|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 15, 2018 11:28:51 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by pjw4118 on Mar 16, 2018 14:32:14 GMT 12
Isnt it time that aviation here ( and many other places ) grew up and deregulated , if they allow single engined operation of jet aircraft across oceans surely reliability is no longer a real issue , just like new cars . So just as the taxi co ops got real fright to their over regulated profitable little cartels isnt it about time we uber ised air traffic to small centres. So if Pete Lewis was hopping off Whitianga or Wanganui he could take onlong a couple of extra bods. It might just rejuvenate GA.
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Mar 16, 2018 15:33:03 GMT 12
Isnt it time that aviation here ( and many other places ) grew up and deregulated , if they allow single engined operation of jet aircraft across oceans surely reliability is no longer a real issue , just like new cars . So just as the taxi co ops got real fright to their over regulated profitable little cartels isnt it about time we uber ised air traffic to small centres. So if Pete Lewis was hopping off Whitianga or Wanganui he could take onlong a couple of extra bods. It might just rejuvenate GA. Noting of course that Uber doesn't make a profit (loss of 4.5 billon last FY), so is sustainable only due to the courtesy of suckers investors money (sounds a bit like what everyone likes to accuse AirNZ of, with regard to domestic routes). Most of the regulations are well paid for in blood and to wipe them would only supply more blood. GA is about surplus folding stuff and spare time, both of which is much harder to come by today. So dropping airways charges aren't going to do diddly swat.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 16, 2018 16:53:47 GMT 12
Someone started doing that in the USA Peter, pilots can register with a website and tell it where they are going and how many seats might be available and the cost, and passengers can browse the site and find trips to odd destinations or much cheaper than airline flights. He was on Airplane Geeks a year or so back.
|
|
|
Post by pjw4118 on Mar 16, 2018 18:17:34 GMT 12
Madmac , talking about blood and safety , what airline in NZ has the worst record for crashes. For the rest just look at the stats on how many people fly in NZ and the number of corpses generated versus the number of those who drive . The difference is remarkable. So dont drive . It reminds me of the sailing ship versus steam argument , oh its too dangerous , they will all perish .One of them won and it wasnt sail. The steam laws continue to exist today only because of archaic regulations that made ex K class loco engine drivers able to retire into a cushy boilermans jobs. Today boilers arent coal fired but auto LPG units and they dont blow up ! So now turbine powered cargo ships , space rockets and nuclear submarines exist , its called progress. Surely its safe to allow a qualified pilot to fly mum and me to an airstrip to save some time and an hours trip to an AirNZ hub just to enjoy a bikkie and a water on a scheduled flight. Regarding profit ask Air NZ , in business terms , the domestic routes are milking cows.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Mar 16, 2018 21:20:04 GMT 12
Isnt it time that aviation here ( and many other places ) grew up and deregulated , if they allow single engined operation of jet aircraft across oceans surely reliability is no longer a real issue , just like new cars . So just as the taxi co ops got real fright to their over regulated profitable little cartels isnt it about time we uber ised air traffic to small centres. So if Pete Lewis was hopping off Whitianga or Wanganui he could take onlong a couple of extra bods. It might just rejuvenate GA. Well actually 'Pete Lewis' is flying to Whitianga - this Sunday (weather permitting).
|
|
|
Post by craig on Mar 17, 2018 7:20:55 GMT 12
I believe you are legally able to cost share (just as aeroclubs have done on trips for years ,ie all people on flight pay a share of the flight cost). Not so sure if this would legally apply to other members of the public. So that just leaves a means of advertising the flight to the public (uber esk). Clearly CAA would take a dim view and need well documented proof this was cost share vs profit. But just the same for the average PP going for a jolly, being able to offset perhaps 75% of the flight cost would be very attractive.
|
|
|
Post by pjw4118 on Mar 17, 2018 14:34:40 GMT 12
Mr Lewis, now that is freaky. But I am now content no more tree shaking , I will retire to my burrow.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 20, 2018 9:36:56 GMT 12
I'm sure Air New Zealand are quaking in their boots... not Air New Zealand feels Shane Jones' wrath over axed regional air links20 Mar, 2018 6:22am ![](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/resizer/i4tYJjJASriGKpu_3bDiZTfjidQ=/620x349/smart/filters:quality(70)/arc-anglerfish-syd-prod-nzme.s3.amazonaws.com/public/GXG24NLS2RH4PNQMEEQQDT2JEM.jpg) Economic Development Minister Shane Jones, centre, with Far North Holdings chief executive Andy Nock and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters at Kerikeri airport. Photo / Peter de Graaf By: Peter de Graaf Peter de Graaf is a reporter for the Northern Advocate peter.degraaf@northernadvocate.co.nz Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones has given a blunt warning to Air New Zealand to stop shutting down its regional air links. The extraordinary censure from the NZ First MP came during last Friday's announcement that the Government was stumping up $1.75 million towards the $4.75m cost of building a new terminal at Bay of Islands Airport near Kerikeri. Striding towards Air NZ's regional affairs manager, Ian Collier, Jones said ''terminal'' was a fitting word for the warning he was about to deliver. ''Don't keep closing down regional air links. And take that message to your supervisors.'' Later, Jones conceded he wasn't the shareholding minister for Air New Zealand but said he was speaking out as someone born and raised in the provinces. ''They've just ditched Kapiti, Kaitaia is gone with the wind ... While Air New Zealand has become very skilled at moving people around our major metropolitan areas, I think it is quite irresponsible of them to continue to degrade their provincial connectivity.'' As a champion for the regions he was ''absolutely'' within his rights to challenge Air New Zealand, which was still Crown-owned to a significant degree, he said. ''It might ruffle a few governance feathers but I'm not here to stroke the peacock. I'm here to get the mahi done.'' Collier said he didn't want to comment on Jones' reprimand straight away. In 2015, Air NZ axed its twice-daily flights to Kaitaia and a number of other regional centres. Earlier this month the airline announced it was also ending flights to Kapiti Coast. At the same time, however, it has boosted aircraft size and flights to Kerikeri. Jones' Bay of Islands Airport announcement last Friday was part of the latest tranche of funding delivered by the Government's Provincial Growth Fund. Also announced was $5m for wharf upgrades at Paihia, Russell and Opua. www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12015743
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Mar 20, 2018 10:43:19 GMT 12
Wait until Air NZ axe flights from Hamilton.
Then you'll be squealing.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 20, 2018 10:52:50 GMT 12
Not at all. They don't have that many flights anyway and they're all too expensive.
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Mar 20, 2018 11:46:07 GMT 12
The rot set in with Air NZ when the CEO's baton was passed from Rob Fyfe to Christopher Luxton. The company went from being run by somebody who was enthusiastic about running an airline to an accountant who only sees the cost of anything and not the actual value of what the company provides to the country whose name it invokes in its title.
Air New Zealand is now about as far away as is possible from the NAC attributes of providing a public service for all of New Zealand, including the parts of the country which earn the REAL wealth in terms of our export earnings which prop up the country's major metropolitan cities.
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Mar 20, 2018 12:16:40 GMT 12
Perhaps we should campaign for the government to spin NAC back out of AirNZ, the cost structures of AirNZ don't really lend themselves to operating smaller aircraft. The operators of the smaller aircraft don't seem to be able to reach critical mass (say roughtly 10 or so identical make & model airframes) so it leaves NZ at a bit of an impasse really for achieving cost effect air transport away from the main 6 or so centers.
Any body really good at writing funding applications,if we could get our hands on a good chunk of 1 billion dollars kicking about for the regions we could have a proper regional air service.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Mar 20, 2018 13:40:19 GMT 12
Yes, taxpayers (or ratepayers) transparently subsidising regions in line with open and challengable public policy goals is much better than an invisible subsidy from people that happen to use main trunk or international air services. Some issues around co-ordination with AirNZ services.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 20, 2018 14:34:28 GMT 12
Perhaps we should campaign for the government to spin NAC back out of AirNZ What good would that do? The regions they have puled out of will still be unprofitable and very risky for this new airline of yours, only they won't have the the rest of Air New Zealand backing them up financially to keep them afloat when the chocks are down. Airlines don't work on unprofitable routes, they collapse. Any body really good at writing funding applications,if we could get our hands on a good chunk of 1 billion dollars kicking about for the regions we could have a proper regional air service. Hasn't Shane Jones spent all that in Northland already? And Winston on his new racecourse....
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Mar 20, 2018 14:58:51 GMT 12
Perhaps the regions should break away from the part of New Zealand which is the metropolitan cities and keep their export earnings, electricity and water for their own use.
|
|
|
Post by oj on Mar 20, 2018 16:06:26 GMT 12
Barstewards! I have written before about this bullying of regional airports and their users. Too angry to relitigate it here ....
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Mar 20, 2018 18:56:46 GMT 12
When you have control of a company, you have two choices when you appoint a General Manager.
Choice One: You say 'make profits'. At that point, you lose direct control. Your appointee will do whatever it takes to make and maximise the money within the business. Lets face it, that's the goal of capitalistic private enterprise - the rest is largely window dressing. (And before you moan, the reality is that so far that system has provided the best benefits for the majority of the population within many countries).
Choice Two: You say "we, the owners, will micromanage the business, and tell you what you can and cannot do for the good of the country/the people/ Greenpeace/whatever". At that point your Manager, if he is any good will say "and how much of a subsidy are you willing to pay?"
Back in the (bad old) NAC days it cost an arm and a leg to fly Auckland/Wellington/Christchurch. That fare helped subsidise the flights to Kaikohe, Wanganui, Westport and Oamaru.
Nowadays ANZ has to meet and match the Jetstar fares on that main trunk route, so there is no subsidy money left. So the stark choices are: (a) ANZ axes those routes, OR (b) Someone - the Government/local Council (otherwise known as the taxpayer/ratepayer) pays ANZ a direct subsidy to maintain those otherwise uneconomic routes.
In the real world, there are no other choices - despite what Adern says there is no 'Free', someone somewhere is paying.
So next time you score a $49 fare between Auckland and Wellington, think about that.
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Mar 20, 2018 19:03:47 GMT 12
Perhaps the regions should break away from the part of New Zealand which is the metropolitan cities and keep their export earnings, electricity and water for their own use.
metropolitan cities, Auckland will do, the freeing the rest of economy of the politics of Auckland would be like the country winning lotto. Because most of those that have collapsed were due to insufficient air-frames and / insufficient cash flow / insufficient capital (I know of one other that collapsed because they were actively obstructed CAA). The punters want cheap airfares but also the aircraft that have on time reliably & those two things won't happen for the typical two bit operator with a couple airframes (kiwiair comes to mind). I seem to recall that Eagle when it first got the 1900D, it made a profit of buck a sector, a seat & flew 200 or so sectors a day ~ 6 days week. Which works out about 3/4 of a million a year, which may be a lot or not very much depending on how the accountants made every thing work. The 1900D were not particular efficient aircraft, with a comparatively high gross weight, 1600 hp PT6 (J31's & metros get around on 1000 hp engines) and a bit of a maintenance hog. When it is all said and done, the current practical limit is that there is little to nothing in the 19 seat to 40 seat range that is in production (pressurized aircraft that is). Apparently M7 will build metros if you buy 200 but as a minimum change version from the last production version so that isn't very promising really (i love metros but they really are 10,000 crack repairs in close formation).
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 20, 2018 20:07:10 GMT 12
Peter Lewis is spot on.
|
|