NZ289 Turnback to AKL After Permission Refused to Land at PVG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
NZ289 Turnback to AKL After Permission Refused to Land at PVG
Air New Zealand flight to Shanghai forced to turn back
Author Chris Keall, NZ Herald , Section National, Publish Date Sunday, 10 February 2019, 1:41p.m.
Our national carrier has been struck by its second turnaround drama within a week.
Air New Zealand Flight 289 was forced to turn back midway through its flight to Shanghai last night, according to passenger Eric Hundman.
Hundman, an assistant professor at NYU's Shanghai campus, told the Herald the flight took off from Auckland as scheduled close to midnight last night but "midway through our flight, the pilot informs us that Chinese authorities had not given this plane permission to land, so we needed to turn around. A permitting issue, supposedly," he says.
The flight returned to Auckland around 9.30am this morning, Hundman says.
Shortly after 11.30am this morning, Hundman was sent a txt from Air NZ saying "As you were advised onboard, the aircraft operating your flight did not have regulatory approval to land in China and was required to return to Auckland."
An Air NZ spokeswoman tells the Herald:
"NZ289 Auckland to Shanghai returned to Auckland around four and a half to five hours into its journey after it was discovered a technicality meant the particular aircraft operating this service did not have Chinese regulatory authority to land in China.
"Customers will be accommodated for the day at hotels or at the airport's Strata Lounge before they depart for Shanghai on a special service at 11pm this evening.
"We know customers will be deeply disappointed and frustrated by this situation and we are very sorry for the disruption to their travel plans."
Hundman says, "I would be stunned if Air NZ had allowed a plane full of passengers to take off without being quite sure they would be able to land it in Shanghai."
The Herald has asked Air NZ for elabouration on that point.
Reparations offered so far has been meagre, Hundman says.
"We were given hotel vouchers for the Crowne Plaza, $30 of meal vouchers for use at the airport, and taxi vouchers. There's been no compensation offered for time lost or hassle Hundman says.
Hundman was allowed out of the airport to rest at the Plaza because he had a visa. Those who did not had to camp out at the Strata Lounge - the so-called "second class" option.
He says passengers were woken up by the pilot with the turnaround announcement four or five hours into the flight. He was one of a handful travelling business class, so could only gauge the reaction of a handful of passengers around him, but he says all were shocked.
Hundman tweeted as the flight returned to Auckland:
The incident comes just days after an Auckland-Queenstown flight was forced to turn around, with passengers reportedly "losing their minds" amid poor communication and a five-hour delay.
Author Chris Keall, NZ Herald , Section National, Publish Date Sunday, 10 February 2019, 1:41p.m.
Our national carrier has been struck by its second turnaround drama within a week.
Air New Zealand Flight 289 was forced to turn back midway through its flight to Shanghai last night, according to passenger Eric Hundman.
Hundman, an assistant professor at NYU's Shanghai campus, told the Herald the flight took off from Auckland as scheduled close to midnight last night but "midway through our flight, the pilot informs us that Chinese authorities had not given this plane permission to land, so we needed to turn around. A permitting issue, supposedly," he says.
The flight returned to Auckland around 9.30am this morning, Hundman says.
Shortly after 11.30am this morning, Hundman was sent a txt from Air NZ saying "As you were advised onboard, the aircraft operating your flight did not have regulatory approval to land in China and was required to return to Auckland."
An Air NZ spokeswoman tells the Herald:
"NZ289 Auckland to Shanghai returned to Auckland around four and a half to five hours into its journey after it was discovered a technicality meant the particular aircraft operating this service did not have Chinese regulatory authority to land in China.
"Customers will be accommodated for the day at hotels or at the airport's Strata Lounge before they depart for Shanghai on a special service at 11pm this evening.
"We know customers will be deeply disappointed and frustrated by this situation and we are very sorry for the disruption to their travel plans."
Hundman says, "I would be stunned if Air NZ had allowed a plane full of passengers to take off without being quite sure they would be able to land it in Shanghai."
The Herald has asked Air NZ for elabouration on that point.
Reparations offered so far has been meagre, Hundman says.
"We were given hotel vouchers for the Crowne Plaza, $30 of meal vouchers for use at the airport, and taxi vouchers. There's been no compensation offered for time lost or hassle Hundman says.
Hundman was allowed out of the airport to rest at the Plaza because he had a visa. Those who did not had to camp out at the Strata Lounge - the so-called "second class" option.
He says passengers were woken up by the pilot with the turnaround announcement four or five hours into the flight. He was one of a handful travelling business class, so could only gauge the reaction of a handful of passengers around him, but he says all were shocked.
Hundman tweeted as the flight returned to Auckland:
The incident comes just days after an Auckland-Queenstown flight was forced to turn around, with passengers reportedly "losing their minds" amid poor communication and a five-hour delay.
Well, at least there were no Americans involved to blame this one on.
One wonders if it was the leased EVA Air aircraft?
I don't have access to that info
I don't have access to that info
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The plane was ZK-NZQ, a B-789 delivered in September 2018. Supposedly ANZ's thirteenth and final 787 delivery for now.
Maybe the document had the Boeing N-number or was filed before the plane was registered in New Zealand and this aircraft was not listed.
Maybe the document had the Boeing N-number or was filed before the plane was registered in New Zealand and this aircraft was not listed.
I suppose that I am naive, but I had no idea that someone, somewhere sifted through which a/c were operating which flights & turned away those which didn’t appeal to them. What would be the actual basis for refusing to accept this particular a/c ?
As far as I can see, only ANZ's first 10 B789s have been used on mainland China services to date, so sounds like poor planning on someone's part.
Well we already know what difference it makes. 
As to why, it would appear that the Chinese need to grant permission, on an individual registration basis, for aircraft to operate there, and that no permission has yet been sought (or if sought, not yet granted) for the final three B789s ZK-NZM/N/Q.
I believe the last few 787s in the ANZ fleet have a different cabin configuration, so maybe they aren't intended to be used on the PVG/PEK route and there was a last-minute substitution that wasn't thought through.
That's all supposition, of course - other explanations are no doubt available.
As to why, it would appear that the Chinese need to grant permission, on an individual registration basis, for aircraft to operate there, and that no permission has yet been sought (or if sought, not yet granted) for the final three B789s ZK-NZM/N/Q.
I believe the last few 787s in the ANZ fleet have a different cabin configuration, so maybe they aren't intended to be used on the PVG/PEK route and there was a last-minute substitution that wasn't thought through.
That's all supposition, of course - other explanations are no doubt available.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, the passengers made it finally
https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania...11-p50wxx.html
https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania...11-p50wxx.html
Passengers on board an Air New Zealand flight to Shanghai that was forced to return to Auckland over the weekend have finally landed in China.
the flight was most likely forced to turn back because there had been a "cock-up" with the paperwork at Air New Zealand's end.
most likely the aircraft registration filed with the Chinese authorities was different from the registration of the aircraft that was used on the flight.
"In that scenario there's just no way the Chinese were ever going to permit that aircraft to land."
the flight was most likely forced to turn back because there had been a "cock-up" with the paperwork at Air New Zealand's end.
most likely the aircraft registration filed with the Chinese authorities was different from the registration of the aircraft that was used on the flight.
"In that scenario there's just no way the Chinese were ever going to permit that aircraft to land."
Well we already know what difference it makes.
As to why, it would appear that the Chinese need to grant permission, on an individual registration basis, for aircraft to operate there, and that no permission has yet been sought (or if sought, not yet granted) for the final three B789s ZK-NZM/N/Q.
As to why, it would appear that the Chinese need to grant permission, on an individual registration basis, for aircraft to operate there, and that no permission has yet been sought (or if sought, not yet granted) for the final three B789s ZK-NZM/N/Q.
Is that kosher as per ICAO agreements?
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKCN1Q00F3
“This was very much an administrative issue,” she added. “There’s an expectation that inbound aircraft be registered, that the flight in question had not fulfilled the administrative requirements.”
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 63
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"it was a temporary aircraft being leased by Air New Zealand, which had not been registered. Aircraft travelling into China are required to be registered. This aircraft was not."
PM: Plane turned back from China no reflection on relations
PM: Plane turned back from China no reflection on relations
Its Chinese New Year and for the duration of the holiday period I believe they put on aircraft with a greater number of economy seats than the 787s that operate Auckland-Shanghai for the rest of the year.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's Telegraph gives a new slant to the reason permission was refused due to reference in paperwork to Taiwan !
Article here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...wan-reference/
"An Air New Zealand plane en route to Shanghai was forced to turn around mid-air and return to Auckland on Sunday because the flight’s paperwork included a reference to the disputed island of Taiwan, according to a local media report. The Stuff news website on Tuesday cited multiple sources as confirming that documents for the Air NZ flight 289 included a reference to Taiwan which China understood to be an acknowledgement that the island was independent......................."
Article here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...wan-reference/
"An Air New Zealand plane en route to Shanghai was forced to turn around mid-air and return to Auckland on Sunday because the flight’s paperwork included a reference to the disputed island of Taiwan, according to a local media report. The Stuff news website on Tuesday cited multiple sources as confirming that documents for the Air NZ flight 289 included a reference to Taiwan which China understood to be an acknowledgement that the island was independent......................."
Specifically, according to the original article:
Sources say that officials in Beijing warned Air New Zealand to remove reference to any paperwork which suggested Taiwan was a state back in 2018, but someone forgot to do so.
The problem related to documentation from New Zealand's Civil Aviation Authority which was included as part of Air New Zealand's application to allow the particular plane to land in China. According to sources "the Chinese were very explicit" about what the issue was, however the issue was not resolved. The source added that the airline "could have cast a political lens" over the CAA documentation but did not do so.
CAA disputed the version of events, without giving details.
The problem related to documentation from New Zealand's Civil Aviation Authority which was included as part of Air New Zealand's application to allow the particular plane to land in China. According to sources "the Chinese were very explicit" about what the issue was, however the issue was not resolved. The source added that the airline "could have cast a political lens" over the CAA documentation but did not do so.
CAA disputed the version of events, without giving details.
A bit more detail is emerging.
The Chinese apparently require, for every new aircraft to be used on services to China, a list of the other routes and destinations the aircraft is going to be used on.
ANZ use the B789 on Auckland-Taipei, but they listed that destination as "Taipei, Taiwan" on the paperwork which, predictably, the Chinese objected to as they don't recognise the country.
Ironically, the aircraft used on the flight has never actually been to Taipei.
The Chinese apparently require, for every new aircraft to be used on services to China, a list of the other routes and destinations the aircraft is going to be used on.
ANZ use the B789 on Auckland-Taipei, but they listed that destination as "Taipei, Taiwan" on the paperwork which, predictably, the Chinese objected to as they don't recognise the country.
Ironically, the aircraft used on the flight has never actually been to Taipei.
Last edited by DaveReidUK; 13th Feb 2019 at 08:48. Reason: spelling
This whole episode is probably the Chinese using a small faux pas to hit back on political/trade issues that are going on at the moment in this part of the world.
The Chinese aren't happy with some events. Huawei has been blocked, for the time being at least, as a provider for the 5G mobile network (security issues with Five Eyes) and that there's been push back on Chinese influence in the South Pacific.
The Chinese aren't happy with some events. Huawei has been blocked, for the time being at least, as a provider for the 5G mobile network (security issues with Five Eyes) and that there's been push back on Chinese influence in the South Pacific.
