New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 174

mariner · Wed Mar 30, 2016 9:31 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 147):
NZ are in a real bind... they can't afford to get caught in another AN disaster, but they need the Australian market - and without a domestic partner within AU to bring a frequent flyer base they risk losing share not just on the Tasman, but on a substantial portion of their international network - it is highly unlikely they could maintain their growth to/from the Americas ( or even their current level of services) without AU feed.

The airline wants to sell its shareholding (or part of it) in Virgin Australia, it isn't ending the alliance. As Mr. Luxon said today:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviat...gin-australia-20160330-gnu54b.html

""We look forward to continuing our partnership on the Tasman alliance, providing customers of both airlines with the most comprehensive trans-Tasman network," Mr Luxon said."

Quoting Planesmart (Reply 149):
Did NZ actually make their share of the loan?

I believe so, but the article linked above raises an interesting question:

"Sources said the stake could be hard to get away to a new investor as it is expected the purchaser of the stake will have to pick up Air New Zealand's portion of the loan."

I don't see why that's true. The loan is only for a year and I don't know of any reason why Air NZ should not continue to carry it.

However, the following is true:

"Any new purchaser would also be expected to participate in future equity raisings by the company, which is desperately looking to reduce its gearing. "

What also seems also to be true is that Air NZ will take a haircut on their investment, unless they can find a sucker to pay them more than 45 cents plus.

mariner

[Edited 2016-03-30 02:43:30]

NZ107 · Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:46 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 132):
Lay Down Misere

I know it as open misere.

Anyway, widely broadcast by media this evening was the AA/QF sale fare for $799 return AKL-LAX. Looking forward to a price war (or at least subdued prices compared to the last few years). Air NZ ought to respond tomorrow. And I'm sure UA would also be open to a few cheap seats.

ZKOJH · Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:49 am

"Fares slashed from Auckland to LA"

American Airlines has slashed prices on the Auckland-Los Angeles route today releasing limited $799 return fares for later this year.

The airline, which has teamed up with partner Qantas to take on Air New Zealand on the route, will start flights in June using a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner.
The fares are for travel between October 15 and December 15 and go on sale from 4pm today to midnight on April 1.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11614053

aerorobnz · Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:15 pm

I'm happy for NZ is they do sell shares in VA - I have been saying as much for a wee while. There are plenty of better things to do with that cash. It could help finance some more 77Ws/787s/A320-21s, more ATR72s. more GSE and a C Cls/77W U cls cabin revamp.

VA are a difficult company to deal with, and CASA is a pain in the ass - It's time to just leave Australia to revenue sharing and focusthe investment elsewhere,. They are fine as an airshare partner, but as an investment they are not the blue chip airline stock Borghetti maintains they are.

In the old days Koruman would be ranting about how great Borghetti was as a CEO and how NZ has slumped since they got rid of J Class on A320s. Financial results would tend to disagree with him now...

Motorhussy · Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:49 pm

Australian Aviation is reporting NZ's intention to sell up their shareholding of VA.

http://australianaviation.com.au/201...ng-to-sell-virgin-australia-stake/

IndianicWorld · Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:11 pm

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 153):
VA are a difficult company to deal with

Its main complication is the 3 airlines with fairly even stakes in the carrier.

NZ likely wasn't getting its way in decision making and this is the end result.

There are issues with the VA strategy though and as such I do feel that JB's term in the role as CEO may be coming to an end.

georgiabill · Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:36 pm

Would NZ be interested in buying VA'S 77W fleet? It would be a way to obtain 77W'S quickly and probably a good price.

aryonoco · Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:48 pm

Discussion about this NZ VA business is happening at the same time on both the NZ and the Australian threads.

I wonder if we should create a separate thread for it and concentrate all discussion there?

kiwiandrew · Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:56 pm

Quoting aryonoco (Reply 157):
I wonder if we should create a separate thread for it and concentrate all discussion there?

There is a separate thread already

:

Air NZ Selling Share In Virgin Australia? (by VHTAE Mar 30 2016 in Civil Aviation)

NZ107 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 8:30 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 153):
There are plenty of better things to do with that cash. It could help finance some more 77Ws/787s/A320-21s, more ATR72s. more GSE and a C Cls/77W U cls cabin revamp.

I wish. NBR suggests they may do a share buyback with the money.

sunrisevalley · Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:28 am

probably stating the obvious that JB has the support of the Chair and one of the major shareholders that allows him to continue to execute his strategy. It has never been clear to me what SIN's and EY's strategic holdings in VA mean to them other than to give them a place at the table to watch events unfold at VA. Does NZ and VA have operating arrangements that are independent of the NZ equity position in VA?

VAM8789 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:04 pm

I apologize if this has already been discussed at length, but can the NZ 789 make AKL-EZE non-stop? If so, are there any payload restrictions to make the flight?

sunrisevalley · Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:50 pm

Quoting VAM8789 (Reply 161):
I apologize if this has already been discussed at length, but can the NZ 789 make AKL-EZE non-stop? If so, are there any payload restrictions to make the flight?

Similar payload/ distance as LAX-AKL. Good for ~ 40t.

777ER · Fri Apr 01, 2016 4:23 am

Quoting VAM8789 (Reply 161):

Don't be surprised to see NZ possibly go daily with B789s once the required ETOPS is achieved due to the lack of safe diversion locations.

sunrisevalley · Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:00 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 163):
Don't be surprised to see NZ possibly go daily with B789s once the required ETOPS is achieved due to the lack of safe diversion locations

The 789 fuel burn savings over the 77E is north of 20%. This would make a big difference to the cost's of flying the service and make an otherwise marginal route ,profitable.

aerorobnz · Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:22 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 163):
Don't be surprised to see NZ possibly go daily with B789s once the required ETOPS is achieved due to the lack of safe diversion locations.

Given the yields of EZE, and the investment in making 4 772s EDTO 330 which was big bucks, I can see the 772 operating this route even once the 772 fleet as been reduced.

sunrisevalley · Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:23 pm

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 165):
Given the yields of EZE, and the investment in making 4 772s EDTO 330 which was big bucks, I can see the 772 operating this route even once the 772 fleet as been reduced.

But they needed to spend money to get 240-min for IAH and for optimum performance to LAX/SFO . So EDTO 300 for EZE was not the entire reason.

aerorobnz · Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:15 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 166):
But they needed to spend money to get 240-min for IAH and for optimum performance to LAX/SFO . So EDTO 300 for EZE was not the entire reason.

It was fairly much the entire reason I think .The other things you mentioned are useful benefits to sweeten the deal after it had been signed off for EZE, but they would not have actioned the alterations without the necessity of EZE and South America. The 77W could already go 240 without issue which allowed at least for LAX/SFO which until recently were 100% 77W opss.. If that were not true, they would have insisted on the entire fleet being brought up to 330min standard to maintain operational integrity.

The reason they chose to use only 4 out of 8 was because that is how many aircraft they felt would be economically viable for EZE and South America as a new route/region, allowing for some operational flexibility, to run the fleet effectively and maintain the aircraft to the prerequisite standard without pulling more aircraft out of service to refit,

Sure the 789 will likely supersede the 772s totally, but I maintain they would not have done the changes if they didn't want to use the aircraft to that spec for a while and see a return on capital. The asian markets have traditionally been the low yield, high competition routes they have needed the 787 to bring back to life. I think that the 787 will be seen in HKG/YVR before EZE. They are the routes likely to see more competition and therefore which will need the best possible fleet operating them.

VAM8789 · Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:49 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 163):

Quoting VAM8789 (Reply 161):

Don't be surprised to see NZ possibly go daily with B789s once the required ETOPS is achieved due to the lack of safe diversion locations.

OK, makes sense. A fully loaded 789 (passengers and cargo) as NZ has it configured can make AKL-EZE and EZE-AKL non-stop.

zkncj · Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:17 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 164):
The 789 fuel burn savings over the 77E is north of 20%. This would make a big difference to the cost's of flying the service and make an otherwise marginal route ,profitable.

They would need to make an sub fleet that had an higher J/PE class seats, South America is an trendy market. The 787's are currently setup for low yielding Asian markets.

Even though you've got an 20% fuel saving, 1. you lose cross pacific cargo space, 2 your renvue will drop from less J/PE seats.

sunrisevalley · Fri Apr 01, 2016 4:20 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 169):
The 787's are currently setup for low yielding Asian markets.

as are the 77E's being used to EZE at this time. Perhaps the LAN 789 layout to SCL provides some clues how another carrier views the market. My guess is we will know the answer within a very few months.

777ER · Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:02 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 165):

Yes it was a big investment but the youngest B772 is already around 10 years old and maintaining a subfleet of four 772s once the other four have left wouldn't be cheap.

PA515 · Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:31 am

The Air NZ website schedule eff. 30 Oct has AKL-EZE / EZE-AKL as We Fr Su instead of Tu Fr Su.

PA515

[Edited 2016-04-01 21:34:07]

777ER · Sat Apr 02, 2016 10:23 am

While looking at VA flights, I've noticed this interesting operated by:

BNE07:00 PM WLG12:25 AM
VA 108 73H
VIRGIN AUST INTL FOR VA SE ASIA

sunrisevalley · Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:36 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 169):
Even though you've got an 20% fuel saving, 1. you lose cross pacific cargo space, 2 your renvue will drop from less J/PE seats.

I guess I am not understanding what you are saying on the less revenue from J/PE seats. Are you referring to the higher count of J/PE in the 77E ? There is no loss of cargo space , the 77E and 789 have about the same available space on a 12 to 13hr sector.

sunrisevalley · Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:04 pm

If there are any NZ op's people monitoring this thread. What are the EDTO entry and exit points for AKL-IAH . I assume one to be PPT , can someone name the other at the Mexico end.

Andrensn · Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:34 am

Originair's been grounded as the CAA is not confident the planes they fly (on Airwork's AOC) are airworthy.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/785303...e-back-in-the-air-soon-says-inglis

Their arrangement to fly the Metroliners has ceased and so all operations are cancelled

coolian2 · Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:35 am

What's happening at AKL?

afterburner33 · Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:56 am

False fire alarm due to defective equipment apparently. Still, a partial evacuation must have been rather inconvenient for everyone.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:57 am

Quoting afterburner33 (Reply 178):

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11616774

zkncj · Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:26 am

With Mount Cook going to replace there 72-500s next year with 72-600s, would it be worth Air Chathams picking up an couple to replace the CV580s? with Air Freight ditching there this year, surely the Chathams ones must be close to end of life too?

aerorobnz · Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:53 am

Quoting afterburner33 (Reply 178):
due to defective equipment apparently. Still, a partial evacuation must have been rather inconvenient for everyone.

Sums AKL in general up. The whole airport is defective frequently in just about every facet solely because it is at breaking point - Too many passengers, Too many planes, too many bags and chronic overuse of every individual piece of infrastructure . If it isn't the aero-bridge breaking down, then it is the aero-bridge cage trapping strollers and wheelchairs inside that miss departure and cost the airlines/ secure doors not unlocking/ Baggage conveyor system overloaded/ False fire alarms/ Sprinkler systems going off/ Fixtures shooting fireballs, Nose in Guidance/Ground power failures, sewer pipes bursting inside the walls, roof leaking in heavy rain and flooding the baggage area. The place is an embarrassment, and I wonder how long it will take before the media grabs a hold of this national disgrace and gives them the bad press they deserve.

I found out today that the plan for the extra gate by year end is on hold in favour of ....more bus op gates. And even those will struggle to be built by the time the Dec carriers like QR start.

Kiwirob · Mon Apr 04, 2016 10:09 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 181):
Sums AKL in general up.

AKL should never have been privitised.

ZKSUJ · Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:02 pm

The recent runway works were a nightmare for on time performance, just hurry up and build the second runway already. And do it properly

sunrisevalley · Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:48 pm

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 183):
The recent runway works were a nightmare for on time performance, just hurry up and build the second runway already. And do it properly

the litany of issues that Rob put forward in reply 181 has little to do with a second runway. It is up to the carriers to call AIAA on the issues. Threaten to withhold landing fees unless AIAA adopt a solid timetable to put matters right. Frankly I believe the Government has to take Auckland and Manukau Cities out of AIAA and float this share off . Inevitably it will mean higher landing fees to offset the need to service the float. The Government needs to call a moratorium on capex for additional retail space. Apparently this is not where the capex is needed. I am ambivalent about the bus gates; FRA seem to have miles of hardstand as does LHR but there are challenges in handling handicapped passengers.

ZKSUJ · Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:49 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 184):
the litany of issues that Rob put forward in reply 181 has little to do with a second runway. It is up to the carriers to call AIAA on the issues

Yup I get that, I was getting moreat the fact that it helps sum up AKl in general and the attttude that it's not as bad as it seems

texan · Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:11 pm

Quoting Andrensn (Reply 176):
Originair's been grounded as the CAA is not confident the planes they fly (on Airwork's AOC) are airworthy.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/785303...e-back-in-the-air-soon-says-inglis

Their arrangement to fly the Metroliners has ceased and so all operations are cancelled

It is the Air Freight NZ operation that isn't allowed in the air right now. Airwork's aicraft can still fly, but Originair's operating arrangement with Airwork ended on 1 April. Sounds like Originair are negotiating with another air operator to provide a plan for the PMR-NSN route, but that they may be dropping NSN-WLG due to increased competition.

On a completely separate note, the construction at WLG sure has made driving into the airport a much bigger pain in the neck. Wasn't the now-removed ramp only installed 12-18 months ago (can't remember the exact timeframe)?

Texan

Zkpilot · Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:19 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 184):
I am ambivalent about the bus gates; FRA seem to have miles of hardstand as does LHR but there are challenges in handling handicapped passengers.

Except that AKL international traffic has pretty much doubled (200%) in the past 15 years and they have only added 2x Gates (20%) in that time (I don't consider the mini-gates to count since the A380s take up most of the use). In reality there should probably be at least 6 more gates (taking into account larger aircraft on average) right now with another 4 to be built in the next 5 years. 15 years ago there wasn't enough space in peak times and the peaks have only gotten bigger since!

As for the runway situation, this absolutely needs to happen now rather than some pie in the sky later date! While the runway isn't at capacity most of the time it certainly is fairly busy. The other runway is needed for redundancy at the very least (issue with the main runway or to allow maintenance/construction). The main capacity issue at AKL with the runways is that small aircraft have to have spacing from heavy aircraft and this causes delays.

sunrisevalley · Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:07 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 187):
right now with another 4 to be built in the next 5 years. 15 years ago there wasn't enough space in peak times and the peaks have only gotten bigger since!

so who is going to kick arse and get some action? Not AIAL unless it is to make more retail space available. Frankly NZ and QF need to step up to the plate and commence a course of action directly or through a third party that takes Auckland and Manukau out . I have to assume the present inefficiencies are costing both carriers considerably more money than the landing fees they are paying.

Mr AirNZ · Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:31 am

Quoting texan (Reply 186):
It is the Air Freight NZ operation that isn't allowed in the air right now.

And yet Air Freight continues to operate the lifeflight Jetstream under its 125 certificate and its Convairs under its 121 certificate so frankly such a statement (as mentioned on another website) has me puzzled. I have also heard why Airwork are no longer flying Metros on the service but as I haven't verified that information, I don't like participating in conjecture.

ZaphodHarkonnen · Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:05 am

I doubt we'll see any fast movement from AIAL until airlines start opening routes to WLG or CHC specifically citing lack of acceptable capacity at AKL.Remember that the airlines are the clients of AIAL, not the traveller.

aerorobnz · Tue Apr 05, 2016 4:20 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 184):
I am ambivalent about the bus gates; FRA seem to have miles of hardstand

In truth,, I can handle hard stand operations ( as a passenger I have had them in reasonably large airports such as HKG/EZE/IST/FRA/LGW/LAX/MNL/JNB/DOH without issue)- in fact I think when organised they can be more efficient than a contact gate for servicing..

No issue there IF they are drive on drive off, have refuelling capability and of sufficient size to be able to park GSE and where they have sufficient buses (or larger enough buses to facilitate simultaneous operations or where they have a walkout facility to avoid the necessity of bis journeys

If I took the good features from other airports I'd do the followingI could do the following witout even building out pier B
End on bus operation gates like CPT/HKG
Longer and wider buses that can hold 160 pob like HKG
AKL needs th hard stands with contact gates/aerbridges like LAX
Drive on drive off gates like FRA
GSE stowage like NRT

77west · Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:47 am

Can someone start a Part 175 and lock this one? Up to 191 replies already!

zkncj · Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:07 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 188):
Frankly NZ and QF need to step up to the plate and commence a course of action directly or through a third party

Problem being that NZ likes complaining about airport cost, and will bargin its way to the cheapest cost. At the slight talk of building that will cost them extra on airport fees, they go running.

Kiwirob · Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:15 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 193):
Problem being that NZ likes complaining about airport cost, and will bargin its way to the cheapest cost. At the slight talk of building that will cost them extra on airport fees, they go running.

We used to have departure fees, so bring them back, it wasn't a big deal, people paid, if they instigated them again to raise money for rebuilding the airport I would happily pay.

zkncj · Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:27 am

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 194):
We used to have departure fees, so bring them back, it wasn't a big deal, people paid, if they instigated them again to raise money for rebuilding the airport I would happily pay.

The departure fee simply become the PSC (Passenger Service Charge) which is now $32 Its just hidden in apart of your airfare. You now also get in on arriving into New Zealand

Current Charges departing AKL
F1 Border Clearance Levy $3.37
IA Passenger Security Charge $10.58
KK Passenger Service Charge $18.22
WY Passenger Service Charge International $33.50
Total $65.67

Its an pretty big dent on your $129 Tasman fare.

I'd much rather an tin shed for the Tasman, as long as it still had an decent NZ lounge I'm sorted.

sunrisevalley · Tue Apr 05, 2016 8:20 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 195):
Current Charges departing AKL
F1 Border Clearance Levy $3.37
IA Passenger Security Charge $10.58
KK Passenger Service Charge $18.22
WY Passenger Service Charge International $33.50
Total $65.67

who gets which of these or does AIAA get them and distribute them?

zkncj · Tue Apr 05, 2016 8:33 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 196):
who gets which of these or does AIAA get them and distribute them?

Border Clearance Levy - Customs
Passenger Secuirty Charges - AVSEC
Passenger Service Charge - AIAL

While it get split up - AIAL stills takes home a reasonable amount.

Under the old system you paid the $25 on the way out, new you pay it both ways.

NZ107 · Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:11 am

So it seems like NZ announced AKL-MNL nonstop..

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story...-to-new-zealand-coming-in-december

763 obviously, 3x weekly.

sunrisevalley · Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:34 pm

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 198):
763 obviously, 3x weekly.

will NZ ever retire the 763's ?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net