Some Christchurch folks are not happy with Air NZ

[kiwithrottlejockey]

from The Press....

Turbo props: slower, noisier, more cramped. Does
Air NZ think Christchurch travellers are suckers?

By DEVIN DORE | 9:03AM - Thursday, 04 August 2016


There are no security checks before boarding an ATR. Probably because hijackers and
terrorists don't like flying them either. — Photograph: Andy Jackson/Fairfax NZ.

IS OUR national air carrier exploiting our pride and loyalty to the point where it is arrogantly and surreptitiously taking us in Christchurch for suckers. I think so, and here is why I think so.

In my lifetime, the Christchurch-Wellington sector which we used to call the “Main Trunk” has been serviced by the DC3, the Vickers Viscount and the Fokker Friendship aircraft.

We left behind the lower, slower turbo prop aircraft and entered the jet age, first with the prodigious Boeing 737 followed by the Airbus A320 which provided excellent service before being replaced by the lower slower ATR 72 and Q300 turbo prop aircraft.

Now of course if you don't fly between Christchurch and Wellington more than a couple of times a year this won't bother you too much, but never the less consider these facts:

• According to Air New Zealand's website schedules, The ATR and Q300 aircraft are around 30 percent slower than the A320.
• If you don't fly regularly you are more than likely not aware that the ticket you have purchased is not for a flight on a modern jet service until you reach the airport. Yes there is always palpable sense of WTF on an ATR between CHC and WLG.
• Of 11 flights from Christchurch to Wellington on a typical day, nine of these — yes nine — out of 11 are either ATR or the even smaller Q300 propeller driven aircraft.
• Boarding is from the recently built but often over crowded regional lounge designed for flights to smaller centres like Westport or Oamaru or Blenheim. If indeed they still fly there of course.
• If you're into exercise you'll enjoy the 250 metre trek just to get to the gate before you pass the puffer jacket clad flight attendants who ensure you don't walk into a spinning prop or board the wrong aeroplane. Forget using the Koru Club it's even further to walk.
• There are no security checks on passengers boarding an ATR or Q300. Probably because hijackers and terrorists don't like flying in them either.
• There are no airbridge facilities available for the ATR or Q300. This means that you are subjected to all weather conditions to board your aircraft and we all know what Wellington for example can turn on in that department.
• It is much noisier in the cabin of a turbo prop aircraft and they are subject at times to significant vibration.
• The seating is more cramped, it has to be, the cabin is much smaller.
• The navigation systems in an ATR are not as sophisticated as an A320. What this means is that if you are flying to Queenstown in an ATR you are often diverted to Invercargill and given a free 2 hour bus ride to Queenstown. An A320 on the other hand can use RNP to fly into Queenstown operating to a much lower weather minima.

The Airbus A320 is significantly faster than an ATR turbo prop aircraft.
— Photograph: Bevan Read/Fairfax NZ.

Get this, a seat on an ATR is the same price as an Airbus A320 and often more.

Now as mentioned previously, of 11 flights from Christchurch to Wellington on a typical day, nine of these are either ATR or Q300 turbo prop aircraft.

Also on a typical day there are 14 flights between Wellington and Auckland. Every single one of these is an A320 yet this sector is only a few minutes longer than Christchurch to Wellington. Try just once putting an ATR on this sector and there would be huge indignation. That's one way of putting it.

Which begs the question, why are we in Christchurch being treated so poorly by Air New Zealand.

There are other issues of course, such as I discovered when I went to book a trip to Sydney a few days ago. Of five Air New Zealand flights from Christchurch to Sydney the only direct flight at 6.15am was on a Virgin Australia service, say no more, but at least it was a jet service.

The rest were through Wellington, Melbourne or Auckland taking either 7 hours 15 minutes or if you are really lucky 6 hours and 35 minutes. As it happens I am I am taking the shorter Auckland route to Sydney on Sunday. And look, when was the last time you saw one of our Boeing 787 Dreamliners or one of our Boeing 777's here in Christchurch.

It may seem to some readers that all this is no more than an attempt to win an Air New Zealand Whine Award but just in case the point has been missed we are talking here about our national airline servicing our country's second biggest city. The word servicing of course can have a number of different meanings as those in the bloodstock industry will acknowledge. I can't help but feel at times that it's the latter servicing that Air New Zealand has in mind for Christchurch.

Come on Air New Zealand we know you own the skies in this part of the world, in other words you have no real opposition and if you do, you buy into them or come to an arrangement, but please don't take the mickey, we deserve better down here, especially on the Main Trunk.

• Kevin Dore is a Christchurch businessman, frequent traveller, aircraft owner and holder of a current private pilots licence.

www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/82769956

[Dave Homewood]

What an absolute joke and typical media beat up. This guy needs to take a good hard look at himself. If he's that worried about a few minutes longer in the air he could always buy an L-39 or something.

[nuuumannn]

Kevin Dore is a Christchurch businessman, frequent traveller, aircraft owner and holder of a current private pilots licence.

Cripes, man, stop whining! No competition? Jetstar is real competition and will increase the number of aircraft it operates and the frequency of its services.

Could be worse, could be an all-ATR fleet - oh wait... That's gonna happen one day

[johnnyfalcon]

I dunno, I kinda agree with his perspective, I'd been thinking along the same lines for a while...Of course, I also live in Christchurch, travel to Wellington semi-regularly and have my private pilot's license too.

[Bruce]

lots of places in NZ where all we get is ATRs and Dash -8s (which I'm actually quite happy with) Hamilton hasnt had a domestic jet for decades... considering the types of routes involved even in the Christchurch example, the turboprops are the right aircraft for the job...

[troops]

He made the same point to AirNZ almost 3 years ago on their Facebook page too

Not sure what the big fuss is about, the cookies are better on the regionals than the crisps on the jets anyway...

[Dave Homewood]

I love the way he thinks the Boeing 737's he so misses were "modern jets", implying the turboprops are older...

[nuuumannn]

A lot of us here have flying experience, Johnny. The thing that annoys me the most about this is that, rather than a carefully considered discussion about the choice of aircraft on differing routes, it is just a dig at Air NZ through the media. The airline is an easy target and this sort of thing isn't helpful to anyone.

[Dave Homewood]

At the top of the article the author's name is Devin Dore and at the bottom it is Kevin Dore.

[kiwithrottlejockey]

I see the WHINGERS & MOANERS are at it again....


• Air NZ defends use of turboprops on main trunk routes


Give me a turboprop on that route any day. You're only in the air for ten minutes or so longer (which incidentally gives one more time to enjoy a cup of tea and a bikky instead of having to pour it down on a jet service); but you also have a greater choice of travel times due to more flights than if all services were jets; plus (and its the BIG PLUS), you don't have to queue up to empty your pockets, pull your laptop out of its bag and get yourself scanned, like you do with jet services. You simply turn up at the departure lounge, scan your boarding pass and walk straight onto the aircraft without going through all that annoying security crap. AND....boarding and disembarking times are considerably quicker when the aeroplane is a turboprop compared to when it is a jet.

I guess the whingers and moaners are always free to fly Jetstar if they wish to always travel on jets between Wellington and Christchurch, although they will have to put up with considerably less choice of flights and crappy service when things go wrong, but I guess that is their choice.

[thomarse]

Having traveled the route last Thursday, I'm happy to comment.

Numbers seem to have changed - I count 20 flights on a weekday, 2 of which are A320. At peak times, there's one every 30 minutes - I can confirm that when I flew, the previous flight was boarding at the final check-in time for the next.

I wonder what this knocker would think if Air NZ halved the frequency and put just A320s on the run? No doubt he'd bitch about that too.

And as for Jetstar to the rescue - yeah right, 3 flights a day. Guess why? Lack of demand thus lack of profit (for which I don't necessarily blame them)

One thing that does warrant criticism is the bloody trek to the aircraft at both CHC and WLG, out in the elements on the tarmac plus the route march down the corridor in WLG's case and the breezeway in CHC's but that is not the airlines' fault. I see WLG at least try to put as many of the flights on Gates 18/19/20 as they can (immediately in front of the main concourse)

[isc]

I see that the Government has given Jetstar the contract for air transport over ANZ, someone in Wellington must have read the article, and forgot that they owned an airline. isc

[ErrolC]

As a taxpayer, I wish the current position of awarding government work on a commercial basis to continue. Giving AirNZ preference due to the Government being majority shareholder would be foolish.

[Peter Lewis]

I agree with Errol. It is never good commercial practice to give automatic and unquestioning preference to one supplier over all others, even if you own that supplier.

Back in the day, the Government insurance business went unquestioningly to State Insurance and Government Life, banking business to the BNZ, transport to the Post Office NZ Rail and Railway Road Services, and so on.

This means that those entities can provide high cost shoddy service knowing that they are never going to lose that business, no matter what. Effectively, it just becomes  an underhand subsidy and a recipe for institutional inefficiency.

That is why a number of large diversified corporates (e.g. Fletchers) deliberately do not give their own sister companies any preference when tendering out work. Keeps them lean and mean. Even now, Wespac handles the Government's banking business, not Kiwibank.

Also note that the NZ Government does not 'own' AirNZ. It just owns a number of shares in that company, alongside may private shareholders.

[Ian Warren]

Frankly and my name is not Frank, I simply enjoy the ride and enjoy the flying experience, I away's request a window seat, only one occasion I missed getting the window seat and that was a return flight from Malaysia, in turn I score myself a five hour ride in that 777 cockpit, the aircraft had only entered the MAS airline fleet.

One other flight heading back from Tauranga, a DASH-8, this time a women was already in my window seat, I then explained the reasons I always take these seats is to study the land photo and pick landmark specific to my and the hobbt of Flight Simulation, we got really fine and she was impressed pointing aircraft coming into Taupo , she mentioned see had never seen that before, we were at 20,000ft , she contacted me weeks later after I told her the simulation scenery and see was showing here husband, the people you meet.

The best flight was another return from Malaysia, but was a transfer flight Auckland to Christchurch, Ansett 146, I knew two stewardess's on the flight and were I was placed was the back end, strangely the back end of the flight was filled with the people I meet on the MAS flight. Just after takeoff two girls in the front were swapping seats and photoing each views each side of the aircraft (perfect weather all the way down) their was sitting beside me and asked if she could get some photos Philly the stewardess popped up and I said to her Ill point out specific landmarks , it was fine with after checking with pilots , have the plane really got some seriouly great shots, being able to tell what was coming next - example the Mt Taranaki/Egmont to Ruapehu, good dozen people moving around aircraft even the front started to get in on the act best flight ever, one German family stayed in contact with me years later, Armin was in NZ for a quick stop and stopped here, German and Dutch girl never seen them again.

People simply gotta learn to enjoy the flight, ... funny thing mate worked as ground crew, air-bridge , Philly put me at the external door entrance so these people could thank me , Colin was having a great laugh , The fun thing of flying .. people just get there knickers in a bloody twist over nothing !

[nuuumannn]

It is what it is, really. These guys who criticise whether airlines fly turbo props or jets don't really put any thought into the vagaries of running an airline. Air NZ and NAC tried flying jets into smaller centres and with their scheduling turned out to be loss making, and before anyone pipes up and complains that its all about profit, the answer is , yep, it sure is. When a bolt can cost upwards of 3,000 dollars, it has to be. Profit is how airlines survive, not breaking even and certainly not losing money. The more money you have in the coffers, the better to deal with those unexpected little things you weren't planning for, like earthquakes, which might put off some would be tourists living in a far off country deciding whether or not to go to New Zealand. This means there are a couple of fewer seats on an international flight and then a domestic one. All these things have direct cause and effect and balancing an airline's books is a bit of a tight rope walk as a result. Turbo props are just more economical than jets on short haul routes, otherwise we'd be seeing more of the likes of the EMB 145s on domestic routes.

The Dashes have been around for awhile now, but they are undergoing internal refurbishment and an exterior respray into the new black livery, but the cabin of the newer ATR -72 600s as evidence, there isn't much you can do to change the design of the interiors of these aircraft. They are after all, just busses in the sky. At least the seats don't have that ghastly grey with coloured pin stripe coverings that trains and busses all over the world seem to be afflicted with. Attacking an airline for its fleet choices in the media because you had an uncomfortable flight is a bit crap though and does reek of clueless elitism.

Another thing (almost finished my rant), would these same complainants support higher air fares to cater to overhauling the domestic fleet interiors and making them more plush just for them? Probably not. Here's a statistic; to transport one passenger on your average regional airliner it costs around 850 dollars (could be aittle more or less, I was given this figure a few years ago). Times that by 50 or 68 and you get a rough idea of the operational cost of a regional airliner on a one way flight. The fact that we pay what we do as pax means that on average most domestic flights run at a near loss and that volume compensates for that loss.

Yes, it's expensive to fly domestic in New Zealand. That's it, suck it up. If you don't like it, catch a bus.

[Ian Warren]

Grant, the many times I say to people, "My most favourite part of the holiday is the flight" even enjoy the airport services, one flight to Aussie and the drug dog snuck up behind me, I just about went thru the roof, acknowledged who they/we were and perfectly fine.

The Ultimate example was when they first brought in the 'ARBUST' into the ANZ fleet, heading to Aussie again and it broke down, this was after we had boarded, thirty so minutes later we were asked to disembark and have breakfast on the company, happens all the time I guess, One passenger really 'spat the dumby' almost like a "Do you know who I am" .. a businessman I hate see how he operated his , well worked with others .. On that flight, I approach the stewardess and mentioned I had a connecting flight .. all good gave the details, I was not the only one and also not the only one on this specific flight.

The ARBUST < Hence the nickname, got us into Melbourne, funny part, racing to catch the customs quickly checked us through but as we entered the domestic transfer hall I was stopped by a Bomb checking squad, they asked if OK , by all means but be quick those others running are the same flight I was on ... This is getting exciting and people complain .. (Bloody Primadona's) Got to my SAAB and apologized ... even that flight got eventful, spotted a fire and away we went again. Simply so much fun !

PS: That Twit of a businessman would have got the worst service ever a complete empty row bar one other on my side, I am sure the girls would have loved to tip something on him, Yip half the fun is getting there.

[Ian Warren]

One other flight return into Christchurch from Sydney, a late night flight .. still have my window seat, many say you cant see a thing, surprising to say 'Yes you can' I do and seen much on many flights, the flight was another ARBUST, while flying I ask cabin staff if I could meet the pilot and check out the cockpit, I did not know the pilot but was intrigued with how and whys and the questions, it was late, by the time we both disembarked it would have been 12.45 plus .. soon as I come thru the air-bridge door there is airport staff wandering around with my baggage, when I mentioned was doing a cockpit tour and chatting to the pilots, she said "I can go home now ... thought we lost a passenger" biggest thing .. no-body in customs .. straight thru .. The fun of air travel !