Air New Zealand
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Godzone
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure, (Just having a pop at captjns). At the end of the day a common fleet saves on a multitude of costs, (maint., crew training etc, etc)
The bean counters probably came down with a better deal from Airbus.........
The bean counters probably came down with a better deal from Airbus.........
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer might be found in paragraph 4 of this link in the Middle East forum. http://www.pprune.org/middle-east/33...roll-cafe.html
In less time than it takes to say "sell-cheap-an'-milk'em-dry-with-the-cost-of-spare-saddles-oolala-m'sieur",
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot
.
Did not mean to offend any Airbus Drivers. I will say that the Airbus is a very comfortable ride in the back. And the cockpit sure looks more user friendly too.
.Did not mean to offend any Airbus Drivers. I will say that the Airbus is a very comfortable ride in the back. And the cockpit sure looks more user friendly too.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which one is the most cost efficient/fuel efficient, 320 or NG?
... and Airbus on the other hand, naturally will say Airbus wins hands down.Light loads, the NG can putter along happily at FL410 burning about 33kgs per minute. Not sure about the Airbus capabilities however. Anyone shed light on regarding fuel efficiency for the IAE V2500 motor?
Air NZ was known for achieving discounts on its aircraft purchases by buying the last of the "superseded" models off the line. While they have 737-300s they aren't as old as that sounds, as they were the very last off the production line (same with some other types they operate).
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Godzone
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot.
I have about 4,000 hrs on the 737 (300-800), 757/767 & nearly the same on 319,320 & 321.I was initially sceptical of the FBW etc, but that's the same for the 777. So in the end they are all just aeroplanes. However, the "Bus" is the nicer (quieter, roomier, more comfortable) place to work in!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May Air New Zealand have nothing but joy with their disposable airplanes.
Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air New Zealand schedule question
Air New Zealand 777 HKG layover?
Network timetable question...Air New Zealand cut their HKG-LHR 777 service to 5 p/week for winter sched from daily but the AKL-HKG remains daily...all timings remain standard. My question is that by my estimates they must now layover a 777 for almost 36 hours twice per week in HKG?
Anyone know if this right-seems amazing to leave an aircraft downroute for that long (as a good ex network planner!)
Network timetable question...Air New Zealand cut their HKG-LHR 777 service to 5 p/week for winter sched from daily but the AKL-HKG remains daily...all timings remain standard. My question is that by my estimates they must now layover a 777 for almost 36 hours twice per week in HKG?
Anyone know if this right-seems amazing to leave an aircraft downroute for that long (as a good ex network planner!)
