN was doable by most aircraft in the wet with payload restriction but full passenger load.

http://www.connectwellington.co.nz/reports

Specifically read this one. Page 19 has a nice table. Note that they refer to full passenger load and not full payload. But they then note that there probably wouldn't be that much outbound freight anyways, so as long as the passenger load was good it should still work.
http://www.connectwellington.co.nz/s...Runway%20Length%20Astral%20Ltd.pdf
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:41 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 15):
They're looking at a 355m extension, not 300m.

Interesting, thanks. I had only heard 300m probably from the media stories on it. With a final length of 2655m (8,700ft) things start to look a little bit better.

I suppose what it will come down to is how happy the airline is to accept a payload penalty, and also, weather they are operating so close to the limits that an exeptionally hot day or other unfavourable conditions would result in passengers being offloaded.

They can get around that by blocking off seats in the system, if need be. The A350-800 if built would probably not have been limited. A potential A359ER with the Trent-10 engines would probably also be a lot less limited.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8353
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:45 pm

It seems to me like CBR-WLG will be a bit risky for SQ - Of course it does feed off what might be a successful SIN-CBR route (yet unproven international market). Two brrand new markets both with limited advantage to flying there AND operational restrictions at 2 airports known for bad weather and airport closures (fog/high wind respectively). Not to mention they already fly to two markets within 50min flying time and having considerable existing codeshares to the market.

1) who wants to fly SQ SIN-CBR-WLG when it is far easier to fly SIN-CHC-WLG or any of the other points across the central NZ cities that WLG feeds and If it's a direct international flight you can connect SIN-SYD/MEL/BNE-WLG anyway on SQ/NZVA or QF/EK. There is no advantage to flying this new route unless it is substantially cheaper.

2) who wants to fly WLG-CBR? Is it going to be a better place for onward connections with AU? The market for governmental traffic isn't that large it is going to fill an A330-300 and it doesn't feed other international fligthts
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
77west
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:52 pm

Which gate are they going to use? Looks like only 26 would fit an A333 without affecting other gates and/or taxiways?
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:05 pm

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 17):
1) who wants to fly SQ SIN-CBR-WLG when it is far easier to fly SIN-CHC-WLG or any of the other points across the central NZ cities that WLG feeds

1. Same plane service has its attractions.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 17):
2) who wants to fly WLG-CBR?

2. I dunno, but I'd guess at a a fair few tourists. And WLG-CBR-SIN - same plane - looks quite attractive, too.

I think the greater questions may be who wants to fly SIN-CBR and/or SIN-WLG?

In that case, it might be a bit like the AirAsiaX KUL-OOL-AKL. I assume that the airline will bring a fair number of trans-Taman pax with it from Malaysia, those who want two bites of the cherry, perhaps, OOL and AKL/NZ.

AirAsiaX managed an 80% average load factor into CHC, and there must have been some Malaysia originating traffic in that. I think most people leaving Christchurch then were moving permanently elsewhere, because of the earthquake, not jaunting off to Penang or Langkawi.

I agree that lower fares will help - as we see with Malaysia Airlines good load factors KUL-AKL-KUL - but I imagine there will be some premium traffic for Singapore.

I don't know how either route will do, but I hope they work and I'm happy to give both the benefit of any doubt. But has Singapore actually announced the CBR/WLG service, or is this just a.net speculation?

mariner

[Edited 2016-01-11 15:08:28]
aeternum nauta
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10117
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:07 pm

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 3):

I can't see any reason why NZ would block earning on SQ's service since NZ doesn't offer any competing service.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 5):
Quoting coolian2 (Reply 2):
Rumours of 4x weekly SQ A330 flights operating SIN-CBR-WLG

Sooooo still no need for that longer runway then.

From what I'm hearing this is only the start............

I did say last year another new route/new airline is looking good!

Quoting ycp81 (Reply 9):
ust curious, can WLG support the A330 with its 2000m runway? Seems to be cutting it very close...

Yes WLG can handle B767/A330. Both NZ and QF in the 90s operated daily B762 services before moving to twice daily B737 services. QF still sent B763s to WLG when loads required it. During the rugby world cup final matches QF sent an A330. QF also sent a daily B747SP before the B762s.
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
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:41 pm

They may also have had thing where the aircraft would have been idle for a day or so in CBR. So they may feel they can make enough to cover the operational costs and then some by slipping in hop to WLG and back.

It's a gamble that's for sure. But maybe a better choice if AKL is already essentially at capacity and CHC already has connections to Asia. I expect it will also depend what the transit in CBR is like. Will one have to reclear security in CBR or will they be able to just relax in the international side of the terminal during the layover.

Though if successful it could make an extension harder as SIN might not want to switch to doing two direct flights. Very much a wait and see.
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:42 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 19):
SIN-CBR

It's less about that, I expect, than about who wants to fly CBR-Asia / Europe and does this present them with a better option than the status quo. As a Canberran, my vote is for yes!

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 17):
(yet unproven international market)

SQ would have data about numbers of pax originating in CBR and WLG travelling both to SIN and onwards to Asia & Europe. The route may not have been flown before, but don't believe it's totally 'unproven'.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:50 pm

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 22):
It's less about that, I expect, than about who wants to fly CBR-Asia / Europe and does this present them with a better option than the status quo. As a Canberran, my vote is for yes!

That too, but I don't think there's a lot of point to the route if the airline doesn't bring any SIN originating pax into CBR - some going on to WLG, or two bites of the cherry tourists - Canberra and NZ.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:55 pm

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 6):
No but a step in that direction.

How so? It's fundamentally the same as the existing QF/EK and NZ/VA/SQ offering via the eastern seaboard. Maybe a Chinese carrier will offer a similar service via SYD or BNE, but it still doesn't necessitate the runway extension. A runway extension which Infratil is trying to get rates and taxpayers to stump up out of all proportion to their ownership.

Of course if a nonstop is announced to Asia later in the year, I'd be wrong. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that one given the brick wall of the Chinese slowdown into which we're about to slam face-first.

But as aerorobnz points out...

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 17):
1) who wants to fly SQ SIN-CBR-WLG when it is far easier to fly SIN-CHC-WLG or any of the other points across the central NZ cities that WLG feeds and If it's a direct international flight you can connect SIN-SYD/MEL/BNE-WLG anyway on SQ/NZVA or QF/EK. There is no advantage to flying this new route unless it is substantially cheaper.

Yeah, this.

It's great that there might be a new carrier. I know people throb at the thought of a widebody service, so that's a tick. But it's not fundamentally different to what's already offered.

You fly to an Australian city. You deplane with all your goods. You get re-screened at security. You're frog marched into a waiting lounge. 60-90 minutes later you're off again.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 17):
2) who wants to fly WLG-CBR? Is it going to be a better place for onward connections with AU? The market for governmental traffic isn't that large it is going to fill an A330-300 and it doesn't feed other international fligthts

Government to government traffic is wildly overstated. I'm not sure why everyone thinks government officials have these enormous travel budgets (usually the very first line item cut come budget time). Yes there's some. Maybe this will spur even more. But I suspect most traffic from Wellington will be WLG-outbound to SIN and onwards from there. I wonder what the stats are for WLG-SIN pax. Allowing for potential spurring of growth, if your final destination isn't SIN (say it's KUL), wouldn't it be easier to just one stop via MEL, SYD, BNE or, gasp, AKL?

But if there is an influx into WLG (note: highly doubt it) perhaps it could spur some thinking at AIAL to sort out the domestic/international terminal integration a little sooner.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:05 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
Yeah, this.

It's great that there might be a new carrier. I know people throb at the thought of a widebody service, so that's a tick. But it's not fundamentally different to what's already offered.

You fly to an Australian city. You deplane with all your goods. You get re-screened at security. You're frog marched into a waiting lounge. 60-90 minutes later you're off again.

I think that will be the major thing. If you have to reclear security with all you bags that will make it much less attractive. But if clearing immigration in NZ is good enough and you can remain in the international side of the terminal it becomes more attractive. As it becomes more like a fuel stop than changing flights.

Note, I have no idea what the setup is like in CBR and if that's possible. But if I were SIN I'd be pushing for it.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
Government to government traffic is wildly overstated. I'm not sure why everyone thinks government officials have these enormous travel budgets (usually the very first line item cut come budget time). Yes there's some. Maybe this will spur even more. But I suspect most traffic from Wellington will be WLG-outbound to SIN and onwards from there. I wonder what the stats are for WLG-SIN pax. Allowing for potential spurring of growth, if your final destination isn't SIN (say it's KUL), wouldn't it be easier to just one stop via MEL, SYD, BNE or, gasp, AKL?

But if there is an influx into WLG (note: highly doubt it) perhaps it could spur some thinking at AIAL to sort out the domestic/international terminal integration a little sooner.

Agreed with the government travel thing. The NZ civil service have heard of and use such amazing technology as telephones, emails, and teleconferencing. So it isn't as much as you'd think so. Plus most of the travel the civil service does is domestic so a flight to CBR is of no use for that.
 
Megatop747-412
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2000 1:59 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:16 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 19):
But has Singapore actually announced the CBR/WLG service, or is this just a.net speculation?

Well, as far as I know, at the moment it remains a rumour (i..e speculation), although not necessarily a.net speculation per-se. It was reported from the supposed well-sourced AFR http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-window...ights-to-canberra-20160111-gm3dju, which apparently coincides with SIA's CEO Mr Goh Choon Phong supposed visit to CBR next week. As such, I think the speculations are reasonable, although, yes, it remains a speculation at this stage. I guess we will have to wait until at least next week to find out more, in anything!
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:19 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
I wonder what the stats are for WLG-SIN pax. Allowing for potential spurring of growth, if your final destination isn't SIN (say it's KUL), wouldn't it be easier to just one stop via MEL, SYD, BNE or, gasp, AKL?

If you're going to KUL, then - sure. Or maybe.

If you're going to Singapore, then there's a fair chance your first choice will be SQ. And if you're going onward from Singapore - to Europe, say, or Vietnam or Myanmar - then maybe it's SQ again. Or India. Kiwi Indians have strong loyalty to SQ.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:21 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
I wonder what the stats are for WLG-SIN pax.

WIAL has pretty comprehensive stat's saying there is enough daily traffic to points in Asia and beyond (Europe mostly) via an Asian super-hub to support the likes of one A359, 789, 77E per day. I'm sure CBR have done their own work on numbers which can only add to the potential complement of this new venture, so...

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 24):
How so?

If the figures start to add up correctly for the two capitals, we may end up first with a daily service for the two, then the start of two discrete services.

And if/when this happens, perhaps they'll know that there's enough traffic between CBR-WLG to support a VA E-190 or 738 or nothing at all.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 25):
But if clearing immigration in NZ is good enough and you can remain in the international side of the terminal it becomes more attractive. As it becomes more like a fuel stop than changing flights.

Why would it be anything but?! There is no change of flights. You're not entering Australia. It's no transit via the U.S. and CBR has new international facilities they're just waiting to show-off.
come visit the south pacific
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1231
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:03 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 25):
Note, I have no idea what the setup is like in CBR and if that's possible. But if I were SIN I'd be pushing for it.
Quoting motorhussy (Reply 27):
Why would it be anything but?! There is no change of flights. You're not entering Australia. It's no transit via the U.S. and CBR has new international facilities they're just waiting to show-off.

That would be the crucial point for me. Also, in case of a delay you won't miss your connection, since you'll go on with the same (delayed) aircraft.

The WLG-CBR leg can have also patronage from AKL and CHC, as well as other NZ airports. If I have to go to go to CBR 1-stop I sure would prefer to change in WLG, rather than in SYD or MEL...

And lastly, from and aviation enthusiast's point of view, OF COURSE I would love to see a new TT-link. I'd even go AKL-WLG-CBR-SIN instead of AKL-SIN just for the sake of it  

Cheers
micha
 
jetkid
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 11:55 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:03 am

I know when I lived in Wellington and family went to the UK the hassle factor of transferring in Auckland with such a long trip just made it that much worse. It’s a mental thing in some respects, anxious about the long trip ahead or exhausted after a 24hr plus trip with the need to get on yet another plane to get to WLG.

Yes SQ would be offering the same thing people in WLG can get today with a SYD/MEL connection (all be it with less risk of a missed connection) but there is something to be said for a same plane service through to SIN with a connection in a decent terminal to your next flight to Europe. The added bonus of a larger aircraft might also tempt some people.

I suspect some of the people on here saying ‘it’s the same as transferring in AKL or CHC’ don’t live in WLG.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:09 am

Quoting jetkid (Reply 29):
I suspect some of the people on here saying ‘it’s the same as transferring in AKL or CHC’ don’t live in WLG.

Lived there for two years. Did three longhauls while living there. - twice transferring at AKL (including one CHC transfer on the way back in) and once via SYD. Despite changing terminals, I found the hassle absolutely overstated. I was confused about checkin times at WLG though - NZ kept stating you needed to be there three hours (!!!) before the flight to AKL if connecting to an international sector. Turned out to be a nonsense.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 27):
If the figures start to add up correctly for the two capitals, we may end up first with a daily service for the two, then the start of two discrete services.

Fair enough. And it might be an EK style toe in the water. I believe the initial enthusiasm from them was care of the ridiculously high parking fees at Australian airports. Though it coincided with a dramatic reduction in widebody flights across the Tasman by QF and NZ (if I recall correctly) opening a window for belly freight on widebodies from EK.

I'm still skeptical. You do still need to get off the plane, faff about on pointless security procedures, wait, reboard. Not a whole lot different to existing connections. But maybe shorter wait time?

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 27):
Why would it be anything but?! There is no change of flights. You're not entering Australia. It's no transit via the U.S. and CBR has new international facilities they're just waiting to show-off.

Yeah but you still have to deplane and go through security. I've never understood the logic for it, except that they don't trust the security in the country of origin. Somehow there's a risk you've acquired something on board the flight that poses a risk. Hrmmm.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 27):
WIAL has pretty comprehensive stat's saying there is enough daily traffic to points in Asia and beyond (Europe mostly) via an Asian super-hub to support the likes of one A359, 789, 77E per day.

I think (THINK) the stats said something like 400 passengers per day to Asia. Not to a single point in Asia, but across the constituent markets. Of those, how many going to Singapore only? And of the 400, they have a one stop option via QF and NZ. This just adds a two-stop option via SQ for those pax, no?

Don't get me wrong - the more competition the better. And all for whatever airline wants to give it a go. I just hope it's not used as justification for the runway extension. And if it is - and accepted - then Infratil pays its fair share, aka 66%.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:58 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 30):
Yeah but you still have to deplane and go through security. I've never understood the logic for it, except that they don't trust the security in the country of origin. Somehow there's a risk you've acquired something on board the flight that poses a risk. Hrmmm.

Its an weird one, recently transited through a couple of EU airports are didn't need to re-screen and on most of the flights you mixed with departing/arriving passengers.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1502
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:21 am

seems we are getting closer to the D7 flights;

Operational schedule is now listed on the airline’s website, reservation is expected to open later this week.

D7206 KUL2125 – 0725+1OOL0840+1 – 1500+1AKL 330 D
D7207 AKL1630 – 1800OOL2125 – 0400+1KUL 330 D

http://airlineroute.net/2016/01/11/d7-akl-mar16/

slight change to the times I posted a few days ago.
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:24 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 32):

That's a long stop in OOL on the way back!!!
 
zkncj
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:45 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 32):
seems we are getting closer to the D7 flights;

Operational schedule is now listed on the airline’s website, reservation is expected to open later this week.

D7206 KUL2125 – 0725+1OOL0840+1 – 1500+1AKL 330 D
D7207 AKL1630 – 1800OOL2125 – 0400+1KUL 330 D

http://airlineroute.net/2016/01/11/d7-akl-mar16/

slight change to the times I posted a few days ago.

Tomorrow apparently, with $99 fares http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11572678
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8353
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 8:06 am

Quoting zkeoj (Reply 28):
Also, in case of a delay you won't miss your connection, since you'll go on with the same (delayed) aircraft.

From an airline operations perspective, I can see this becoming like the reverse of LA SCL-AKL-SYD where they operate the delayed inbound, then turn it around directly back to SCL without the SYD sector and they just send everyone via NZ/QF to Australia. I would imagine this would apply to WLG due curfew overnight too.

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 21):
SQ would have data about numbers of pax originating in CBR and WLG travelling both to SIN and onwards to Asia & Europe. The route may not have been flown before, but don't believe it's totally 'unproven'.

All airlines do have passenger data. NZ had data for years on EZE/IAH before it started them,, they were still unproven markets. Proven requires an operational history to compare the passenger data over time against cost of operation.
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 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 8:45 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 16):
2) who wants to fly WLG-CBR? Is it going to be a better place for onward connections with AU? The market for governmental traffic isn't that large it is going to fill an A330-300 and it doesn't feed other international fligthts

I'd do it once for the short field takeoff from WLG  
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8353
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:11 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 36):
I'd do it once for the short field takeoff from WLG

Likewise, but Av geeks aren't going to keep them profitable for more than a few months....
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 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:14 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 37):

Indeed, my motive is not to keep them afloat  

Get a flight before in they decide SIN-CBR-AKL is a better idea or something.
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:20 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 38):
Get a flight before in they decide SIN-CBR-AKL is a better idea or something.

Officially, they haven't yet decided that SIN-CBR-WLG is a good idea.   

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:53 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 39):
Officially, they haven't yet decided that SIN-CBR-WLG is a good idea.   

Ha! True. We're well ahead of ourselves here.
 
xiaotung
Posts: 1087
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 10:07 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 19):
I can't see any reason why NZ would block earning on SQ's service since NZ doesn't offer any competing service.

Because based on the Airpoints partner airline earn chart, CBR-WLG would earn 12 APD and 25 SP in discount economy, way more than what earns on NZ's own trans-Tasman service which would make them look stupid.

For the very same reason, cheaper TG fares were prohibited from earning Airpoints unilaterally when they operated SYD/BNE-AKL years ago even though these booking classes were eligible.

[Edited 2016-01-12 02:14:46]
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1676
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:30 am

Pales into insignificance compared with the alleged pending announcement of WLG-CBR-SIN but have just been in Tassie and met with a good friend who has been on Tourism Tasmania delegations to AKL in the last few months. They are VERY sure that NZ will start AKL-HBA in the short-medium term though they acknowledge that there is as yet no agreement. Not that it hasn't been speculated on many times before, but the sense is that it's definitely closer to decision. Just FWIW.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:03 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 39):
Officially, they haven't yet decided that SIN-CBR-WLG is a good idea.

Well I think it's an very clever idea.

Watch this route suck up a vast chunk of the Europe bound traffic originating in the central North Island. Why not start your journey in WLG, within driving distance from home, on the carrier that's going to take you the whole way? Making such a trip via AKL mandates a much earlier departure from home to allow for the transfer, and AKL is a cumbersome place to make a domestic to international transfer.

But it is still less cumbersome than making an international to domestic transfer at SYD, which is why this route will also take all New Zealand to CBR traffic. A quick flight to WLG from AKL or CHC, followed by a nice flight on SQ direct to CBR is worlds better that flying to SYD or MEL, clearing customs then making the ghastly domestic transfer to CBR.

Not to mention what WLG-SIN market exists and also of course, a possibly significant amount of CBR-SIN traffic.

I reckon it'll do extremely well.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:05 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 43):
Well I think it's an very clever idea.

So do I - but it is all speculation until it is announced.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:17 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 43):

I'm inclined to agree with you there, I also think this is a way of trying to stay ahead of the curve of the ME3 by taking a punt on something a little different, a bit of a gamble, but something that can do well if done right. This is one of the increasingly few instances where SIN is looking better placed geographically to take on a couple of small destinations, as the middle east is just too much distance to make a direct flight to CBR work IMO. If they advertise well and get people on the flights, both CBR and WLG could have solid yields, but this is no doubt what SQ are trying to work out, it's not decided, but I would like to see it happen.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 7:32 pm

Does somebody know which A330 WV SIN operates ?
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 972
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 7:50 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 46):
Does somebody know which A330 WV SIN operates ?

I believe the 232t version, but it may be paper derated similar to what they did with the 772ER back in the day.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1046
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:11 pm

Interesting analysis over at TransportBlog.co.nz about light rail to AKL and the Auckland CBD.

http://transportblog.co.nz/2016/01/1...ight-rail-is-fast-enough-afterall/

The tl;dr version is that if it's grade separated most of the way and has intersection priority to minimize intersection dwell time then it could very well be competitive with heavy rail when it comes to travel time. And they note that much of the design calls for the light rail to be grade separated, especially coming into the airport.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:23 pm

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 45):
I'm inclined to agree with you there, I also think this is a way of trying to stay ahead of the curve of the ME3 by taking a punt on something a little different, a bit of a gamble, but something that can do well if done right. This is one of the increasingly few instances where SIN is looking better placed geographically to take on a couple of small destinations, as the middle east is just too much distance to make a direct flight to CBR work IMO. If they advertise well and get people on the flights, both CBR and WLG could have solid yields, but this is no doubt what SQ are trying to work out, it's not decided, but I would like to see it happen.

I really, really hope it happens.

What pleases me the most about this is that for all the pontificating I/we do here about potential routes/carriers, not one of us saw this one coming. Yet the more I think about it, the more I think it makes perfect sense.

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