New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 171

ZaphodHarkonnen · Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:31 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 149):
Wouldn't the golf course just make way for the airport to expand if needed?

Good luck getting rid of it. The wealthy people that make use of such things would make life very difficult to get rid of it. Plausibly to the point it's easier to just move the airport elsewhere.

But yeah, if you did some major construction you could bulldoze the golf course and fill it with terminal.

coolian2 · Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:56 pm

The golf course is airport property.

Or at least that's what a security guard told me and a rather embarrassed lady friend.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:59 pm

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 151):
The golf course is airport property.

Or at least that's what a security guard told me and a rather embarrassed lady friend.

My understanding was that only some of it was. I could be totally wrong as a series of searches didn't tell me who owned the land.

georgiabill · Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:29 pm

Any rumors of top off orders for 77W'S or additional 789'S? Do you think there is a chance of NZ flying to JNB or CPT from AKL perhaps 3 or 4 weekly? Just being curious could their 772ER'S do AKL-LIM without heavy payload restrictions? I am asking only because if EZE remains successful would NZ consider another route to South America?

mariner · Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:52 pm

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 153):
I am asking only because if EZE remains successful would NZ consider another route to South America?

The question, as always, is where?

The airline has said that it doesn't have an aircraft that can fly Brazil-AKL without serious payload penalties. So if GIG and GRYU are out as non-stops, that doesn't leave too many places.

SCL would be head-on competition, and while some have an affection for LIM, I'd raise an eyebrow. Maybe. Perhaps.

Personally, I'd rather see them go north and start AKL-MEX, but that might have altitude issues, as might BOG, and might only make sense to those of us who know Mexico.

IF they get an aircraft that can fly GIG or GRU, then yeh, but I'd rather see a couple of extra frequencies to EZE, assuming that's working.

mariner

[Edited 2016-01-31 15:54:29]

kiwiandrew · Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:59 pm

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 153):
Do you think there is a chance of NZ flying to JNB or CPT from AKL perhaps 3 or 4 weekly?

Never say never, but I personally can't see it . Nonstop flights would require a substantial diversion even to fit within EDTO 330. JNB has issues because of the altitude. There are many other one stop options and I don't think pax would be prepared to pay a substantial premium for a non-stop. In my previous life as a travel agent it always seemed to me that expat South Africans had an eye out for a bargain, even if it involved a substantial detour.

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 153):
Just being curious could their 772ER'S do AKL-LIM without heavy payload restrictions? I am asking only because if EZE remains successful would NZ consider another route to South America?

AKL-LIM is in between AKL-EZE and AKL-IAH in length. I don't believe there are any specific restrictions to operating in/out LIM. However, please bear in mind that LAN supposedly looked into LIM-AKL-SYD and the sums didn't add up for them in spite of having a substantial hub there ( much bigger than NZ's Star partner Avianca)

aerokiwi · Mon Feb 01, 2016 1:50 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 140):
I doubt we'll see widebodies on the trunk routes anytime before 2030. We'd have to see basically all AKL-WLG-CHC routes done by A321s before widebodies will be considered.

Agreed. If ever.

Consider SYD-MEL, the 3rd or 4th busiest air corridor in the world. Now that the 767s are gone, QF has only the occasional 330 (often subbing 737s in for scheduled 330s), with the vast bulk being flown by 738s. MEanwhile Virgin still schedule an awful lot of E190s on the route. 100 seaters!

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 140):
But yeah, I can totally see AKL-CHC turning into a widebody route before I'm dead. AKL-WLG by that time would likely be staring down a high speed rail route depending on the government in power at the time. If you can fill multiple B788s or A332s then it's probably worth considering high speed rail between the two.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 147):
If it gets to the point of any major runway investment being required then central government will likely be roped in.

The economics of a high-speed rail are so insanely mad that I bet you a billion dollars it will never happen in New Zealand. Would love to be wrong but high-speed rail is an expense that would effectively bankrupt the country. You'd be talking tens of billions of dollars. We can't even run a regular rail system without massive losses/subsisidies.

A runway extension/addition in either AKL or WLG is a vastly cheaper option.

Gasman · Mon Feb 01, 2016 3:23 am

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 153):
Do you think there is a chance of NZ flying to JNB or CPT from AKL perhaps 3 or 4 weekly?

Zero. Too far, JNB is also too high, and the market is probably inadequate.

Quoting georgiabill (Reply 153):
I am asking only because if EZE remains successful would NZ consider another route to South America?

EZE hasn't declared itself as successful yet. To even consider a second destination EZE would have to prove itself as being inadequate to service demand to South America alone. Otherwise a second destination would simply bleed pax off EZE.

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 140):
We'd have to see basically all AKL-WLG-CHC routes done by A321s before widebodies will be considered.

Unless traffic movements & gate space become an issue. Look at the list of scheduled flights in reply 146. Does there really need to be flights at 0700, 0730, 0810,0840 and 0900? Would it not be more efficient to drop a couple of these and put an appropriately configured 787 on the route instead??

zkncj · Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:02 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 157):
Unless traffic movements & gate space become an issue. Look at the list of scheduled flights in reply 146. Does there really need to be flights at 0700, 0730, 0810,0840 and 0900? Would it not be more efficient to drop a couple of these and put an appropriately configured 787 on the route instead??

In an market they is business heavy frequency is key, when you've already got an pack full day being able to get an flight that fits within you first meeting, but doesn't mean you have to leave home to early is an bonus.

If I'm going on an day trip to WLG, I'll take the 0730 knowing that I'll be in town by 0900. We're as if I was going down for more than an day would take the 0810.

It also provides decent connections from Intentional flights, and allows them to move people around as needed depending on the arrival of inbound long-hauls.

aerokiwi · Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:06 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 157):
Unless traffic movements & gate space become an issue. Look at the list of scheduled flights in reply 146. Does there really need to be flights at 0700, 0730, 0810,0840 and 0900? Would it not be more efficient to drop a couple of these and put an appropriately configured 787 on the route instead??

No, I don't think so.

You start to introduce way too much complexity and the frequencies do have a logic, that's largely proven.

On top of the grossly inefficient use of the airframe (and the opportunity cost of using it elsewhere or even giving it a rest/buffer time between long haul flights), you introduce substantial logistical issues (e.g. delays or cancellations impacting considerably more pax than on a smaller type) that would negate any perceived benefit. AKL isn't that congested. Throw in the need for pax flexibility (pax across the Auckland region can experience traffic delays or last mintue changes due to, well, any number of unforeseens - arriving 5 minutes late so waiting another hour) and you have a pretty undesirable scenario.

PA515 · Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:39 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 139):
The 77W and 789 won't be far from seeing a new/additional configuration I don't think..

So the 77W 'Space Seat' will be replaced by the 789/77E Premium Economy seat ?

PA515

Zkpilot · Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:59 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 137):
It'd be nice if NZ could come up with something tangential like SQ did with WLG-CBR-SIN. PVG-BNE-ZQN anyone?

CHC-BNE-HKG perhaps.

Gasman · Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:17 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 161):
CHC-BNE-HKG perhaps.

Better than anything I can come up with, but not in the inspirational league of WLG-CBR-SIN

777ER · Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:29 am

Jetstar's first Q300 ops on NSN-WLG-NSN launched today with a water arch welcome to WLG

zkncj · Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:51 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 163):
Jetstar's first Q300 ops on NSN-WLG-NSN launched today with a water arch welcome to WLG

Along with AKL-PMR-AKL, AKL-NPL-AKL

[qoute]While regional network wouldn't be profitable for Jetstar "overnight," he said the airline backed the operation for the long-term. (David Hall, qoute to NZ Herald today)[/quote]

So Jetstar admits that there regional fares are below cost then? and infact what NZ has been telling us for years that regional fares are higher due to higher operating costs is true?

mariner · Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:08 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 164):
So Jetstar admits that there regional fares are below cost then? and infact what NZ has been telling us for years that regional fares are higher due to higher operating costs is true?

It's certainly true in part although the lower price of fuel helps.

It is tough, really tough, to make money with smaller aircraft unless costs are fairly ruthlessly kept down, and/or where fares command something of a premium.

Move it up to mainline and the same thing happens. It's why the A321Neo is suddenly a red hot seller and the smaller A319Neo has sold about 50 frames.

Generally, at least in the US, smaller aircraft - regional aircraft - make money when (i) they are feeding connections to a mainline hub or (ii) when they fly in a unique environment - high yield routes with no competition - outback Alaska, for example.

The low price of fuel has changed some of that, but it hasn't changed the basic equation.

mariner

[Edited 2016-02-01 00:12:15]

Gasman · Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:21 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 164):
infact what NZ has been telling us for years that regional fares are higher due to higher operating costs is true?

Contrary to 99% of the New Zealand public, I always thought that the Regional airfares were reasonable. Sure, expensive on the surface; but when you actually look at the economics it's a different story.

The only regional route I fly with any regularity is AKL-WAG. I could pay anything between $150 and $300 for a one-way fare. Typically the flights would carry about 15 pax in a Beech 1900D. That's about $2500-$3000 revenue to the airline out of which they have to pay for the pilots, and all other operating costs, which are about $1800 per hour. So if the airline were making more than $500 per flight I'd be very surprised. Hardly a cash-cow.

[Edited 2016-02-01 00:22:50]

aerorobnz · Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:14 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 142):
come again on this, please...

see below.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 160):
So the 77W 'Space Seat' will be replaced by the 789/77E Premium Economy seat ?

Yes, I suspect so. A lighter and better higher density use of space. I also suspect NZ will ave a variation on 787 config to suit different markets

aerokiwi · Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:25 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 162):
Better than anything I can come up with, but not in the inspirational league of WLG-CBR-SIN

Maybe an $8 million subsidy from CHC and another separate subsidy from BNE would elevate it for you

PA515 · Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:13 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 167):
I also suspect NZ will ave a variation on 787 config to suit different markets

The three 2016 789's must be the existing configuration as Air NZ hasn't announced any changes and the routes two of them are assigned to would not justify a more premium configuration.

The other three 789's on order, two due in 2017 (FY2018) and the other in 2018 (FY2019), are unlikely to justify a different configuration on their own, so another order seems likely within the year.

PA515

Kiwirob · Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:44 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 71):
How much air service can a nation of 4 million support

It's now 4.6 million and will hit 5 million in the early 2020's. I think it can suppoort a lot more, remembers tourism is also growing, visitor numbers are increasing annually.

zkncj · Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:12 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 166):
Contrary to 99% of the New Zealand public, I always thought that the Regional airfares were reasonable. Sure, expensive on the surface; but when you actually look at the economics it's a different story.

Agreed - when you look at other countries, Australia for example and go book an regional fare there you soon quickly understand that what we pay here isn't bad.

Even if you we're yo compare AKL-CHC and SYD-MEL. Often you'll be able to get AKL-CHC from $59NZD on NZ, yet on SYD-MEL its often $120AUD on VA/QF.

mariner · Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:40 pm

Two small airlines join forces:

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/37...barrier-air-link-services-hamilton

"Kiwi Regional Airlines, Barrier Air to link services via Hamilton

A new airline alliance will give passengers departing Dunedin airport easier access to remote areas including Great Barrier Island.

Kiwi Regional Airlines flies between Dunedin, Hamilton and Nelson.

Barrier Air flies between Auckland, Great Barrier Island, Kaitaia and North Shore and from Monday will fly to Hamilton on a daily basis.

A flight from Dunedin to Great Barrier Island would cost from $286 one way, he said. The cost included a stopover in one of the connecting cities."

I'm a bit surprised Barrier is still flying to Kaitaia - there was talk of it being dropped.

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

"Last ditch bid to save Kaitaia air service"

mariner

ZKSUJ · Mon Feb 01, 2016 6:44 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 170):
I think it can suppoort a lot more, remembers tourism is also growing, visitor numbers are increasing annually.

I agree, while in the grand scheme of things 4-5million is not a whole lot, it is still sufficient when you take in to account our tourism industry and the fact that unlike other places we can't hop on a bus or train to get anywhere. A boat (Cook straight in particular) takes ages, and that's if you don't break down and loose a propeller shaft half way through the journey

kiwiandrew · Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:02 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 170):

Quoting mariner (Reply 71):
How much air service can a nation of 4 million support

It's now 4.6 million and will hit 5 million in the early 2020's. I think it can suppoort a lot more, remembers tourism is also growing, visitor numbers are increasing annually.

It's a long, thin country, with bad roads ( and terrible drivers) with 72% of the population (according to the 2006 census) living in the main urban centres. That seems to be a natural market for air transport.

Having said that, I am sure that for the size of the population, we are already pretty decently served.

NZ107 · Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:52 pm

Heard on the radio QR might be announcing AKL-DOH this week...

Zkpilot · Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:25 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 162):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 161):
CHC-BNE-HKG perhaps.

Better than anything I can come up with, but not in the inspirational league of WLG-CBR-SIN

Would have made even more sense back when they had the HKG-LHR flight of course. Then again with the CX partnership there is no reason why this couldn't happen. My understanding is that CX is somewhat restrained in it's abilities to add more services to Australia and of course VA would code-share on the service further expanding their virtual network. AKL-CNS-HKG might also be an option.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 167):
Quoting PA515 (Reply 160):
So the 77W 'Space Seat' will be replaced by the 789/77E Premium Economy seat ?

Yes, I suspect so. A lighter and better higher density use of space. I also suspect NZ will ave a variation on 787 config to suit different markets

Once they are needed to be replaced then yes I expect them to go in favour of the more standard seat. In the meantime NZ have said that the space seats are popular with Americans in particular which is why you only see them on USA routes.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 173):
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 170):
I think it can suppoort a lot more, remembers tourism is also growing, visitor numbers are increasing annually.

I agree, while in the grand scheme of things 4-5million is not a whole lot, it is still sufficient when you take in to account our tourism industry and the fact that unlike other places we can't hop on a bus or train to get anywhere. A boat (Cook straight in particular) takes ages, and that's if you don't break down and loose a propeller shaft half way through the journey

Not too mention the AKL hub effect between Oz and USA/Canada/South America/Pacific Islands.

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 174):
It's a long, thin country, with bad roads ( and terrible drivers) with 72% of the population (according to the 2006 census) living in the main urban centres. That seems to be a natural market for air transport.

Yes it most countries a drive the distance of Auckland-Wellington could be done on a divided fairly straight highway (shortening the distance, while operating at both a faster maximum speed and faster average speed) that would take around 5 hours as opposed to the current 8+ hours, or train services that would take 4 hours. So flying makes sense.

IndianicWorld · Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:39 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 170):
It's now 4.6 million and will hit 5 million in the early 2020's. I think it can suppoort a lot more, remembers tourism is also growing, visitor numbers are increasing annually.

Thats still a fairly limited market overall. Putting that into perspective it is the size of Melbourne or Sydney.

With 1 dominant player (NZ), JQ also in the mix and a few smaller airlines there will be a point that it is far too competitive to generate sufficient returns.

Aviation is a challenging business and not having a significant base to draw from does make things even harder.

zkeoj · Tue Feb 02, 2016 3:39 am

The Herald reports that CX confirmed that the A350 will be used on the AKL services later this year. I seem to remember that it was discussed on the NZ thread, but recently saw in another a-net thread that other destinations are planned first. Great to see it coming here - must book a flight to HKG in the not too distant future again

Cheers
micha

NZ107 · Tue Feb 02, 2016 7:33 am

Quoting zkeoj (Reply 178):

Well it was more of a case that LGW was announced first but flying doesn't begin until later this year (way after the delivery, and plenty of time between proving flights and then). Flights around SE Asia have always been on the cards to begin with but AKL has been in that group of destinations to get it first (by virtue of the 343 being replaced). I can't wait to fly CX AKL-HKG soon....

Kiwinlondon · Tue Feb 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Hi

Does anyone have an update on how NZ are going in IAH and EZE?

Kiwinlondon

777ER · Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:57 am

WLG have started construction of a multi story car park building which will add 1000 more parks

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/7...to-handle-growth-repel-freeloaders

Gasman · Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:32 am

Quoting Kiwinlondon (Reply 180):
Hi

Does anyone have an update on how NZ are going in IAH and EZE?

Kiwinlondon

Without quoting actual load factors to me, a source in NZ used the words "they are picking up well" - implying not exactly off to a roaring start, but looking positive.

aerorobnz · Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:53 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 182):
implying not exactly off to a roaring start, but looking positive.

Bearing in mind that EZE is in Southern hemisphere high season loadwise right now (and equal to LAN loads), and IAH is low season they are very good compared to other recent destinations and IAH is at the least the same as LAX/SFO/YVR right now. There will be little in the way of meaningful information until both markets have had both a high and low season under their belt.

Kiwirob · Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:24 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 176):
Yes it most countries a drive the distance of Auckland-Wellington could be done on a divided fairly straight highway (shortening the distance, while operating at both a faster maximum speed and faster average speed) that would take around 5 hours as opposed to the current 8+ hours, or train services that would take 4 hours. So flying makes sense.

There simply isn't enough traffic in NZ to warrant a 4 lane divided highway from Auckland to Wellington. If our population was double maybe there would be a justification, but not at 4.6 million.

There's not many countries where you could legally drive the 640km from Auckland to Wellington in 5 hours.

Zkpilot · Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:46 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 184):

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 176):
Yes it most countries a drive the distance of Auckland-Wellington could be done on a divided fairly straight highway (shortening the distance, while operating at both a faster maximum speed and faster average speed) that would take around 5 hours as opposed to the current 8+ hours, or train services that would take 4 hours. So flying makes sense.

There simply isn't enough traffic in NZ to warrant a 4 lane divided highway from Auckland to Wellington. If our population was double maybe there would be a justification, but not at 4.6 million.

There's not many countries where you could legally drive the 640km from Auckland to Wellington in 5 hours.

My point is that because we don't have this air makes more sense...not that we should have that.
That said I think we probably could have a 4 lane divided highway for most of the length if it had been developed earlier and built properly (none of this flexible pavement BS that ends up costing much more in the long run due to maintenance costs).
Also the distance would probably be closer to 600km if a more direct route was taken and 600km @ 120km/h is 5 hours.

aerohottie · Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:00 am

WLG have released initial pictures of what the expanded carpark will look like.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...47/Airport-gives-expansion-details
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...rtfolio-at-wellington-airport.html

ZKOJH · Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:25 am

"Air NZ in $25m deal with European business"

Air New Zealand has announced it will spend more than $25 million on a partnership with an European
aircraft manufacturer to equip its 68-seat turboprop fleet with advanced required navigation performance technology.

The national carrier is working with manufacturer ATR on the technology which enables trained pilots to fly at lower altitudes.

ATR is a French-Italian aircraft manufacturer headquartered at Toulouse Blagnac International Airport and formed
in 1981 by Aérospatiale of France and Aeritalia of Italy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11584707

Zkpilot · Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:36 pm

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 187):
Air New Zealand has announced it will spend more than $25 million on a partnership with an European
aircraft manufacturer to equip its 68-seat turboprop fleet with advanced required navigation performance technology.

Should result in a lot less disruption and more efficient approaches/departures.... gives them a competitive advantage over JQ.

PA515 · Fri Feb 05, 2016 7:40 pm

Re the ATR72-600 and RNP, ZK-MVI is circling at 3,750 ft about 20 km south of KKE, the first of two ATR flights to KKE today.

PA515

Gasman · Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:08 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 184):
There's not many countries where you could legally drive the 640km from Auckland to Wellington in 5 hours.

It currently takes around eight hours to drive from Auckland or Wellington without stopping and travelling at a sensible pace. There are plenty of countries we like to compare ourselves with (Australia, US, Canada, virtually all of Continental Europe, Japan) where such journeys could easily be done in six hours or less.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 184):
here simply isn't enough traffic in NZ to warrant a 4 lane divided highway from Auckland to Wellington. If our population was double maybe there would be a justification, but not at 4.6 million.

I'm going to take an alternate view. I think there is justification, and it probably could have and should have happened a long time ago. SH1 was created many decades ago when the population and economy was not even an imitation of what it is today. If you could justify and fund one two-lane road then, you could equally justify a four lane one many times over now. Sure, the North Island of New Zealand is not necessarily the simplest topography in the world; but it's not exactly Colorado either.

It'll happen, but not as some grand political master plan. In fact it is happening. Auckland to Hamilton is mutli laned virtually the whole way now. More and more passing lanes are being constructed all along the route. One day we'll wake up and realise the two laned segments between Auckland and Wellington are thankfully becoming few and far between.

It will make a difference. If the trip was an easy six hour drive, there are many who would prefer to do that rather than fly, given that a house to house Auckland to Wellington trip flying is going to be around three hours anyway. The main driver however will be freight. Most things have to be transported around the country by road or rail. As the economy grows, so will the demands on SH1, regardless of what is happening in the air.

DavidByrne · Sat Feb 06, 2016 12:20 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 190):
I'm going to take an alternate view. I think there is justification, and it probably could have and should have happened a long time ago. SH1 was created many decades ago when the population and economy was not even an imitation of what it is today. If you could justify and fund one two-lane road then, you could equally justify a four lane one many times over now. Sure, the North Island of New Zealand is not necessarily the simplest topography in the world; but it's not exactly Colorado either.

Maybe, but I doubt that it would achieve a b/c ratio even approaching 1, and this will be a ten-billion-dollar-plus project. There are so many projects that are in the pipeline that have a really positive b/c ratio which are not able to be funded, so I don't hold out hope for this one. Even the Penlink project connecting the Northern Motorway to Whangaparaoa, which has a b/c ratio of 2.5 to 3.1 depending on which method you use to calculate it (and maybe costs $350m), is not fundable in the next ten years as things stand.

Having said that, central government seems to require a huge amount of rigour over the justification of local capital projects with strict insistence on the best b/c ratios, while at the same time hypocritically not applying the same standard to its own State Highway projects (ie Roads of National Significance).

Notwithstanding, I don't expect to see a four lane road from Auckland to Wellington in my lifetime!

Motorhussy · Sat Feb 06, 2016 8:40 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 190):
As the economy grows, so will the demands on SH1, regardless of what is happening in the air.

Which is why we need better investment - time, planning and money - in rail. So that it works better with the roading, shipping and airways partners.

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 191):
Notwithstanding, I don't expect to see a four lane road from Auckland to Wellington in my lifetime!

In mine either.

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 186):
WLG have released initial pictures of what the expanded carpark will look like.

Shouldn't that be 'expanded terminal facilities'? There is no visual reference to the car park in those links.

This link shows the impression of the new $70-million car parking building...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/7...to-handle-growth-repel-freeloaders

SXI899 · Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:59 pm

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 187):

Air New Zealand has announced it will spend more than $25 million on a partnership with an European
aircraft manufacturer to equip its 68-seat turboprop fleet with advanced required navigation performance technology.

I'm curious whether anyone know what Airways has planned in terms of additional RNP approaches.

Currently there are only a limited number in use in New Zealand, both runways in NZQN (naturally), 05R at NZAA, 29 at NZCH, and NZRO both runways.
All of these would need to be adapted for ATRs, and I can't see NZ investing that kind of money unless there was some indication of additional RNP approaches being developed.

Zkpilot · Sat Feb 06, 2016 8:14 pm

Quoting SXI899 (Reply 193):
additional RNP approaches

NZPM springs to mind.

coolian2 · Sat Feb 06, 2016 8:37 pm

Quoting SXI899 (Reply 193):
05R at NZAA,

Really? Whats the technology some international arrivals use on 23? The one that has them turning final fully at about Manukau?

Gasman · Sat Feb 06, 2016 8:47 pm

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 195):
Really? Whats the technology some international arrivals use on 23? The one that has them turning final fully at about Manukau?

There's an RNAV procedure for 23L

http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZAA_45.1_45.2.pdf

(whoops sorry - my bad - that's not RNP)

[Edited 2016-02-06 12:50:22]

aerokiwi · Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:08 am

Hey does anyone know who's running the Alliance Fokker 50 in New Zealand at the moment? Is it Alliance themselves? I saw it around a fair bit on a recent visit.

Unclekoru · Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:17 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 197):
Hey does anyone know who's running the Alliance Fokker 50 in New Zealand at the moment? Is it Alliance themselves? I saw it around a fair bit on a recent visit.

It's Alliance themselves. In the main it's used to operate air cruising type trips for Tauck tours, it replaced the Air Chatham's CV580 that was previously used for this work.

aerokiwi · Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:32 am

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 198):
It's Alliance themselves. In the main it's used to operate air cruising type trips for Tauck tours, it replaced the Air Chatham's CV580 that was previously used for this work.

Cool thanks. Guess with the mining slowdown they have excess capacity in Oz right now.

Good to see another type in our skies.

Though that reminds me, gotta get a CV580 flight in before they're gone.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net