|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 6, 2011 17:52:24 GMT 12
Well done on that one Colin.
|
|
|
Post by angels15 on May 6, 2011 20:18:51 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on May 9, 2011 11:28:43 GMT 12
Marvellous photo Colin, good timing!
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on May 9, 2011 14:21:54 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on May 9, 2011 14:52:07 GMT 12
QANTAS are official sponsors of the Wallabies.
|
|
|
Post by nzompilot on May 9, 2011 14:55:14 GMT 12
Makes sense really - the only way the Wobblies can be competitive is to have a Kiwi coach, so makes sense to advertise them on a ZK registered and based bird.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on May 9, 2011 14:58:49 GMT 12
QANTAS are official sponsors of the Wallabies. Yes, and QANTAS have testified that Jetconnect is an independent company, which happens to be owned by Qantas. Using ZK aircraft, with crew operating under NZ labour rules etc.
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on May 9, 2011 21:05:04 GMT 12
QANTAS are official sponsors of the Wallabies. Yes, and QANTAS have testified that Jetconnect is an independent company, which happens to be owned by Qantas. Using ZK aircraft, with crew operating under NZ labour rules etc. Maybe it's a severe case of zapping? ;D If New Zealand wasn't a third-world country as far as employee rights are concerned, then big companies from overseas wouldn't use its citizens as sweat-shop labour. Go The Wallabies! ;D
|
|
|
Post by yak2 on May 9, 2011 21:30:47 GMT 12
the only way the Wobblies can be competitive is to have a Kiwi coach, so makes sense to advertise them on a ZK registered and based bird. Hmmm. Don't recall them having a Kiwi coach in previous RWC's and they have done OK. Apparently.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on May 9, 2011 21:37:48 GMT 12
Maybe it's a severe case of zapping? ;D If New Zealand wasn't a third-world country as far as employee rights are concerned, then big companies from overseas wouldn't use its citizens as sweat-shop labour. I got the impression that this particular case is mainly due to the Qantas-specific issues in Australia, rather than general labour laws, although pay rates are part of the reason. Mmmm, maybe we should stop wondering off-thread.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on May 11, 2011 22:12:02 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 27, 2011 17:51:59 GMT 12
Withthe opening of the new Tainui-Novotel Hotel right next to the airport today, you should have a great new, warm, wind-free place to spot from now Colin, if they let you lurk in their corridors and shoot out the window. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kereru on Jun 3, 2011 15:43:26 GMT 12
Withthe opening of the new Tainui-Novotel Hotel right next to the airport today, you should have a great new, warm, wind-free place to spot from now Colin, if they let you lurk in their corridors and shoot out the window. ;D Hmm sounds like a good idea I know someone working there too not sure if that will help. Security at AKL is becoming obsessive especially if you have big camera and long lens. Should have been there yesterday or early this morning to catch the German Air Force A319? mrcaviation.blogspot.com/2011/06/and-gone-already.html#linksI been trying my 300mm and 2x converter at AKL. Still quite a bit of heat haze tho. Two 772s in my sights. Trusty Convair taxing in. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 4, 2011 10:45:13 GMT 12
Hey Colin, nice photos as always. Did you see that polished grey-coloured B737, registration started with 'VP' yesterday or day before? It was parked on the freight apron C1 along with ZK-NQC. I think it may have been a real old -100 series.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 4, 2011 10:52:35 GMT 12
Incidentally what is security's issue with the long lens etc?
|
|
|
Post by Ykato on Jun 4, 2011 11:10:28 GMT 12
Incidentally what is security's issue with the long lens etc? I reckon a bit over board.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 4, 2011 11:32:21 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Kereru on Jun 4, 2011 19:54:36 GMT 12
Yes a very nice 737-200 Cayman Island registered. www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=VP-CBA&distinct_entry=trueA couple of us spotters have been questioned at AKL mainly when we use the upper level of the domestic car park. I was told no photographs beyond the front of the terminal unless authorised by the airport company. Any one with a telephoto lens could be approached I guess and all due mainly to the RWC event. I have been visiting and taking photos at Mangere since before the airport was built and a bit sad to see this happening to bonafide enthusiasts in this day and age. I seldom go there now. Just not worth the hassle. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by haughtney1 on Jun 4, 2011 21:59:51 GMT 12
Colin, I think you might find that the aiport company is on very shaky ground from a legal standpoint. Unless they pass a specific bylaw restricting/banning the use of cameras etc, you are allowed to photograph what you like where you like. Its quite a simple tenant in law..i.e. it is space freely accessable to the public, they cant in essence restrict the view..or your desire to catch images from a vantage point. They could concievably restrict your access to the carpark..but even then if you parked and paid...you are there lawfully and in a purpose for which the carpark was designed for. Its just typical small minded beauracracy..with delusions of grandure.
|
|
|
Post by FlyingKiwi on Jun 5, 2011 21:14:05 GMT 12
Problem is, even if you're technically in the right, it just isn't worth arguing with them. Easier just to go somewhere else, even if it is admitting "defeat" to a certain extent, than have a long drawn out argument with someone who is convinced you're there to cause trouble, somehow, by taking photos. Part of the reason I mainly stick to Ardmore and regional airports now.
|
|