NZ | Airports + Aviation News

[aucklandman]

Originally Posted by Cartel

Mate make sure you look at the reasoning, and please don't try to act like you know a whole lot more than you actually do, or anyone else here for that matter, because that's how you come off.

What did I say that wasnt in the reasoning? If it proves to be economic to fly to a city they will fly there, as I said this would have absolulty nothing to do with Air New Zealand anti CHCH sentiment.

[Davee]

Originally Posted by jafa

any excuse to hate on auckland...

im pretty sure air nz would give christchurch and wellington flights if they were as profitable as you make out david

Who said anything about hating Auckland? My family and personal connections with the AKL go back generations including the very real present - I couldn't hate a place that has been so formational in all the 40 years of my life - so I think you are being a tad presumptious - your comment jafa gives reason for NZers to think people from AKL are as your name sugests you are - and the f does not stand for fantastic - and most of us here don't think or want to think like that.

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

What did I say that wasnt in the reasoning? If it proves to be economic to fly to a city they will fly there, as I said this would have absolulty nothing to do with Air New Zealand anti CHCH sentiment.

I think you are right in Ben in saying that it is about the economics of the airline. AKL is Air NZ's hub!

I think the frustration that Cartel and I and most SIers and those from the the lower NI find is that the majority of tourist to NZ will end up in either AKL or CHC at the beginning or end of their trip. We have two excellent international airports, both doing well, but our national airline has just pulled the plug on one (at least with the North American link) which was working well, serving a great route, to start up another route at it's expense? Air NZ staff will openly tell you that. Then the airline announce they will start flying even more north american routes, not giving any of those customers the choice of entry or exit points in NZ?

[aucklandman]

Yes I agree that it does suck, thank you for explaining it in the way you did

I do find it annoying that Auckland is the ONLY hub, it defenitly should be evenley spread, and logic suggests CHCH.

But surely if the airline was flying to an airport and it proved to be a good economic success, both due to location and demand, why would they then pull out? Was CHCH Intl a success for Air NZ? Or has it become more of a trans-tasman hub?

Oh and Jafa wasn't talking about what you had said David, I think it was Cartel's response that he was talking about.

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

Oh and Jafa wasn't talking about what you had said David, I think it was Cartel's response that he was talking about.

cool just took it the wrong way jafa........

It seems to me both CHC and Air NZ are both being very suscessful. As you can see from the CHC Int thread - please look at it if you haven't already

Air New Zealand are doing well - new aircraft, new routes.

What does not make sense is the axing of something that was sucessful - what the media and staff are telling people are very different things.

One only hopes the national airline will utilise the SI a little more than just Australia in the future - I mean the door is open and Singapore, Korean, Jetstar, Pacific Blue, Emarites and Fijian are all serving CHC well. Singapore has picked up the slack that Air NZ created. I'd rather fly the national carrier than not, they are good and I'd rather fly in and out of CHC direct. Adding another 2 -3 hours to your already long international journey is just horrid. Hubbing through AKL is not as straight forward as they would have you believe - ask anyone who has done it.

[Trades]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/...ectid=10426037

I agree with what you are saying David. It's disappointing that they are axing successful routes, especially off the back of this news. Seems to me they could lease widebody aircraft if necessary.

[aucklandman]

Cool pic in that article!

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

Cool pic in that article!

Hmmmm I wonder which Island the 747 is flying over? Its a very rare sight now that you will see one of these beauties at CHC Int

[aucklandman]

Lol yea, USING THE SI FOR PUBLICITY!

[LX]

lol

I am skeptical about how successful those routes must be though if Air NZ is axing them

[Davee]

Originally Posted by LX

lol

I am skeptical about how successful those routes must be though if Air NZ is axing them

For CHC it was the LAX - mainly tourist and ferrying Kiwi's back and forth - it was sucessful - expansion getting in he way.............

[aucklandman]

Air NZ is very slack at times, I for one am with David here. Bring it back to CHCH. Maybe they will with the new 787's?

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

Air NZ is very slack at times, I for one am with David here. Bring it back to CHCH. Maybe they will with the new 787's?

I agree Ben - it is about the national airline using it's two biggest national partners! After all, why are both airports in the process now of expanding there sites with $100's of millions of new terminal, runway, control, parking and accomidation facilities?

I asked the Air NZ lady about the 787's and routes, she said they were unsure as to what was happening - they are hoping that CHC will get some of the action once the fleet had been updated - for one, AKL is becoming congested at times on top of all that has been said.

Marketing studies have clearly showed that utilizing both AKL & CHC as the primary entry and exit points for kiwis and tourist makes sense. This in no way threatens AKLs position as New Zealands primary hub and business capital, and will go a long way to establish further CHC's position as the countries secondary hub.

[aucklandman]

Originally Posted by DavidEugene

for one, AKL is becoming congested

Never!

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

Never!

not in the sky, but in the terminal - Wednesday the 3rd Janurary 2007 was one such time!!

[Kane007]

Originally Posted by DavidEugene

not in the sky, but in the terminal - Wednesday the 3rd Janurary 2007 was one such time!!

To a visitor what looks better - a pack out international terminal or a totally empty one.

Myself, I get a buzz being in a crowded terminal - Heathrow is a great example.

[aucklandman]

Yea I would agree with that, but only if its well managed.

Domestic is one that is hideous to be in when packed, but when Auckland Int. is busy its managed well and it looks good for the tourist too.

[flyin_higher]

They are upgrading the domestic terminal ben. It will look alot better once its done.

[Davee]

Originally Posted by aucklandman

Yea I would agree with that, but only if its well managed.

Domestic is one that is hideous to be in when packed,

Have to disagree Ben - so disorganised it was, they were giving out complaint forms for both Air NZ and the Airport Authority - not good. AKL will be much better with it's new spangley extended Int terminal and new Domestic. I must admit, I had a great cup of tea in the well staffed and cafe laiden Domestic Terminal while waiting for my connecting flight

But I do agree with a busy terminal is a good sign - it is fun, and you get a real buzz. I'm not fond of Heathrow busy though and I HATE cues for secruity

[Davee]

Originally Posted by flyin_higher

They are upgrading the domestic terminal ben. It will look alot better once its done.

It's functioning well, has great food outlets, easy to get around - but the new terminal will be so much better!

They need to do something about getting international and domestic transfers running a lot better.