New NZ Aviation website

[cowpatz]

For those interested in the goings on in NZ airspace:
AirspaceNZ

[Splitpin]

Great link CP ...added to my reading list.

[deeknow]

thanks CP, also bookmarked

[Aharon]

Thanks for info on new website.

The website contains news announcement that SURPRISED and SHOCKED me (here is my face expression )

It says that Qantas will challenge Air New Zealand for dominance of non stop Auckland to KJFK to Auckland route!!!

That got me baffled as I thought government of New Zealand would not allow Qantas to offer new non stop service between those 2 cities??

At least, the new website just answered my 2 month old question post on aircraft type that Air New Zealand is planning to use for non stop service between NZAA and KJFK. It is 787-9!!!!

The non stop route is 7,717 nautical miles. 787-9 range is 7635 nautical mile range.

That is gonna be interesting challenge for both airlines using their 787-9!!!! I sure hope real life Air New Zealand 787 pilots who lurk around here will show up and post explanations on how the flight can be done NON STOP with required 90 minute of emergency fuel reserve!!!!

Regards,

Aharon

[chopper_nut]

I'm a bit concerned hat there are no names behind this site.

[cowpatz]

Thanks for info on new website.

The website contains news announcement that SURPRISED and SHOCKED me (here is my face expression )

It says that Qantas will challenge Air New Zealand for dominance of non stop Auckland to KJFK to Auckland route!!!

That got me baffled as I thought government of New Zealand would not allow Qantas to offer new non stop service between those 2 cities??

At least, the new website just answered my 2 month old question post on aircraft type that Air New Zealand is planning to use for non stop service between NZAA and KJFK. It is 787-9!!!!

The non stop route is 7,717 nautical miles. 787-9 range is 7635 nautical mile range.

That is gonna be interesting challenge for both airlines using their 787-9!!!! I sure hope real life Air New Zealand 787 pilots who lurk around here will show up and post explanations on how the flight can be done NON STOP with required 90 minute of emergency fuel reserve!!!!

Regards,

Aharon

What Qantas is proposing is Ok and Air NZ have done similar hops through Australia to Asia in the past. I have heard unofficially that Qantas will operate there on the days that Air NZ doesn't so it will effectively give the traveling public a daily New York service.
The quoted range of an aircraft depends on many factors. Usually full tanks and a reasonable payload. The only way to increase, or conversely reduce, range is to alter it's payload. This is what Air NZ will manage. Being a long flight there will be less seats (pax) for more legroom. Very little if any cargo will be carried. Air NZ had hoped to have had the GE powered 787-9 (which is more fuel efficient) by now but there have been delays at Boeing.
We don't operate with a 90 min reserve policy. Normally a destination alternate is carried with a minimum of 30 min fuel on landing there. An exception to this is if the destination airfield has at least 2 non intersecting runways then no alternate is carried (as the other runway is effectively the alternate "airfield") but there must be a minimum of 60 min fuel remaining on landing, inclusive of the 30 min fixed fuel reserve.
There is no doubt that this will be a challenging route to operate, especially JFK to AKL which is into the prevailing westerly wind. The company has been running simulated flight plans for over a year to check the viability.
I would suspect that the first few flights would be lightly loaded until operating experience is gained on the route.
Fortunately I only have one more flight on the 787 before going back to the 777. I'm not really keen on the ULR stuff.

[cowpatz]

I'm a bit concerned hat there are no names behind this site.

It is run by a group of aviation enthusiasts. A friend of mine is one of them and is a keen aviation photographer.
I could ask him who the others are if you would like to know.

Aviationshotz

[chopper_nut]

No, if it's legit enthusiasts then that's fine. Just the lack of names and the fact that there are other blogs and the like that cover NZ movements pretty comprehensively. It just looked to me like a bunch of kids ripping off other sites.

[Aharon]

Cowpatz,

Thanks for all interesting explanations particularly on New Zealand aviation regulations concerning emergency fuel reserve requirement.

If it was up to me as CEO of Air New Zealand, I would have leased 777-200lrs from Delta airline. Non stop NZAA to KJFK to NZAA service is piece of cake for 777-200lrs!!

Regards,

Aharon

[cowpatz]

Cowpatz,

If it was up to me as CEO of Air New Zealand, I would have leased 777-200lrs from Delta airline. Non stop NZAA to KJFK to NZAA service is piece of cake for 777-200lrs!!

Regards,

Aharon

As much as I hate to say it A350-1000s would be the aircraft of choice.

[Aharon]

Cowpatz,

If it was up to me as CEO of Air New Zealand, I would have leased 777-200lrs from Delta airline. Non stop NZAA to KJFK to NZAA service is piece of cake for 777-200lrs!!

Regards,

Aharon

As much as I hate to say it A350-1000s would be the aircraft of choice.

Cowpatz,

I understand your reasoning but the problem is that Air New Zealand has NO idea if the non stop service between NZAA and KJFK will be commercial success or not hence my suggestion for temporary lease of 8,800 nautical mile range 777-200lr until Air New Zealand sees this route as profitable success with favorable long term forecast for continued success, then they can buy A350-1000.

Pssst pssst it takes one or 2 year to get new A350-1000 so Air New Zealand can lease 777-200lrs now while ordering the Airbus planes now. One or 2 year later, if the route is success, then accept delivery of A350-1000. If the route is big flop, then they can cancel order of the new planes and return the lease of 777-200lrs. No risk

Regards,

Aharon

Regards,

Aharon

[Aharon]

https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/09/17/air- ... Zoe_zMSJhI

[Charl]

Best go on a diet before you try this one, every bit helps it seems.

[Charl]

And now, this.

Can't help feeling someone is playing MINE IS BIGGER THAN YOURS.

I actually find 17 hours in the air something I'd avoid by preference.
Six hours and a nice hotel before the next leg is so much more civilised.

[Aharon]

And now, this.

Can't help feeling someone is playing MINE IS BIGGER THAN YOURS.

I actually find 17 hours in the air something I'd avoid by preference.
Six hours and a nice hotel before the next leg is so much more civilised.

That is interesting news. They should have used 777-200lrs with much longer range than 787-9 has!!!

Regards,

Aharon

[FlyingKiwi]

It's not a great look for the airline, I think it's fair to say. You'd think an enroute stop wouldn't be unreasonable but I guess it all comes down to $$$'s?

[cowpatz]

It didn't divert to NAN in the end. It briefly turned 90 towards NAN then turned back to AKL. Dynamic flight re-routing has always been part of the equation for operating this route.
It would have operated a DDP (Diversion Decision Point) plan. In these types of plans a reduced contingency fuel (0 instead of 2 %) is used up to the Decision Point. Then the full 2% needs to available from the DDP to destination. If under at that point then a decision needs to be made as to the weather at destination (actual and forecast) and revise any alternate selection. This will determine whether to continue to destination or divert to the refuel airport.
The AKL TAF had a tempo period of forecast fog with visibility down to 500m BKN 600 ft from 0600 to 0800 NZ time. It would appear that the fog didn't eventuate and there would have been a sufficient period of time from the end of the Tempo to ETA. CHC TAF wasn't that flash either.
To be fair this sector was never intended to be operated with this model of 787. The GE powered and especially configured aircraft, was meant to operate this sector but with Boeing's woes and Covid, that wont happen for quite a while.

[Charl]

The 787-9 would comfortably manage Auckland - Johannesburg, slightly more than 12,000 km.
Oliver Tambo is hot 'n high so maybe the return would need to stage through Cape Town.
Can one refuel without disembarking, I wonder?

It would be the closest thing to an "Antarctic Crossing".



EDIT:
Coming home would have some lovely jetstream assist!



Wonder if Scott Base could be a diversion airport?
MMm ANZ might not like my idea, after all.

[deeknow]

The 787-9 would comfortably manage Auckland - Johannesburg, slightly more than 12,000 km.

Might struggle w ETOPS compliance on that route?

[cowpatz]

They have their hands full just with JFK; and ORD recommencing soon.