Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 99):
Air New Zealand starting mid-September 2016 is revising planned operational aircraft for Auckland – Perth route,
as all 10 weekly flights will be exclusively operated by Boeing 787-9 aircraft
Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 99):
Air New Zealand in Northern summer 2016 season is revising planned operation on Auckland – Los Angeles route,
operating up to 14 weekly flights with Boeing 777-300ER service,

the airline operated 17 weekly flights in Northern summer 2015, however the 3 weekly frequency is being moved to
Houston, with a total of 5 weekly flights .

No news here - it's been visible in the timetable on-line for weeks.
 
nz2
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:38 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:57 am

I am sitting in the AKL Koru lounge waiting to fly to SYD on the 4pm flight. The inbound aircraft has parked at the remote stand and the buses are lining up. So following on from earlier chatter here it seems I will get to enjoy the bus trip out to the plane. I must admit it has been some time since I last did this, maybe 15 years or so, it will add a novelty factor to the trip!
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1505
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:22 am

"Fog throws flights into chaos, with queues 150m long at Auckland Airport"

Rolling fog in Wellington has thrown travel plans in both Auckland and the capital into disarray, with passengers
complaining of huge queues.

Virtually all flights to and from Wellington were delayed, cancelled or diverted as thick fog rolled in from Cook Strait and
made take-offs and landings too dangerous for pilots.


In Auckland, Jetstar passenger Jane Ballan, who was supposed to travel with her family to Wellington,
was stuck at the airport with hundreds of other customers from that airline and from Air New Zealand.

Mrs Ballan said it was frustrating to have so many flights cancelled, and to be told the next flight wouldn't be available
till 6pm tomorrow.

She was supposed to fly at 4.45pm but was still at the airport 2 hours later, watching the boards as more and more
flights were cancelled.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11575274
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

ZK-NZH returned to AKL this morning after 6 days in NAN. The schedule was maintained by rescheduling the 2355 AKL-PVG to a morning departure, and no doubt paying for the pax to overnight in AKL. But it is a reminder that AKL-PVG-AKL can be done with one 789 instead of two. Is it worth wasting a 789 to get extensive connections at both ends?

PA515
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:05 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 103):
PVG-AKL can be done with one 789 instead of two. Is it worth wasting a 789 to get extensive connections at both ends?

I would say yes - recently did PVG-AKL it looked like approximately 70% of the passengers were connecting from LHR,ZRH,FRA.

NZ has an pretty good system at PVG along with VS,LX,LH. The airport company has even put signage up in English for these passengers, e.g they are signs pointing you in the direction for LX188 to NZ288.

Without these connections these flights would be an couple times an week
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:10 am

Quoting PA515 (Reply 103):
ZK-NZH returned to AKL this morning after 6 days in NAN.

Was this a part that Boeing does not stock or is it difficult and time consuming to replace? I have trouble understanding six days out of service !
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:44 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 104):
it looked like approximately 70% of the passengers were connecting from LHR,ZRH,FRA.

I wonder if there is enough premium seating in the NZ 789 to meet these connecting passengers needs?
 
xiaotung
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:09 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 104):
I would say yes - recently did PVG-AKL it looked like approximately 70% of the passengers were connecting from LHR,ZRH,FRA.

NZ has an pretty good system at PVG along with VS,LX,LH. The airport company has even put signage up in English for these passengers, e.g they are signs pointing you in the direction for LX188 to NZ288.

Without these connections these flights would be an couple times an week

I don't know how many PVG flights you have taken but my experience is all of the flights I have been on were mostly Chinese. 70% seems to be a very far off number.

The signage is there because PVG doesn't transfer bags apart from the NZ-LX/VS/LH, AA-CX/KA and some CA combinations.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:14 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 104):
NZ has an pretty good system at PVG along with VS,LX,LH.

Not only those three - I connected to HEL on AY on an NZ ticket. btw, AY was a nice experience in Y  
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:44 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 106):
I wonder if there is enough premium seating in the NZ 789 to meet these connecting passengers needs?

The J/PE cabins we're near empty, most of the $2000 AKL-Europe returns are via PVG.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6889
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:42 am

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 61):
Auckland, and Auckland airport could and should lead by example, but they won't and don't, is the reality of it.

Agree, don't get me started. Landed in AKL a week or 2 ago to see 2 EK 388's waiting for gates. Embarassing as a New Zealander
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 10143
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 5:57 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 110):

Yes its a bad look for the country but the real shame lies with AIAL and their clearly useless Managament. Thankfully I've been able to avoid the disgrace that AIAL is when flying in the last 12 months. Have always hated having to transit via AKL with the domestic - international system
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:05 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 110):
Landed in AKL a week or 2 ago to see 2 EK 388's waiting for gates. Embarassing as a New Zealander

Yeah, doesn't surprise me, it's about doing the barest minimum to meet the requirements for the airport's current operation, not one airbridge more. Though increasingly it seems like the airport is even a little bit behind what is required of it, if the A380 gates need to be used for non-A380 ops when two EK flights need to use them. Never fear, they're building new gates at the staggering rate of 1 per year. Embarrassing as a New Zealander, yes, but is there any competition? Not really, so they don't need to impress anyone yet.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6889
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:11 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 111):
Quoting keen2fly (Reply 112):

If only you guys were in Managment   But yea about time we took the future proofing approach rather than the ''yea nah it'll be sweet as'' approach. That goes for the whole of AKL as a city in terms of infrastructure. With D7, UA, AA etc... comming in, it's gonna be tight...
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:15 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 110):
. Landed in AKL a week or 2 ago to see 2 EK 388's waiting for gates

At least they didn't try de-board them with stairs?
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:42 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 114):
At least they didn't try de-board them with stairs?

Even with all the buses AIAL has (up to 8) when the loads have regularly been upward of 440 passengers on all the SQ/EK A380 flights...

Aircraft hold on a daily basis for 10-15. And occasionally much longer. The most bus operations I have had simultaneously is 5.
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 113):
With D7, UA, AA etc... comming in, it's gonna be tight...

With the 787s due for delivery this year and next within the NZ fleet alone there are problems for gate allocations. Gate 4 is currently accessible for 763 or smaller, which of course the 789 is too big for
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:50 am

http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/ne...-to-see-scheduled-ops-this-quarter

Barrier Air is starting flights AKL-Dairy Flat beginning in February.. Considering taxis can cost an absolute fortune, I wonder if some people would actually consider this.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:53 am

This is the side effect of having private for profit companies running strategic infrastructure. They want to minimize risk and maximise efficiency so they will run as close to 100% capacity as they can get away with.

If you want AKL to have enough capacity to handle any possible increases in traffic you will need the central government to nationalize it and put a hell of a lot of taxpayer cash into it. This of course comes with its own risks. Or maybe the government needs to legislate that strategic infrastructure can only be run by not for profit companies that must reinvest all profits into staff or capital projects.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13704
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:51 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 117):
If you want AKL to have enough capacity to handle any possible increases in traffic you will need the central government to nationalize it and put a hell of a lot of taxpayer cash into it.

Just what I said further up the page, floating AKL was a huge mistake, one the travelling public has been paying for since 1998.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 117):
Or maybe the government needs to legislate that strategic infrastructure can only be run by not for profit companies that must reinvest all profits into staff or capital projects.

That's a good idea, just too late for the airport.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2833
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:45 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 117):
If you want AKL to have enough capacity to handle any possible increases in traffic you will need the central government to nationalize it and put a hell of a lot of taxpayer cash into it. This of course comes with its own risks. Or maybe the government needs to legislate that strategic infrastructure can only be run by not for profit companies that must reinvest all profits into staff or capital projects.

That's a little extreme. The airport was actually developing reasonably well and coherently through the 2000s, even beginning prelim work on the second runway. The GFC put a grinding halt to that - if my memory of timing serves - and since then I believe some changes in management have led to today's situation, of which I'm no fan.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 118):
Just what I said further up the page, floating AKL was a huge mistake, one the travelling public has been paying for since 1998.

How do you know this? The counterfactual - maintained Government and Council ownership - may have been even worse. The Auckland councils, pre-merger and since, have racked up some fairly gnarly debts. How were they ever going to finance the necessary expansion and improvements? Sell other assets? Charge for other, currently free services? Up the rates? Load on more debt? And who's to say they'd have done a better job or even agree to it?

Government, meanwhile, got a pretty tidy sum as a result of the sale, using it for other things we benefit from. And as majority shareholder it suddenly becomes a political football, potentially a plaything for a forceful individual minister with other interests. Who knows?

And afterall, it was under Council and government ownership that they built two separate (three, even!) passenger terminals in the first place. Hardly a bastion of foresight and planning.

Remember, the last Labour Government put the kibosh on the Canadian pension scheme seeking to buy the airport whole. They're an investor known for long term planning and a solid history of infrastructure investments. But no, we got all nationalistic all of a sudden.

Yes, AIAL need a kick up the bum. As a customer, and maybe a shareholder, you can help do that by raising your voice to them. Infratil do too, for that matter. The cheek of trying to squeeze rates and tax payers for two thirds of the runway expansion costs for only one third the ownership. Prfth.

[Edited 2016-01-18 04:47:40]
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:51 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 119):
How do you know this? The counterfactual - maintained Government and Council ownership - may have been even worse. The Auckland councils, pre-merger and since, have racked up some fairly gnarly debts. How were they ever going to finance the necessary expansion and improvements? Sell other assets? Charge for other, currently free services? Up the rates? Load on more debt? And who's to say they'd have done a better job or even agree to it?

Yes, local and central government in NZ don't have the best track record in being forward thinking either, I don't really think things would be much different. It's a matter of how management prioritise their spending, and right now the priority is making the quickest and easiest buck, but that might change as things evolve, as AKL certainly is. It's just unfortunate that we have this management style at a time when so many new airlines are announcing new routes to AKL. It's one of those situations, it might just have to get worse before it gets better, that is after all how this country operates.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:57 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 119):
Yes, AIAL need a kick up the bum. As a customer, and maybe a shareholder, you can help do that by raising your voice to them. Infratil do too, for that matter.

  

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 120):
It's one of those situations, it might just have to get worse before it gets better, that is after all how this country operates.

  

She'll be right - eventually.  

D
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:14 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 119):
Yes, AIAL need a kick up the bum. As a customer, and maybe a shareholder, you can help do that by raising your voice to them. Infratil do too, for that matter. The cheek of trying to squeeze rates and tax payers for two thirds of the runway expansion costs for only one third the ownership.

Really any difference between AIAL and Infratil? AIAL is watching Infratil negotiations with interest, and would accelerate airport development if Government / quasi-Government money was forthcoming.

If tax payers and ratepayers are going to carry a disproportionate amount of the funding and risk, they may as well own the asset, even if they aren't quite as effective at extracting profits. At least 100% of the profits remain in NZ, and the risk/reward equation improves.
 
nzrich
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:58 pm

Quoting keen2fly (Reply 120):
Yes, local and central government in NZ don't have the best track record in being forward thinking either, I don't really think things would be much different. It's a matter of how management prioritise their spending, and right now the priority is making the quickest and easiest buck, but that might change as things evolve, as AKL certainly is. It's just unfortunate that we have this management style at a time when so many new airlines are announcing new routes to AKL. It's one of those situations, it might just have to get worse before it gets better, that is after all how this country operates.

Not always true look at CHC its owned by the council and NZ government
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:26 pm

There's also Wellington Water which is owned jointly by Wellington, Porirua, and Hutt City councils and has invested massive amounts in asset tracking, fixing leaks, and investing in supply security. Or just Wellington City council in general who would have a credit rating better than the central government if the credit rating agencies did not have policies to not allow local bodies to have a better credit rating than the central government.

If the incentives are set right you are more likely to get what you want. The incentives for AIAL are such that running at 100% capacity as much as possible is what's best for the company owners. Perhaps this incentive needs to be changed.

Looking at the two examples I used. Wellington Water is wholly owned by the local councils and has a clear requirement to provide a safe and secure water supply. And in the case of WCC use of Single Transferable Vote means we get a council that represents what most people want the most instead of the minority control that often happens with First Past the Post.
 
a7ala
Posts: 401
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:27 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:52 pm

Im surprised at how little everyone on here knows about airport expansion.

In New Zealand and around the world there is always a tension between the airports and the airlines when it comes to expanding capacity, particularly capacity which will be charged back to the airlines as aeronautical use. In the case of AKL, im sure the airport would want to expand/improve facilities, but would the airlines actually want to pay for it. In the case of Air NZ who will be the biggest airline in Auckland, would they want to pay for expansion which will enable a future increase in competition against their services. Not likely!

What tends to happen is that demand will expand to almost breaking point when existing airlines such as NZ will start to see a deterioration of their own offering at the airport, and then these existing airlines will be more willing to agree to an increase in airport charges to enable expansion to occur.
 
axio
Posts: 273
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:29 pm

Sounds like there was a rather bumpy flight from NRT a few days ago: Reddit thread, imgur link.
Nasty situation to be in, but it sounds like the crew did very well handling the circumstances.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:46 pm

An interesting rumour going around about a new service to AKL this year. Unexpected but if it occurs will certainly be interesting to see. Stay tuned.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4631
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:54 pm

Quoting A7ALA (Reply 125):
In New Zealand and around the world there is always a tension between the airports and the airlines when it comes to expanding capacity, particularly capacity which will be charged back to the airlines as aeronautical use. In the case of AKL, im sure the airport would want to expand/improve facilities, but would the airlines actually want to pay for it. In the case of Air NZ who will be the biggest airline in Auckland, would they want to pay for expansion which will enable a future increase in competition against their services. Not likely!

Build it and if the airlines don't want to pay for it they can use the buses.... won't be many takers for buses that's for sure!
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2833
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:04 am

Quoting A7ALA (Reply 125):
In New Zealand and around the world there is always a tension between the airports and the airlines when it comes to expanding capacity, particularly capacity which will be charged back to the airlines as aeronautical use.

I think most of us on here are aware of this. It's why the Infratil suggestion for the runway extension is looked on with such scepticism - their user charges are based on asset values and with a greater asset base they can up fees.

But I agree there's a fundamental tension between user charges and infrastructure development. Arguably the decreasing relaince on user fees brought about by increased retail, parking and property development revenues is a good thing longer term as the airport becomes less reliant on fees to fund expansion. However, it doesn't negate the imapct on the airport's core users - airlines - and may actually distort incentives as the airport focuses attention more and more on non-aviation revenue opportunities.

I believe there's actiuually a legal requirement for airlines and airports to agree on fee changes, or some such.

But what you say is absolutely true - it will likely be only at breaking point before airlines agree to airport expansion i.e. upping fees.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:17 am

A good article explaining why WLG doesn't have landing capability in heavy fog.

Fog landings not an option in Wellington - it's cheaper to cancel flights

Quote:
Low-visibility landings would be possible in the capital if the airport and the airlines using it were prepared to pay for expensive auto-pilot technology and training, used in many other parts of the world.

But with so few heavy fog days in New Zealand, the cheaper option is to close the airport, and to ground planes.

Dave Reynolds, senior technical officer for the New Zealand Airline Pilots' Association, said the technology that allowed planes to land in zero visibility had been around since the 1960s.

But the cost of kitting out airports and airlines with the computer systems required, while also paying to regularly maintain the system and train staff to use it, was quite prohibitive.

"It's a commercial decision, to be perfectly honest," Reynolds said.

Of course the comments are a laugh with all the people bitching about the cancelled flights. As a Wellingtonian I think the airport is in the right here. We just don't get enough fog often enough to make the investment in a CATIII/b system worth it.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:22 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 127):
An interesting rumour going around about a new service to AKL this year. Unexpected but if it occurs will certainly be interesting to see. Stay tuned.



Aw, c'mon, give us a hint  
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:29 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 124):
Or just Wellington City council in general who would have a credit rating better than the central government if the credit rating agencies did not have policies to not allow local bodies to have a better credit rating than the central government.

No local authority should have a credit rating better than the sovereign risk of the country. Most banks, including Australian and NZ banks, ultimately group NZ local authority risk under NZ Government, so this effectively caps NZ local authority ratings as a subset.

The reason local authorities in NZ generally enjoy such high credit ratings, is because lenders get special rating provisions. If your local authority struggles to re-pay a loan, lender/s can request a special rate is imposed on rate payers. Published credit ratings include a component which is an assessment, of how willing rate payers would be to accept a special rate. Generally, rate payers who accept annual rates increases consistently above prevailing inflation rates, are assessed as being soft, and likely to both accept and have the capacity to meet special rates.

If your local authority borrows from the Local Government Funding Authority, all loans are jointly and severally guaranteed by their other local authority borrowers. In the event council X are unable / unwilling to re-pay, the LGFA can impose special rates on all borrowing local authorities ratepayers using their services. Some local authorities won't borrow from LGFA for this reason.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:39 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 127):
An interesting rumour going around about a new service to AKL this year.

AKL-DXB nonstop?
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1505
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:51 am

Well if we are going to play the rumour game for 2016.

I would say BA with an extension of their KUL service .

Would the rumour be with an airline that operates already, i.e apart from the usual NZ new routes or somebody new? -
which if it is a new one would open up the debate can AKL cope with any more "new" airlines.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:24 am

We could look at airlines that have flown to AKL previously and pulled out (and which have 330s, 787s, A350s - they are the only types viable on new, unproven routes to/from AKL)
BA(unlikely),AC,OZ,JL,BR,GA
And airlines with 787s,A350s, A330s with unserved md/longhaul markets from AKL who have been approached by AIAL in the past
DL,HU,AI,5J,AV,AM,PR (direct),QR,EY

You pretty much can see the markets in which NZ might consider from those carriers too.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:35 am

The clue I would give is that the airline has never flown to AKL before.

It would be a very interesting move it it does occur.
 
PA515
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:57 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 136):
The clue I would give is that the airline has never flown to AKL before.

Not even as a code share  

PA515
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2833
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:17 pm

I'm guessing Delta. From ATL, perhaps? Is that possible with the 77L?
 
xiaotung
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:34 pm

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 138):
I'm guessing Delta. From ATL, perhaps? Is that possible with the 77L?

I would like that, though not sure what NZ would need to do with one of their best friends being VA. Could this relationship get any more complicated?

Given DL doesn't even have a good coverage in Australia I doubt that they would enter New Zealand. I still would put my money on a new Asian carrier.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7605...ingtoncanberra-service-from-august

The above article seems to suggest NZ was not too happy about SQ's CBR-WLG initially but would now work with them and perhaps codeshare. I wonder if they would rather oil be at US$100 a barrel instead of everyone coming to take their pie.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:42 pm

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 136):
The clue I would give is that the airline has never flown to AKL before.

My money would be on Qatar using a 77L to DOH nonstop.

Distant second choice, if we're talking carriers that haven't served AKL before would be one of the Euros - KL, LH...

Given that UA & AA have recently entered the market and are still to start services, not to mention NZ's own foray into IAH, I doubt we'd see interest from a third US carrier anytime soon, if at all.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:18 pm

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 136):

The clue I would give is that the airline has never flown to AKL before.

It would be a very interesting move it it does occur.

Hmm, given how the Chinese carriers have been expanding perhaps one of the smaller carriers will start here from a 'secondary' ( but still huge) Chinese city
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:32 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 140):
My money would be on Qatar using a 77L to DOH nonstop

or EY from AUH. The top candidates for sure, not sure it will be direct maybe via PER-AKL. The other one I reckon likely is AI from India.
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1161
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:08 am

Looks like the rumours were true. Singapore Airlines to start flying SIN-CBR-WLG 4 times a week starting September 4.

RadioLIVE Newsroom ‏-- Singapore Airlines will start flying Canberra to Welly from Sept 4 times a week and ticket sales start on 25 Jan

Edit: According to this article Singapore Airlines will be putting a B777 onto the route!? This needs confirmation. O_O

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

[Edited 2016-01-19 16:16:08]
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:21 am

I will say that one of the suggestions so far is on the money.. Which one was it? That will have to wait  
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:03 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 143):
Looks like the rumours were true. Singapore Airlines to start flying SIN-CBR-WLG 4 times a week starting September 4.

I still marvel at the brilliance of this. Establish a New Zealand to Canberra non-stop service, which was long rumoured but always going to be a bit of a line-call, and offload some of the risk by drawing in Europe and Singapore bound traffic from the lower North Island. *Respect*.

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 144):
I will say that one of the suggestions so far is on the money.. Which one was it? That will have to wait

wnaker  
 
Megatop747-412
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2000 1:59 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:17 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 145):
I still marvel at the brilliance of this.

It is a marvellous piece of news indeed! :P

So looking forward to seeing SQ metal @ WLG. Seemed that their B777 will be on the ground in WLG for a good 5 hours - that would have made the ramp look a little tight wouldn't it...? But I'm not complaining!  
 
keen2fly
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:10 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:23 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 142):

Quoting gasman (Reply 140):
My money would be on Qatar using a 77L to DOH nonstop

or EY from AUH. The top candidates for sure, not sure it will be direct maybe via PER-AKL. The other one I reckon likely is AI from India.

I was thinking along similar lines, I've thought for a while that another gulf carrier is basically inevitable, but it's got to be different to EK's SYD, BNE and MEL services for it to be a success, so it could be non-stop or via another destination as EC Australia to NZ is very crowded already. AI is an interesting one, it might work, but for an airline in such a state I can't help but think it may be a bridge too far.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4370
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:36 am

Quoting Megatop747-412 (Reply 146):
So looking forward to seeing SQ metal @ WLG. Seemed that their B777 will be on the ground in WLG for a good 5 hours - that would have made the ramp look a little tight wouldn't it...?

Could possible have an impact on growth for Jetstar Domestic from WLG, as there gates are swing gates between Intentional and Domestic.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 170

Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:51 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 145):
I still marvel at the brilliance of this

I'm inclined to agree - it surely shakes up the trans-Tasman airline market a bit.

mariner

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