Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Sylus
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:06 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 97):
Also, can someone explain to me why BNE is the only international destination served from DUD, ahead of SYD and MEL? I understand the holiday market to Gold & Sunshine Coast, but still surprising...

Dunedin is a relatively low income city and there are many families who typically choose Queensland holidays (Gold Coast, theme parks etc) over Sydney or Melbourne holidays. Similar story to the old HLZ-BNE flights. As International flights from DUD are virtually entirely leisure, you don't typically see many of the J seats occupied, however during school holiday periods (particularly July and summer) the Y cabin is chocka.

DUD-SYD and DUD-MEL flights were seasonal during summer only however ended in 2014.

Cheers
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:29 am

Quoting Sylus (Reply 100):
DUD-SYD and DUD-MEL flights were seasonal during summer only however ended in 2014.

We'rent these operated as NZ? which NZ choose to move the flights to ZQN from 2015 onwards.
 
aerohottie
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:37 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 97):
Really? VA have a large presence in the BNE-NZ market with:

12x weekly AKL
12x weekly WLG
7x weekly CHC
2x weekly ZQN
3x weekly DUD

They would be the largest player in the BNE-NZ market

Which is only 3 aircraft worth... not even 5% of VA's fleet. Could easily be covered by NZ
What?
 
Sylus
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:14 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:50 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 101):
We'rent these operated as NZ? which NZ choose to move the flights to ZQN from 2015 onwards.

Nope they were operated as VA with VA metal.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6887
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:51 am

Quoting Gasman (Reply 82):
That disclaimer aside, when I flew one packed 744 after another between AKL and LAX in the first decade of this century, I smugly considered that the 748i was a foregone conclusion for NZ; it almost seemed like a no-brainer. I still maintain it would have made some sense to have a fleet of 748s for AKL-LAX-LHR; with 772s or 789s looking after everything else. And now that there is competition on the route, a true VLA would really have set NZ apart from the rest.

Yea me personally too. I thought a small-ish fleet of 8-10 would have been a no brainer with AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO, the second AKL-LAX warranting a plane with 50-60+ more seats than the 744. Even SYD-LAX like they used to do. Twin deck aircraft are obviously not on NZ's radar for now but you could say that judging by capacity offered on the routes out of AKL at the moment, even places like SIN, HKG would come into view.
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:27 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 94):
AMS just got made A350. It was a 77W.

Which was a 77E before that..
It's all about the destination AND the journey.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7889
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:28 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 102):

That's BNE only, throw in SYD, MEL, OOL with another 4/5 aircraft. Sure NZ could cover and use larger aircraft ex AKL but it's a lot of capacity.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:55 pm

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 106):
That's BNE only, throw in SYD, MEL, OOL with another 4/5 aircraft. Sure NZ could cover and use larger aircraft ex AKL but it's a lot of capacity.

With NZ starting to introduce the 321NEO next year, that could be used to replace some capacity lost ex CHC/WLG. Then ex-AKL up the widebody sectors.
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:47 pm

So I finally fully emptied my laptop bag after visiting CHC a few weeks ago (earthquakes are fun...not. I tense up every time I hear a rumble from AKL now).

I accidentally stole a safety card from the A320 along with the Kia Ora magazine my dad wanted. I broke my rule of don't do things in a rush even though my dad was a WCHR pax, but I felt pressured to get a damn move on.

Any other time I've taken one I've asked first. Have I been an arsehole by error?
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
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 2:40 am

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 108):
Any other time I've taken one I've asked first. Have I been an arsehole by error?

For what it is worth, this action does not meet my definition of an a.....hole.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:48 am

The non-stop DXB-AKl-DXB will switch to the A380 in December:

http://gulfnews.com/business/aviatio...a380-flights-to-auckland-1.1839712

"Emirates to launch daily A380 flights to Auckland

Dublin: Emirates will start direct daily Airbus A380 services on the world’s longest non-stop route from Dubai to Auckland in New Zealand in December 2016, airline president Tim Clark said on Thursday.

Clark said he was very happy with the route's performance, which he said has consistently operated at above 85 per cent load factor, a measurement for how many seats filled on an aircraft."


I think he'd be happy wiht an 85% load factor - LOL - it's higher than system load factor, and I'm a bit surprised it's that high.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 8:03 am

Airbus now pitches the A350-900 ULR to NZ.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11648025

Quote:
Airbus says it is trying to sell Air New Zealand its ultra-long range Airbus A350XWBs which would be capable of flying from Auckland to cities such as New York.

At the launch of Cathay Pacific's A350-900 aircraft in Hong Kong overnight, the plane maker said it had done "a fair amount of work with Air New Zealand'.

Airbus executive vice president for Europe, Africa and Asia-Pacific Christopher Buckley said the ULR version of the plane was an ''interesting vehicle'' for Air New Zealand.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 8:41 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 110):
The non-stop DXB-AKl-DXB will switch to the A380 in December:

That will be fun finding parking for 4x A388s in the Christmas Peak! Add that the directly DXB-AKL arrives around the same time as the SIN-AKL A388 service over summer.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6887
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:47 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 112):

Plus the KE 74H which is also a code F aircraft
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7889
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:02 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 110):

Nice bit the spotter side of me would rather the 77L for something different.

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 113):

Atleast that is before all the A380's arrive.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 111):

I don't believe in good luck bad luck other than an unlucky bounce of a rugby ball, but good luck to Airbus here, personally they are pushing uphill big time to get the A350 into NZ's fleet. It certainly looks a good aircraft though the A350 family in general.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 107):

It depends on the configuration I guess weather there is a J class on the A321 and weather NZ see a need ex WLG/CHC. I'd more likely maybe see additional A320's on those routes. We aren't yet sure what the breakdown of the order is yet other than the original 3 A321's, 10 A320's. Some think more could be A321's and if the VA deal falls over then I could see a much larger order overall being placed.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:15 pm

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 114):
It depends on the configuration I guess weather there is a J class on the A321 and weather NZ see a need ex WLG/CHC. I'd more likely maybe see additional A320's on those routes. We aren't yet sure what the breakdown of the order is yet other than the original 3 A321's, 10 A320's. Some think more could be A321's and if the VA deal falls over then I could see a much larger order overall being placed.

Which would be fairly typically for NZ, place an small conservative order up front then top it up in 1 & 2....
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 1115
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:34 pm

With all this extra traffic taking AKL to a bursting at the seams point. Do we expect some of the airlines with fewer flights to AKL start looking at going to CHC instead? Sure it's a bit longer to get there but the connections are still fairly reasonable.

And who knows, if WLG gets an extension maybe we'd see some airlines go there.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:57 pm

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 116):
And who knows, if WLG gets an extension maybe we'd see some airlines go there.

AIAA are in danger of killing the goose that lays the golden egg ! If WLG extends there is no question but that they will increase their traffic in my view. Market growth assures them of this.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3676
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Fri Jun 03, 2016 11:02 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 111):

Thanks Karel, we'd actually been discussing this quite a bit already.

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 56):
Airbus still thinks it may have a shot with the A350 at NZ, this time with the 900-ULR for routes like AKL-NYC.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...48025

I think most of us in this part of the world would prefer the Y-class cabin possible with the A350 rather than the 787 or 777 for the longhaul flights we must take to get to most places.

Bit of debate going on yesterday into the viability of the proposed runway extension at WLG. A new report contradicts quite a bit of the previous one commissioned by WIAL and Council through InterVISTAS.

A radio article here says that planes may not be able to make landfall in Asia and USA with viable loads, even with the extension...

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/pr...ightshave-to-fly-practically-empty

WIAL's CEO Steven Sanderson responds to claims in the report and attempts to refute some points and clarify others. The interviewer does not give him much chance to speak or inform.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/pr...rport-responds-to-report-on-runway

I think that RNZ got the detail wrong. The full Astral Aviation Consultants report is available here for those interested...

http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/Resourc...iation-Review-of-Runway-Length.pdf

NB, page 21 gives individual widebody performance assessments for a range of potential aircraft of which the A350-900 is rated best out of an extended WLG.

Regards
MH

[Edited 2016-06-03 16:04:08]
come visit the south pacific
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10135
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 12:51 am

Stuff.co.nz have done an interesting opinion on NPL with JQ/NZ service

http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-dail...s-Jetstar-and-Air-NZ-battle-it-out

Quoting Motorhussy (Reply 118):

From what I've heard from the report, its an interesting report.

- SQ B772 is able to reach SIN non stop with a full load on a wet runway
- WLGs current runway design means its considered a wet runway only about 10 days per year.
- WLGs current runway design enables easier take offs
- The airline group of New Zealand is actually backing WIAL on some claims
- Not all aircraft will obviously be able to use an extended runway but the popular models like A359, A338 etc will
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
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:09 am

Quoting ZaphodHarkonnen (Reply 116):
With all this extra traffic taking AKL to a bursting at the seams point. Do we expect some of the airlines with fewer flights to AKL start looking at going to CHC instead? Sure it's a bit longer to get there but the connections are still fairly reasonable.

While CHC is good for connections for within the South Island, it is not as great with connection into the North Island we're the majority of the population lives.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3425
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:28 am

One thing to consider with all this growth is just how sustainable it is.

We will have to wait and see who thrives and those who don't as all this capacity is added.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 120):
While CHC is good for connections for within the South Island, it is not as great with connection into the North Island we're the majority of the population lives.

Correct.

AKL is able to pull in a significant amount of O&D traffic due to its larger population and business market.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2820
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 93):
IMO the 777-9 is just too bigger plane for the airline.

I disagree. With growth rates and noting that NZ actually downsized with the 77W, I think the 779 is pretty bang on what they need in terms of capacity.

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 93):
It wouldn't surprise me at all if VA drop New Zealand ops entirely...

It would blow me away. For one, some of their most profitable routes are AKL-Pacific Islands.

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 93):
With a long haul fleet that is universally extremely comfortable to fly in, even in Y?

Errr, hyperbole? QF's Y-class has the lowest seat pitch of any A380 operator at 31" pitch, apparently.

Quoting mariner (Reply 59):
We're never going to agree on this, so I don't really see the point of both of us just saying the same things over and over.

Actually, it's evolving, and the analysis that Luxon's dummy spit was a balls-up is increasing... http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11650287

Unless this whole menage-a-mess actually forces SQ to take NZ's stake at some inflated price to block HNA... hrmmmm. But of particular note was Luxon's non-presence at the board table - out of the loop is usually not a great place to be.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:31 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
It would blow me away. For one, some of their most profitable routes are AKL-Pacific Islands.

If anything would be an great fit for there 332 on AKL-Pacific Islands, if NZ can fill an 772/789 on AKL-RAR/APW/NAN surely that VA could. I wonder why they never gave AKL-NAN ago? this route always seems to be over priced.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 5:16 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
Unless this whole menage-a-mess actually forces SQ to take NZ's stake at some inflated price to block HNA... hrmmmm. But of particular note was Luxon's non-presence at the board table - out of the loop is usually not a great place to be.

If it is true - if - that he tried to force Borghetti's departure and failed, then I think he did the right and proper thing in resigning. If he had stayed I doubt he could have had any influence on the Hainan purchase, one way or the other. He hadn't even been able to persuade the BOD that Virgin should be profitable - LOL.

As to the selling of the hares, I think he left it a year too late, and, since they are not yet sold, I surely hope Air NZ won't be on the hook to throw more money at Virgin Australia in the assumed coming re-capitalization.

So - I think he did the right thing. You don't. Okay. Once again, each to their own interpretation, certainly of events at which neither of us was present.

mariner

[Edited 2016-06-03 22:33:14]
aeternum nauta
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7889
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 7:54 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):

Interesting, is that true re some of VA's most profitable routes being AKL-pacific islands? They time the SYD/MEL-AKL flights to connect to APW/RAR same aircraft usually different flight number, with BNE having a 4-5 hour connection. I flew to RAR recently flight were probably 65-70% full but it sounds like they are usually pretty full.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 123):

VA only have the 6 A332's they do a weekend SYD-NAN but they don't have anywhere enough to run them Ex AKL and now with this China thing no chance for NZ ops IMO.

I'd imagine NZ get quite a few connections on their pacific flights from long haul and domestic. But I agree I was wondering if VA would try AKL-NAN.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8432
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:27 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 125):
is that true re some of VA's most profitable routes being AKL-pacific islands?

Seasonally the Dec-Jan period is good for all carriers NZ/NF/VA/FJ/SB/TN/JQ.

The rest of the year one has to work hard to make it work. That involves using whatever aircraft meets pax/cargo demand and fitting services into scheduled downtime as NZ/FJ do. The widebodied services can uplift the profitable cargo demand year round as well as lower the costs per seat sold,if VA used an A330 seasonally in the summer to APW say as SYD-APW-AKL-TBU-SYD-TBU-AKL-APW-SYD they would do very well.

VA's current problems include
- Payload/landing weight restricted flights that frequently leave baggage, passengers and cargo behind (never for lack of available seats)
- Often late due tight scheduling with no backup options.

I'm sure at one time or another the Pacific has been good to most airlines, but at the moment VA seem to be sailing very close to the wind on pacific routes. Remember VA makes a loss internationally right now.
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.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1504
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:56 am

"Grant Bradley: China's double whammy on Air NZ"

Hainan Airlines has suddenly moved squarely into Air New Zealand's sights from two directions - and neither move is welcome.

The surprise move by Hainan Airlines' owner HNA Aviation to buy 13 per cent of Virgin Australia complicates Air New Zealand's attempt to extricate itself from an increasingly complicated investment across the Tasman. The less surprising decision by Hainan subsidiary, Hong Kong Airlines, to fly to Auckland is a direct challenge.

On Tuesday morning Virgin Australia warned the market of a major announcement regarding Hainan Airlines. From the outside it looked as if this would be the sale of part or all of Air New Zealand's 26 per cent stake to Hainan.

Far from it.

While Air New Zealand had wind of a buy-in, Virgin Australia announced Hainan was spending US$114 million buying into the heavily indebted Australian carrier.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ticle.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11650287
Air New Zealand ~ dreams of flying
 
PA515
Posts: 1661
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:17 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:24 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 114):
We aren't yet sure what the breakdown of the order is yet other than the original 3 A321's, 10 A320's.

The order for 13 A321NEO / A320NEO says "at least three" will be A321NEOs. However, 5 A321NEO / A320NEO will be leased from ALC and a note to the delivery table says: "Reflects timing of aircraft expected to be sourced through operating leases that may substitute current purchase commitments". So between 13 and 18 aircraft were available depending on what Air NZ decided closer to delivery.

The 2016 Interim Report Analyst Presentation orders table has 3 aircraft to be delivered in FY18 (01 Jul 2017 to 30 Jun 2018), and 6 aircraft in FY19 (01 Jul 2018 to 30 Jun 2019), however it excludes the 5 leased aircraft, 3 to be delivered in FY18 (01 Jul 2017 to 30 Jun 2018) and 2 to be delivered in FY19 (01 Jul 2018 to 30 Jun 2019). So that's 14 A321NEO / A320NEO by 30 Jun 2019.

A previous Analyst Presentation had 4 of the 13 ordered aircraft for delivery in FY20 (01 Jul 2019 to 30 Jun 2020), which would add up to 18.

The Air NZ 2016 Annual Report Analyst Presentation slides on 26 August will have FY20 in the table, so more information about how many NEOs, but maybe not a breakdown for each type.

PA515
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4607
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:25 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 94):
AMS just got made A350. It was a 77W. CHC will be switched soon enough, and SQ has 67 on the way..

Ah, right.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
It would blow me away. For one, some of their most profitable routes are AKL-Pacific Islands.

I'm skeptical. Based on what?

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
Errr, hyperbole? QF's Y-class has the lowest seat pitch of any A380 operator at 31" pitch, apparently.

Etihad, BA and Lufthansa have 31" also. I'd much rather 31" pitch with 18" width in a Qantas A380 compared to 31" pitch and 17" width in a 777 such as Air New Zealand's.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 123):
I wonder why they never gave AKL-NAN ago? this route always seems to be over priced.

I wonder if JQ might jump in on this one for summer.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 126):
Remember VA makes a loss internationally right now.

  
First to fly the 787-9
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7889
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:28 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 127):

Yea yea, while NZ maybe weren't expecting Hainan to buy into VA, I guess someone had to that wants a bit of a challenge, maybe that's why NZ wanted out or maybe they just didn't trust the VA board?

As to them flying to AKL while not surprising personally I think Hainan will have to largely generate their own traffic which may well rely on China connections where there is plenty of traffic, I don't no that NZ/CX will be to worried, big market and I'd say NZ/CX have a pretty loyal base. I saw somwhere that CX haven't ruled out adding more AKL flights, maybe not this year but they look like the second daily will go for the whole summer period rather than just 3 months this year. NZ could add more flights as well depending on slots to try pick up a few EZE connections.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 126):

I'd imagine June-Sep to the islands as well is good for most carriers.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3676
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:08 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 127):

Grant Bradley's a bit late to the news. Perhaps NZ may now be interested in staying involved in VA. Fresh money in the kitty and all.

First thing I'd be doing is meeting with the new suitor.
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8432
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:10 am

Quoting zkojq (Reply 129):
I wonder if JQ might jump in on this one for summer.

Given that Fiji is about to start a per day per person "tourist tax" of about 30 dollars a day paid at airport it will be interesting to see if Fiji will keep any tourists or whether they will continue flying to the other islands as they have done since the taxes went uppreviously.. With that in mind, I think the focus will still be with RAR for JQ.

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 130):
I'd imagine June-Sep to the islands as well is good for most carriers.

School holidays in that time certainly.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 128):
The Air NZ 2016 Annual Report Analyst Presentation slides on 26 August will have FY20 in the table, so more information about how many NEOs, but maybe not a breakdown for each type.

It is fairly evident that the 321NEO is a heck of a moneymaker in the same way a 77W was when it was new. a perfect combo of spec and operating costs.

Airlines like TK,Vietjet,Wizzair,PR,NH,B6.HA and even leasing companies like Air Lease Corp have ordered only 321 variants. I don't expect NZ to be any different in this regard, i'd be very surprised if there was not a large percentage of the order wasn't A321.
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
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 12:04 pm

Quoting zkojq (Reply 129):
compared to 31" pitch and 17" width in a 777 such as Air New Zealand's.

31 " pitch on a NZ 77E is not the same as 31" pitch on a AC 789. In fact I found I had better than 2" of clearance at the knee on the NZ seat where as I was tight to the seat in front on AC. Different seat manufacturers I would expect.
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 7:21 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 128):
The order for 13 A321NEO / A320NEO says "at least three" will be A321NEOs. However, 5 A321NEO / A320NEO will be leased from ALC and a note to the delivery table says: "Reflects timing of aircraft expected to be sourced through operating leases that may substitute current purchase commitments". So between 13 and 18 aircraft were available depending on what Air NZ decided closer to delivery.

Prefect the additional 5x additional leases frames that they could take, would probably replace any loss in capcity from dropping VA.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 129):
I wonder if JQ might jump in on this one for summer.

Do they still fly the A321 from SYD-NAN? if so maybe an SYD-NAN-AKL-NAN-SYD A321 service could work.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 132):
Given that Fiji is about to start a per day per person "tourist tax" of about 30 dollars a day paid at airport it will be interesting to see if Fiji will keep any tourists or whether they will continue flying to the other islands as they have done since the taxes went uppreviously.. With that in mind, I think the focus will still be with RAR for JQ.

That would probably been the end of Fiji for the typically New Zealand market, the $150FJD depatrure tax is bad enough. It pushed the NAN-AKL fares well above average for the region.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:09 pm

Meanwhile, AKL-SGN has begun:

http://www.newshub.co.nz/business/ai...n-vietnam-2016060507#axzz4AdvkavE4

"Air New Zealand touches down in Vietnam"

The article says "more than 200 passengers" on the first flight.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
zkncj
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:41 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 135):
The article says "more than 200 passengers" on the first flight.

I wonder how many we're from GrabaSeat? this route constantly seems to be on there at the moment.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:05 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 136):
I wonder how many we're from GrabaSeat? this route constantly seems to be on there at the moment.

I'm never sure how Grab-a-Seat works - pretty much everywhere seems to be available. I've just been offered AKL-IAH for much less than the quoted fare on the main website.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 12:20 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
Errr, hyperbole? QF's Y-class has the lowest seat pitch of any A380 operator at 31" pitch, apparently.
Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 122):
Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 93):
With a long haul fleet that is universally extremely comfortable to fly in, even in Y?

Errr, hyperbole? QF's Y-class has the lowest seat pitch of any A380 operator at 31" pitch, apparently.

Not hyperbole at all.

Even if this is correct, I'd far prefer fly on a 10 abreast A380 at 31" pitch than any 10 abreast 777. NZ's 77Ws are just inhumane in Y.

And let's not forget QF's 744 fleet. I flew AKL-JFK in Y on one (apart from the AKL-SYD leg of course), and arrived feeling refreshed and energised which it was as much to do with the soft product and service as it was the totally agreeable hard product.
 
dc10s2hnl
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:21 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 2:59 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 137):
'm never sure how Grab-a-Seat works - pretty much everywhere seems to be available.

I recently returned from a long weekend to IUE courtesy of a $99 Grab-a-seat deal, and it seems like most other tourists on the island I talked to were availing themselves of Grab-a-Seat (Niue's one of those places where you end up recognising most people on the return flight from around the island). Load factors were in the 60% range in shoulder season; for a place with the two NZ flights per week being the only real link to the outside world, I found this a bit surprising.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2820
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 3:19 am

Quoting zkojq (Reply 129):
I'm skeptical. Based on what?

Based on an internal staff discussion that I was weirdly privvy to a few years back. Pacific Island VFR traffic is often very last minute and surprisingly price inelastic, compared to others. Throw in excess baggage fees, a high rate of BOB, lower costs in the NZ/Samoan operation and you have a nice little money earner. There's been no major change to the market since that time so I don't see any reason to believe much has changed.

What's your skepticism based on?

Don't forget that the NZ operation has lower crewing costs as well. Brings some benefit to the VA Group.

My guess as to the future - Tiger will be introduced to the Pacific Islands, assuming the Bali experiment works in making those routes viable.

Quoting Gasman (Reply 138):
Not hyperbole at all.

"universally extremely comfortable to fly in, even in Y" - yeah I'd say that's almost defining the term.

I've never found QF economy particularly comfortable or otherwise - just standard. But if you start throwing in comparisons, well that changes the context. But I'll leave it there - no one needs another anti-10 abreast rant.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4607
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 3:42 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 140):
What's your skepticism based on?

This:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 140):
Pacific Island VFR traffic is often very last minute and surprisingly price inelastic, compared to others.

I'd have thought that such travel would be incredibly price sensitive. I could be wrong, obviously, but I'd always assumed that it was.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 132):
Given that Fiji is about to start a per day per person "tourist tax" of about 30 dollars a day paid at airport

Well that's just stupid. Strangling the Golden Goose isn't a very smart way to grow revenue.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 3:49 am

Quoting dc10s2hnl (Reply 139):
I recently returned from a long weekend to IUE courtesy of a $99 Grab-a-seat deal, and it seems like most other tourists on the island I talked to were availing themselves of Grab-a-Seat

Thanks for that info.

I understand - or thought I did - the principle behind Grab-a-Seat, an empty seat is a dead seat, so on light load flights, or on flights that aren't entirely sold out or particularly well-booked, they put some seats on Grab-a-Seat to bring in at least some money.

I haven't used Grab-a-Seat before (foolish moi?) and on looking into it, I can enter the dates for almost anywhere I want and get a reduced fare, in all classes. As I said, I checked AKL-IAH for late July and was offered fares less than those on the main website page. Even business class was over $4000 (ow) on the main page and under $3000 (ow) on Grab-a-Seat.

The one that actually interested me - SGN - was available at a pretty good price and the only reason I didn't book it is because I want to go to HAN (on the way to Europe) not SGN, and they obviously don't offer HAN on Grab-a-Seat - or didn't when I looked. I know I can book SGN-HAN on another airline, but it will mean booking seperate flights for each sector and I'm a bit wary of too many self-connects. If I were only flying AKL-SGN (and back), I might have booked it then and there. And I might yet, if the other flights work out, self-connects and all.

Such availability (and such fares) would discourage me from going to the main page first, so I'm not sure of the thinking behind it. Why would I pay more when I can get the same thing for less?

Or is there a catch to Grab-a-Seat that I don't know?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 4:19 am

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 140):
But I'll leave it there - no one needs another anti-10 abreast rant.

I take your point - but I'd argue the exact opposite. As much awareness as possible needs to be made that airlines are squeezing the passenger in the name of profits. If there is eventually a groundswell of opinion, they might stop glibly trotting out terms like "industry standard" (management-speak for lowest common denominator) or making excuses along the lines of "you get what you pay for" and actually swing the pendulum back in the direction of genuine space and comfort.

And - all other things being equal - I would defy anyone to argue that the hard product in Y on an NZ 77W is equivalent or superior to that on a QF A380 or 744.

[Edited 2016-06-04 21:53:57]
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 8432
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:32 am

Quoting dc10s2hnl (Reply 139):
I found this a bit surprising.

IUE is an NZ Govt charity case. Without it IUE has no link with the outside world and no produce/mail. the population is so low that local O&D can't maintain a flight by itself and tourist demand is also low. The seats are going empty so may as well sell them at a price which will fill it up (and therefore also back) , to try and grow some interest and create a price sensitive demand.

Quoting mariner (Reply 142):
Or is there a catch to Grab-a-Seat that I don't know?

It looks to me to be based on on actual booked load vs projected demand at that time of year. ie: if advanced sales project that by -6 months the booked load should be X and the actual booked load is Y then they offer X-Y as grabaseat fares. Once they are gone, then the demand for the flight increases and so do the remaining fares. You may also note that usually it is a one way fare at a discount,and the customer ends up with a higher return fare unless they chooe to return on very specific days (unless it is truly a light season they they put up a range of dates at that price)
Previously you could go months on end without longhaul fares even featuring. It draws a crowd every day who look at the cheap fares, see they aren't available on their preferred dates and people book other normal fares

Last year I managed to book AKL-HKG-AKL-SIN-AKL for $1250 for my girlfriend and I with a 36h layover in AKL . It was a cheap 2 week holiday.

Speaking of cheap fares, I managed to get those cheap oneway $50 fares AKL-SYD on LA, add a booking fee of $10 and it was $60 bucks all up, well to cap it off I got upgraded FOC to Business class on friday. Cheapest business class fare I ever had..

Quoting zkojq (Reply 141):
I'd have thought that such travel would be incredibly price sensitive. I could be wrong, obviously, but I'd always assumed that it was.

It is, but it also is subject to very real social pressures. ie: You must return home for funerals, Christmas season and bring stuff with you/ As it stand that means at certain times of they year they are not price sensitive because they "have to go"
That is also part of the difficulty. Because the community has to go at certain times of year they deliberately do not go at the other times in order to pay for the peak fares. Hence the 6 months of the year that you may as well not bother flying. The peaks pay for the troughs the rest of the year.
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.
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6887
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:39 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 119):
WLGs current runway design means its considered a wet runway only about 10 days per year

I thought WLG's runway was considered dry all the time due to the grooves? I could be mistaken. I also wonder if this stuff was taken as best case scenario? I would imagine that any departure off 34 would be a bit more restricted than 16 which if the acticle may or may not have taken into account

Quoting Gasman (Reply 143):
As much awareness as possible needs to be made that airlines are squeezing the passenger in the name of profits. If there is eventually a groundswell of opinion, they might stop glibly trotting out terms like "industry standard" (management-speak for lowest common denominator) or making excuses along the lines of "you get what you pay for" and actually swing the pendulum back in the direction of genuine space and comfort.

   Imagine that, suddenly the 77W and 789 would have quite a few less seats than advertised. A 77W with 9 abreast & 34' pitch (i.e. maintaining 744 standards) may not have been the best replacement for the 744 in terms of having a drop in capacity. I agree with you I try avoid these aircraft in Y where I can (And yes I have tried it)
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:51 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 144):
You must return home for funerals, Christmas season and bring stuff with you/ As it stand that means at certain times of they year they are not price sensitive because they "have to go"

You just described my ex-partner's Samoan family pretty much 100%.
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
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 8:02 am

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 144):
You may also note that usually it is a one way fare at a discount,and the customer ends up with a higher return fare unless they chooe to return on very specific days (unless it is truly a light season they they put up a range of dates at that price)

Thanks for that. I was aware of the possibility - cheap there, expensive back - but with AKL-IAH I was shown the same fares both ways. It wasn't an extensive survey, though, just idle curiosity that those routes were even there.

I didn't check it for SGN because I'm not planning to come back that way.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3676
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 11:11 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 145):

Quoting 777ER (Reply 119):
WLGs current runway design means its considered a wet runway only about 10 days per year

I thought WLG's runway was considered dry all the time due to the grooves? I could be mistaken. I also wonder if this stuff was taken as best case scenario? I would imagine that any departure off 34 would be a bit more restricted than 16 which if the acticle may or may not have taken into account

It's not from an article, it's from an independent report commissioned by the Greater Wellington Regional Council. Officially WLG is a wet runway on average 10 days a year.
come visit the south pacific
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10135
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 178

Sun Jun 05, 2016 11:54 am

Quoting Motorhussy (Reply 148):

Stuff.co.nz had an article on the report with a few highlights mentioned from the report
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

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