AIR - Air NZ.

[tim23]

That scenario doesn't suit couta1!

[Beagle]

I wonder if the whispers of Chicago will come to fruition? We'll know soon enough no doubt.

Maybe range could be an issue on return flights into the prevailing wind ?

[winner69]

OPerating stats for June tomorrow (I hope)

Will tell us how much better H2 has been compared to H1 (where passenger revenue was down 4%)

AIR guidance is 'more than $525m' ....FBU guidance is 'about $525m' - spooky both pick on this magic number of 525

[Robomo]

Maybe range could be an issue on return flights into the prevailing wind ?

Auckland-Chicago is 13,170 km, published maximum range for the Qantas 787-9 is 14,856 km, sufficient for Sydney - Chicago. Qantas is already flying the 787-9 Perth-London, which is 14,429 km. So Chicago is well in range to and from Auckland.

The AIR 787-9s yet to be delivered have more business and PE seats that the current planes, presumably with an eye to the heavier demand for these seats out of USA. Chicago would have to be a serious contender once these planes are delivered later this year, particularly as all the USA routes are doing well. A fire hydrant and 1 sq m grass patch is provided for inflight beagles.

The Swiss airline intelligence provider ch-aviation.com report that AIR will be looking at future widebody requirements later this year. My bet is that the 777X would have to be the favourite to eventually replace the 777-200 planes, which will be 20 years old in 2025. The 777X has a similar range to the 787-9, seats 100+ more passengers and will be similar setup to existing 777-300ER and the 787s (i.e. type commonality).

[Beagle]

Thanks Robomo. You made some great points and thanks for the reminder about the different seating configuration of the forthcoming 787-9's. This would give them slightly longer range with less PAX load right ? Surely a sign that Chicago is indeed on the cards. Agree also with what you've said about the 777X. Was reading in Australian Aviation how Boeing may be looking at an ultra long range version of same. One day we might see Auckland to Europe non stop....might need a 2 sq m artificial grass patch for beagle exercise on a flight that long

[Raz]

Thanks Robomo. You made some great points and thanks for the reminder about the different seating configuration of the forthcoming 787-9's. This would give them slightly longer range with less PAX load right ? Surely a sign that Chicago is indeed on the cards. Agree also with what you've said about the 777X. Was reading in Australian Aviation how Boeing may be looking at an ultra long range version of same. One day we might see Auckland to Europe non stop....might need a 2 sq m artificial grass patch for beagle exercise on a flight that long

Chicago has been mentioned for a while..would be interesting what the perceived demand really is for that route.

[Robomo]

Chicago has been mentioned for a while..would be interesting what the perceived demand really is for that route.

I was in Hawaii a month ago and chatted to a lot of the tour operators we met about tourism (as you do!). They have increasing number of 'Snowbirds' coming from Northern USA during the American Winter, quite happy to now fly 8 hours to Hawaii compared to 3 to Florida for a similar comparative airfare they were paying 10 years ago. This correlates with the big increase in capacity by Hawaiian Airlines to the mainland states.

I would not be surprised to see AIR starting with x3 flights a week, perhaps more during the American winter to get those snowbirds down South to the NZ summer.

[arc]

What we need is for Boeing to get the "Fast-and-High" Supersonic models off the drawing board and onto the runway. They are a logical choice for the Northern Continents to Deep Pacific routes... Realising of course that they are not allowed to go Supersonic over solid land due to the sonic boom passing over mom n pop's backyard, might wake the beagle from his afternoon siesta...

[Marilyn Munroe]

What we need is for Boeing to get the "Fast-and-High" Supersonic models off the drawing board and onto the runway. They are a logical choice for the Northern Continents to Deep Pacific routes... Realising of course that they are not allowed to go Supersonic over solid land due to the sonic boom passing over mom n pop's backyard, might wake the beagle from his afternoon siesta...

Whilst the over-water routing of AKL --> West Coast North America are suited to supersonic flights there is an economic barrier to this type of aircraft.

It takes an enormous amount of thrust to overcome the demons of gravity and drag.

The cost of this would restrict passengers to cabinet ministers having a jolly on the tax payer or Silicon Valley billionaires wanting to jump the citizenship queue. A technological breakthrough would be needed to make these aircraft economic.

Boop boop de do
Marilyn

"We obey the laws of fluid dynamics in this house."
Homer J Simpson.

[sb9]

OPerating stats for June tomorrow (I hope)

Will tell us how much better H2 has been compared to H1 (where passenger revenue was down 4%)

AIR guidance is 'more than $525m' ....FBU guidance is 'about $525m' - spooky both pick on this magic number of 525

Still no sign of those op stats for June, may be Eval can shed some light