No AOC for Skyairworld, delay for Solomon Airlines [Archive]

A1BUGSMASHER

3rd May 2007, 00:05

The Spanish operator of the 733 has decided to take the aircraft home, although I believe it has been wheel clamped by AAES until they sort out the bill......

In lieu of Scary Air World not having their AOC yet, OzJet has stepped in to cover the next couple of weeks operations..... All arranged at short notice to I believe.

Is there any truth to the rumour that Sky Air World failed their emergency procedures a little while back?? I am a little surprised by this as every time they are reported in the press they bag the F100 and B732 operators. Their website makes reference to being aviation solutions specialists..... The fact they have not been able to deliver on their first contract gives those established they have bagged considerable leverage:E

ringbinder

3rd May 2007, 01:57

OZjet - 732's??? Bit of a come down for the Solomons pax unfortunately - and via TSV possibly??? Ah well, with the limited capacity of the 732 it will give Solomon Airline some practice at being a bit short on payload when the E170 eventually gets going compared to the 733 they had. Sounds like a great business decision.

Wingletts

3rd May 2007, 06:43

everyone seems pretty quick to criticise SAW when they havent even had a chance to roll out yet..this is AVIATION isnt it? everyone has been victum of the perils of CASA before havent they? getting an AOC in this country isnt like gettig getting a driver's licence!

and as for the experience of its team..well we all have started somewhere in this game..I for one believe they are a highly professional team..

many have left other large successfull airlines to become part of this start up -good luck to them.

we need some class and finesse back in our cheapened skies!;)

ditzyboy

3rd May 2007, 07:06

Here, here, Wingletts! :D

bushy

3rd May 2007, 07:37

The two airline policy is alive and well.
I wonder why the third airline always has serious startup problems. Entry control??????

bentandtwisted

3rd May 2007, 08:34

I don't think people are Criticising SAW, but are just stating the facts as they stand now.

Their web page does knock the B732 and the F100, but at least the operators of those types have an AOC and I believe Ozjet got theirs first time around with no delays.
I think the old saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones” applies to SAW.

I agree they do have some very good people in the senior pilot ranks.

SKYCAMEL

3rd May 2007, 12:15

but at least the operators of those types have an AOC and I believe Ozjet got theirs first time around with no delays.

Yes, but I seem to recall the Chief Pilot of OZ Jet left CASA to take up the job, so first time around and no delays !

Magoodotcom

3rd May 2007, 23:13

VH-SWO will not be going into service on 01 May as there have been some delays.
While this aircraft is in Solomon Airlines colours it will in fact be operated by the new company Sky Air World. Sky Air do not yet have their Air Operators Certificate from CASA. When everything is in place CASA will issue the AOC and Sky Air can commence commercial operations. Those initial ops will be on contract to Solomon A/L.
As a side issue, the person who posted this on OzSpotters is also the CASA case manager for Sky Air World's AOC application! Slight lack of professionalism perhaps?

The AOC should be granted next Friday (May 11) after the final route proving flight on Thursday.

And as for "knocking" other aircraft types, my reading of their website is that they just do comparos against the 732 and F100 which show the 170 and 190 in a very good light! Nobody's "knocking" anything.

Magoo

ringbinder

6th May 2007, 12:06

Just been onto the Embraer website to confirm what my understanding of the specifications for the Embraer 170 jet, it confirms my concern that the Solomons airline people are not fully aware as to the "suitability" of this aircraft and how it will "benefit" them. 'Fessing up, I travel there quite a bit and despite preferring not to travel on an Ozjet 732, at least it isn't 2 abreast seating and, from my perspective, claustophobic - and it appears from the 78 config I'd not be able to travel J-class in the style I'm accustomed to. My type who prefer business travel aren't getting a look-in, it seems!!!! Eight tonnes payoad, too, according to the E website - can't magine where any cargo that was put onto the Spanish 733 will go. How do I figure that - the website says 78 passengers at 100 kg each, that leaves 200 kg for freight!!!!! The airline must be planning on a significant number of services each week to cover the capacity shortfall otherwise. Bring back the 737 I say, it served those wanting to do business in the Solomons well. From my position I stand by my earlier remarks querying the soundness of this decision. But then, as a fare paying passenger, do airlines really care what I think??

Aquaplaner

6th May 2007, 23:11

Our specialty is:
the introduction of new aircraft types into service;
Air Operator Certificate development for start-up airlines and charter operators;
upgrading of existing AOCs into high capacity, airline and/or international services;
operational environment expansion;
flight operations infrastructure planning and implementation;
management of associated training and operational matters; support technologies.
Our methodology provides a framework with clear goals, efficient resource allocation, identification of rate-determining steps, risk identification and management, transparent reporting and well-defined deliverables. It is experience in using this methodology that ensures projects are on budget and on schedule.

Now that is quite a bold statement to be making don't you think? Especially when you are dealing with CASA!

L1011 Nut

9th May 2007, 08:22

just read this on the Flight International Website.

Is this truth or fiction......

Are they about to really start flying :suspect: ???

DATE:08/05/07
SOURCE:Flight International
SkyAirWorld set to start E-170 services for Solomon Airlines

Australian start-up SkyAirWorld hopes to begin Embraer 170 wet-lease operations for Solomon Airlines this week after a hitch in receiving its air operator's certificate. "The aircraft has to be certified [in Australia] so they have to do proving flights," says Solomon general manager of operations Napoleon Padabela. Meanwhile, Solomon has wet-leased a Boeing 737-200 from OzJet.

also who would be footing the bill for the Ozjet lease SkyAirWorld or Solomon Air????

Magoodotcom

9th May 2007, 11:53

just read this on the Flight International Website.
Is this truth or fiction......
Are they about to really start flying ???
DATE:08/05/07
SOURCE:Flight International
SkyAirWorld set to start E-170 services for Solomon Airlines
Australian start-up SkyAirWorld hopes to begin Embraer 170 wet-lease operations for Solomon Airlines this week after a hitch in receiving its air operator's certificate. "The aircraft has to be certified [in Australia] so they have to do proving flights," says Solomon general manager of operations Napoleon Padabela. Meanwhile, Solomon has wet-leased a Boeing 737-200 from OzJet.
also who would be footing the bill for the Ozjet lease SkyAirWorld or Solomon Air????

Why wouldn't it be true L1011???

The crews are in place, the aircraft is certified, all the relevant documentation has been submitted, the money's been paid, and all but one of the route proving flights have been completed. Should be up and running by mid next week if CASA hold up to their end of the process.

Probably Solomon, as they would have been paying for a lease anyway, whether to SAW, OzJet or the Spanish mob who pulled the pin last week.

Magoo

Phlaps 40

10th May 2007, 03:36

Fluke

13th May 2007, 15:22

Whats the word on their 330/340 contract.
Nothing on the SAW website anymore, have they signed up enough or the deal not eventuated ?:suspect:

Baron Captain ?

14th May 2007, 02:58

You guys are a bunch of bloody whingers!!!!!...
You just remind me why I left Australia...
Aviation industry in OZ is full of bitches and babies!!!....
The aircraft you are talking about has 76 seats.. I know as I use to fly it!. They are all very comfortable seats with plenty of legroom for sectors of around 2 hours.
So the AOC is delayed so what!!!....How long was VB's delayed in the beginnning?
Who gives a ****e!....
You will enjoy the Embraer on comfort over a Boeing anyday!... You are probably only knocking it and having a cry and a whinge because SAW never gave you a job!....:ugh: :{

Wingletts

14th May 2007, 08:10

here here!!! :D

Exciter Box

14th May 2007, 10:03

Thread drift has gone to aircraft types but to take it back to the original thread....
Skyairworld did not get the AOC on time, and the people of the Solomons didn't receive the airline service that was promised.
Who REALLY cares about the TYPE that was meant to do the service..........when Skyairworld didn't provide the service as contracted and promised!!!!!

bigjet787

15th May 2007, 09:23

They have failed a number of proving flights and the deal with Etihad is not going ahead which also means their attack on Strategic Aviation seems to be failing.

Where is Mr Charlton who loves the media, he seems to have disappeared????

IAW

15th May 2007, 09:39

How do you fail a proving flight? Land at the wrong airport?

Wingletts

15th May 2007, 09:56

is this all true fact or just the famous avaition grape vine rumour mill hard at work?

MMM..how DO you fail a proving flight?

yowie

15th May 2007, 10:48

Got to have one first:hmm:

ringbinder

15th May 2007, 11:12

Phlaps 40,

You shouldn't assume I haven't flown in an E 170, assumptions are more often than not wrong - I'm not in the habit of making comments without being able to support them, and the fact remains that the narrow cabib is claustophobic to some - double bubble or not.

whogivesa????

15th May 2007, 11:24

Proving flights include more than just flying. CASA look at the complete operation, such as ground handling, passenger loading etc, so there are numerous things a company could fail on a proving flight.

Exciter Box

15th May 2007, 11:41

"is this all true fact or just the famous avaition grape vine rumour mill hard at work?"

'Tis PPRuNe I guess, but the Sky Air World jungle jet sure hasn't picked up any of the the flights or pax since the end of the Spanish 737 contract.

bigjet787

16th May 2007, 01:21

I hear they have just failed yesterdays proving flight again. Must be costing them a fortune.

Are they ever going to get off the ground??????

Cargo744

16th May 2007, 01:46

Bigjet 787... Don't know where you are getting your MISINFORMATION from but they actually passed their one and only proving flight which was last night!! Watch for them to start operating for SolAir very shortly (maybe tomorrow!!)

Magoodotcom

16th May 2007, 03:25

The AOC and Etihad are separate issues.

The aircraft had its final proving flight (BNE-HON-BNE) yesterday along with CASA inspectors and a representative load of 'passengers'. All reports are that it went well, and that the AOC will be issued sometime this week. ;)

I'm not sure where bigjet787 is getting his/her information from, but he/she appears to be motivated by something other than industry interest. :suspect: :=

I don't have any information on the Etihad deal, but I suspect even if I did, it would be commercial in-confidence for the time being anyway.

Magoo

VelvetHammer

16th May 2007, 05:28

Sounds like bigjet787 might be a disgruntled Strategic employee/director.
Perhaps its time to change that log in name again, eh?

amos2

16th May 2007, 08:09

SAW will meet ALL requirements that CASA impose upon them.

Believe me!

We're talking top shelf here!...You get my drift?

bigjet787

16th May 2007, 09:58

Well Velvethammer you must know alot about the industry as I am closer to your organisation than Strategic's. I must congratulate you on your AOC.

amos2

16th May 2007, 10:23

I think you're both a couple of amateurs, and totally out of your depth!

L1011 Nut

16th May 2007, 10:25

I must congratulate you too as you have always had so much information about SAW you must have a top position there.

Pity the Eithad contract did not work out as SAW would have had a ready made crew for another Airbus Contract but hey SAW already has that don't they.

Cargo744

16th May 2007, 22:31

BigJet787... If you are closer to SAW than Strategic why are all your comments so negative against SAW and their management?

witwiw

17th May 2007, 10:59

A few personal conflicts seem to be appearing - best they are put aside and the thread concentrated upon.

It appears that the latest "proving flight" didn't go as well as people appear to believe. Maybe the diversion from Honiara without a current forecast for the alternate did little to impress the regulators. The contractor is not in a position to fulfil its contractual obligations, pure and simple, and the Solomons Airline passengers are the losers with ad-hoc charters being arranged to fill the void. Consequnces of baggage left behind, uncertain departure times, missed connections et-al hardly allows what was a reasonable operation to instill confidence in the travelling public.

Methinks the AOC is still more a dream than a short term reality.

Wingletts

17th May 2007, 11:10

so what now? sounds like there alot of people waiting for this to get off the ground !:ugh:

Magoodotcom

17th May 2007, 22:44

It appears that the latest "proving flight" didn't go as well as people appear to believe. Maybe the diversion from Honiara without a current forecast for the alternate did little to impress the regulators. The contractor is not in a position to fulfil its contractual obligations, pure and simple, and the Solomons Airline passengers are the losers with ad-hoc charters being arranged to fill the void. Consequnces of baggage left behind, uncertain departure times, missed connections et-al hardly allows what was a reasonable operation to instill confidence in the travelling public.

Methinks the AOC is still more a dream than a short term reality.

Strange that, seeing as CASA told SAW after the flight that it was a "pass", the formal application debrief with CASA has been conducted, and they've been told the AOC will be forthcoming "within a few days."

And you wanted to take the "personal conflict" out of the thread??? :suspect:

Magoo

Cargo744

17th May 2007, 22:45

Think you will find that CASA have 5 working days to sign off on the application after a successful proving flight... that would probably mean AOC issued in the next few days.

Magoodotcom

18th May 2007, 07:09

Think you will find that CASA have 5 working days to sign off on the application after a successful proving flight... that would probably mean AOC issued in the next few days.

AOC issued this afternoon!

Magoo

P-air

18th May 2007, 07:19

congratulations Skyairworld

amos2

18th May 2007, 09:53

A forgone conclusion...so why are we surprised?

Dog One

18th May 2007, 22:09

Congrats to all the hard workers at SAW. Enjoy flying one of the nicest jets in Australian skies.

Its interesting to note that all the knockers seemed to disappeared for the time being. Perhaps they are regrouping to get on Airnorth, or Virgins case.

KRUSTY 34

19th May 2007, 10:44

Speaking of Virgin,

The EJ hype has gone very quiet?

Break Right

19th May 2007, 20:33

VB E-Jet courses start in Aug/Sept.:D

gn4p7

19th May 2007, 23:41

Before you pat yourself on the back and say how wonderful everything is, spare a thought for the pax who have been lied to and mucked around for almost two weeks now. Some waiting two days for a flight and having to report multiple times to the airport for another round of lies:mad: . As of today (Sunday) there is yet to be a revenue flight carried out by this aircraft. I'll believe it when i see it.

Going Nowhere

20th May 2007, 01:01

First flight was today :)

DrunkenAir

20th May 2007, 02:12

Congratulations to all at SAW on the AOC.

Now lets hope you can sort out the 'regulatory probelms' with the Airbus jobs.

Cheers :ok:

L1011 Nut

21st May 2007, 12:46

DrunkenAir what do you mean by "Regulatory Problems" with the Airbus Jobs?

Are there "Regulatory Problems" because SAW doesn't have an Airbus Contract, or SAW is still trying very hard to pinch Airbus contracts from the 2 Australian Companies that hold Airbus Contracts?

Hey maybe SAW have "Regulatory Problems" with F100, F50, Boeing 737-200 and BAE 146 Jobs as well.

High 6

22nd May 2007, 16:57

Well done to all the hardworking team in SAW for getting past the AOC hurdle. This sort of success can only be truly appreciated by those who have had any prolonged dealings with any regulatory aviation organisation anywhere in the world.
As the saying goes, the caravan keeps moving on while the dogs continue barking! So let the dogs bark....
You have an excellent aircraft, workable business plan and from the guys I have met, a great enthusiastic team. Looking forward to reading of more successes in the near future. :ok:

ringbinder

23rd May 2007, 07:52

Ringbinder,
Some pretty harsh words against the Embraer. Particularly regarding a cabin that you've never flown in! Having flown and flown in both, I can tell you that the Embraer has the far more pleasant cabin. No middle seat, double bubble fuse for increased space at shoulder width, I'll take it any day thanks. Not sure where SAW get the 78 seats from though as I've only experienced 76 seat configuration. An extra two just doesn't make sense.

Phlaps 40

OK, I concede the point about extra shoulder width after the flight on Sunday, however it must be at the expense of the overhead locker size. A regulatory sized (international) carry-on bag finds it a bit of a squeeze unlike on the Spanish 737. Service much better than with the Spaniards (not hard to achieve) and I wasn't one of the passengers who had their checked-in bags (15 or so) left behind - and the flight wasn't exactly choc-a-bloc. What was the problem, lack of luggage space or lack of payload as the Embraer website suggested? If this is what regular travellers can expect then they will look to alternatives like OUR Airline (what sort of a name is that??) which also operates there. Big problem possibly is a lack of frequency which Solomon Airlines has all over them so they probably aren't really much of a threat.

Dehavillanddriver

23rd May 2007, 08:14

yowie

23rd May 2007, 15:18

Dont see a problem with RINGS concerns,obviously using the service.So, where do you draw the line,as DHD says,got to make some money,all well and good in a perfect world,however I would of thought providing a cost effective,viable service would be the best result for all concerned.:ok:

Exciter Box

23rd May 2007, 23:57

Ringbinders comments seem quite fair to me, obviously saying it how he found it, the good and the bad.

However it must be a bit of a concern when around 20 percent of the total seat load don't get to travel at the same time as their baggage.

ringbinder

24th May 2007, 00:12

Ringbinder

You are obviously one of those pax that makes it a pleasure to fly freight

It should be obvious that the Islands are not the place to make money and any attempt to put aircraft that can make money is a good thing.

DHD,

It might come as a surprise to you, but Solomon Airlines was quite profitable using the leased Qantas 737 some years back. When they ran into some sort of operational problems with the authorities and lost that aeroplane they remained profitable even using a leased Air Vanautu aeroplane. However, since that arrangement ceased, things have been a bit ad-hoc. The point is, the traffic (people and cargo) is there and the airline can make money but need the right aeroplane to do it. If you can't carry the loads that are there to be carried then you don't have the right aeroplane to begin with - unless you put on extra services so that you can carry the backlog, and that is a costly solution. From the perspective of a regular traveller, it is obvious that the Embraer wasn't the best choice.

As to your inane comment, maybe it's best you stick to flying freight if passenger satisfaction doesn't feature in your priorities!!!

Dehavillanddriver

24th May 2007, 10:06

ringbinder

24th May 2007, 11:08

Ringbinder I ask you - how can anyone deal with passenger satisfaction when the passenger - you in this case - bag out the aircraft before they even step a foot on it?

In my opinion the aircraft is more comfortable than the average 737.

I accept that the 170 may not be the ideal aircraft for the route but that is a function of a number of things - the aircraft not being one of them.

DHD,

1. It would serve you well if you really read my previous posts. I am well familiar with the Embraer, as recently as of last Sunday (if you refer to my post of yesterday at 2052) wherein I acknowledge Phlaps 40's valid comment on the extra shoulder width. Can't imagine how I'd do that if I'd never "even step a foot on it". Also my even earlier post referring to finding it claustophobic - wonder how I found it so if I'd never been in one???

2. Your opinion with which I disagree, but I respect your right to it.

3. Incorrect, the aeroplane choice is one of the singly most important factors. Solomon Airlines got it right with the Qantas 737 lease and the Air Vanuatu lease. I'm left wondering why they went against a combination that proved successful.

'Binder.

witwiw

24th May 2007, 11:36

OK, so my scepticism was misplaced and the AOC came through. I guess it was a commendable effort in the circumstances.

However, having said that it appears things could be going better. Two associates booked to travel to HIR with Solair were bumped to another carrier today for "operational reasons" - whatever that means - and they weren't alone. Upon arrival in HIR it was obvious that there were a considerable number of bags from previous Solair flights also on that other carriers flight.

????????????????????????

wallabyblue

31st May 2007, 08:19

Apparently Ozjet operated the services today as a result of a dispute between Solair and Skyairworld.

Word is that the E170 is not carrying anywhere near the payload promised by skyairworld and passengers are booking on Our Airline as a first preference.

Max payload is approx 55 pax and Solair were told it would be a full load of 70+

Will be interesting to watch over next few days

Rabbit 1

1st Jun 2007, 10:07

'Our Airline' was formerly known as Air Nauru. Only thing that has changed is the route structure and aircraft. Gone is the 737-400 VH-RON. They now operate a 300 VH-INU. Think they operate BNE-HIR-INU-MAJ-TRW twice weekly and return next day. Maybe also some charter work in between.

Magoodotcom

1st Jun 2007, 10:37

Obviously from a couple of previous posts regarding off-loaded passengers and bags left behind there is a serious problem with the -170.

Obviously, I mean, please tell us more. You "obviously" know all about it... :D :hmm:

Yesterday's service interruption had nothing at all to do with the Embraer, nor with SAW's ability to operate the service.

Makes you wonder about Solomon Airlines getting the right guarantees, and verifying them, before signing any contracts. Maybe the management of the airline should be held to account for not doing their homework correctly rather than relying on the promises of others. Ahh - reminds me of other Pacific nations over the years and their blind acceptance of things from ..... is "carpetbaggers" too strong a description?

:suspect:Absolutely it is, as is... "snake oil salesmen"

Either tell us what you KNOW to be true, or label your comments as the purely "obvious" head in your a$$ speculation they really are!

Magoo

Magoodotcom

1st Jun 2007, 10:48

Word is that the E170 is not carrying anywhere near the payload promised by skyairworld and passengers are booking on Our Airline as a first preference.

Firstly, the thing has been in service two weeks and there's not a whole lot of corporate knowledge in the region on how to maximise the aircraft's full potential, so naturally SAW are doing the right thing by taking baby steps.

But the thing is, right out of the box the aircraft has already proven it is fully capable of carrying 76 passengers plus luggage in both directions, BNE-HON, or HON-BNE, but with a need to have sufficient fuel reserves to divert to Santo if required, there's not a whole lot of margin for the extra or oversize baggage that is frequently carried by VIP passengers on that service.

At the end of the day, Solomon Airlines is responsible for determining the loading priorities of its passengers, baggage and cargo.

Magoo

flash8400

1st Jun 2007, 20:37

Magoo,

You are obviously a SAW employee so can you please fill us in on a couple of things?

1. Why did Ozjet operate instead of SAW

2. Can the E170 carry all of the pax and bags BNE-HON with an alternate (Santo) with VIP's on board

3. Can you confirm that the cargo required in the Solomons can be carried as well on the E170 or is it going on another aircraft

4. How many VIPs does it take before you start off loading other peoples baggage?

:ok:

Magoodotcom

1st Jun 2007, 22:35

You are obviously a SAW employee so can you please fill us in on a couple of things?
There's that "obviously" word again. No, I'm not an employee of SAW, nor of Solomons. I just happen to ask questions of people who KNOW what's going on before posting speculation or otherwise unsubstantiated crap!
1. Why did Ozjet operate instead of SAW That's between SAW and Solomons, but I can assure it was not because of any failing on the aircraft's or SAW's behalf.
2. Can the E170 carry all of the pax and bags BNE-HON with an alternate (Santo) with VIP's on board
That depends on how much luggage the VIPs want to bring. Again, the airline, not SAW is responsible for determining the loading priorities of its passengers, baggage and cargo.
3. Can you confirm that the cargo required in the Solomons can be carried as well on the E170 or is it going on another aircraft
See above. :rolleyes:
4. How many VIPs does it take before you start off loading other peoples baggage?
Again, see above. :hmm:
Sorry to disappoint that I'm not an insider; I just do my homework before posting. ;)
Magoo

flash8400

1st Jun 2007, 23:29

Magoo,

I dont mean to be personnal, I was simply asking questions regarding the operation but how can you be sure you are right. Operators dont just give up their flights to other operators and airlines dont just change operators for the heck of it.

You say that you just happen to ask questions of people who KNOW what's going on before posting speculation or otherwise unsubstantiated crap! Yet you have not provided any substantiated information as to why Ozjet operated on behalf of Solomon Airlines and if you are not an empoyee maybe should not comment on the contract between Solomon Airlines and SAW because if you are wrong it might be classed as speculation or unsubstantiated crap!

If you are an employee (which you have stated you are not) then I stand corrected in relation to all comments above except the reason for Ozjet operating on behalf of Solomon Airlines but can you confirm to us if the jungle jet can carry a full load of passengers with 16kg of baggage and carry on baggage BNE-HON with Santo as the alternate.

Can anyone tell me what is happening to the cargo which doesnt seem to be going on SAW flights?

:confused:

Animalclub

2nd Jun 2007, 01:35

I don't know the situation now but when FJ operated the service for Solair between BNE and HIR quite a bit of freight went via FJ from Australia to Nadi then on to HIR as the passenger load factor NAN-HIR wasn't that good. Perhaps it's still the same.

ringbinder

2nd Jun 2007, 10:26

3. Can you confirm that the cargo required in the Solomons can be carried as well on the E170 or is it going on another aircraft

Flash -

If it helps answer your question, my freight lodged in Brisbane the week before last did not turn up on Monday, nor Tuesday, nor Wednesday but came on Thursday. Lodged in the usual manner, consigned through the same freight consolidator/forwarder as in the past but arrived with another airlines Air Waybill (and it wasn't Air Pacific) rather than the Solomon Airlines documentation as was the case previously. Makes you wonder who it came with .................!!!! It was only around 90 kgs, too.

flash8400

2nd Jun 2007, 23:34

Movin up, thanks for the feedback.

Does anyone know the truth about why Ozjet operated the flight instead of SAW?

Seems like Our Airline is becoming the national carrier and the E170 should be used island hopping instead of the trunk routes :ugh:DOH

L1011 Nut

3rd Jun 2007, 02:01

I must say that I am amazed that in this day and age with business secrets :suspect: and privacy rules that you could simply ask questions and be given answers that only an insider of SAW would know.

I agree with Flash8400, you must be part of SAW in one way or another or someone from SAW is feeding you information to post on this website, to defend them in the way you do and also have all the answers you have had in the last 6 months or so.

bigjet787

3rd Jun 2007, 23:49

I think you can add Cargo 744 and Velvethammer to your list of SAW employees/Directors.

I wonder when they will have something to brag about as it seems they disappear when there is bad news about SAW.:{

Cargo744

4th Jun 2007, 02:01

bigjet787I think you can add Cargo 744 and Velvethammer to your list of SAW employees/Directors.

I wonder when they will have something to brag about as it seems they disappear when there is bad news about SAW.:{

Thank you for your insinuation Bigjet (MJ)... unfortunately i am currently with a carrier voted recently worst airline... BUGGER!!! But i do speak with people involved in that op. I am looking forward to a program to be aired on the ABC about your organisation!! :)

bigjet787

4th Jun 2007, 02:25

Cargo 744

I must say that I am amazed that in this day and age with business secrets :suspect: and privacy rules that you could simply ask questions and be given answers that only an insider of SAW would know.

I agree with Flash8400, you must be part of SAW in one way or another or someone from SAW is feeding you information to post on this website, to defend them in the way you do and also have all the answers you have had in the last 6 months or so.

Again you guys claim to be close to the SAW group yet you say that you know someone close. Loose lips sink ships.

Just supporting the facts again and can you fill us in more regarding the ABC?

Maybe you can fill us in as to why SAW seems not to be able to carry all the passengers and baggage? Seeing you are so close to them and all.

Cargo744

4th Jun 2007, 02:52

Bigjet... nothing i have posted was really a big secret!! There were many others on this site stating what i did. If business secrecy was so water tight as you are trying to say... then site would be very boring!!! If you actually read Flash's comments i think you will find that i was not mentioned... you seem to be the one fixated with me and the down fall of Skyair.

Why is it such a bad thing that an airline get off the ground??? I would have thought it would be good for aviation on oz!!

I also think you a very good idea what will be aired... You wold have a much better than i as all i know is there is to be an insight into an air charter company currently running Airbus ops from SYD who are based in BNE. :)

L1011 Nut

4th Jun 2007, 03:28

Cargo744

As I am a keen watcher of Aviation Documentaries and News Stories and you have opened the preferbial "Pandora's Box", please let us all know what this ABC new story is all about or is that "a really big secret"?:suspect:

Cargo744

4th Jun 2007, 04:37

L1011,

Unfortunately what i have said above is all i know. I am sorry i cannot be of any more help but i am not going to start making things up. I am sure there is someone else who knows more than I in regards to this???????

OzeBloke

4th Jun 2007, 06:01

Is it not a simple matter of the having the right aircraft for the job?

It would appear the the "island hopping verses the trunk route" comment might have some validity.

:ok:

Windy Chester

9th Jun 2007, 00:07

Talking about delays, just came across this from avstats. The average delay for there flights is 138min with an on time performance of 11%www.flightstats.com/go/FlightRating/flightRatingByFlight.do?airline=IE&flightNumber=700 (http://www.flightstats.com/go/FlightRating/flightRatingByFlight.do?airline=IE&flightNumber=700)

ringbinder

9th Jun 2007, 01:33

Came back from Honiara yesterday (on another carrier with plenty of room for 100+passengers and their bags) and was bemused to read in the Solomon Star (Friday 8th, p4) that Solomon Airlines acknowledges the Embraer is "is smaller in size and can carry fewer passengers and has smaller loading capacitiy". This is something the travelling public to/from Honiara have had to endure since the new aircrafts introduction, often manifesting itself in long delays and missing baggage that couldn't be carried. Mind you, according to the article, Solomon Airlines state the aircraft was "designed in this way so that people can travel light and more efficient." Arriving in Honiara without my bag, despite being careful as to how much I packed, does not assist me in being efficient in my business dealings when my (lighter) bag still doesn't come on the same flight.

A Solomon Airlines spokesman is quoted as saying one alternative ""was to cut down the number of passengers to allow all passengers to carry all their luggage especially the Brisbane Honiara route". Now that makes a lot of sense (ha, ha). Sure it achieves getting those on board there with their baggage, but at the expense of leaving others behind!!!!! This "76 seater" has never had anything like it on the Brisbane Honiara trips, more like 60 maximum, and now it could get worse if they make sure passengers and bags stay together.

You're right, Ozebloke, and this isn't the right aircraft for the job. Solomon Airlines got it right with the 737's (their own years back, the Air Vanuatu lease, the Qantas lease and even the Spaniards). They should have stuck with a proven thing.

I think Solomon Airlines will be rueing their decision to get this aircraft, especially considering the number of people I see transferring to the competition.

Exciter Box

10th Jun 2007, 23:09

From the Age:

The Our Airline service linking the Marshall Islands capital Majuro with Brisbane will be cancelled from July, chief executive Geoff Bowmaker said.

Maybe SAW's regional jet will be the only option.

puff

11th Jun 2007, 00:07

I believe that ourairline will be cancelling the Nauru-Majuro sectors rather than the entire flight as the aircraft does Brisbane-Honiara-Nauru-Tarawa-Majuro.

It was a bit like using a/c like PA31s on Lord Howe and BAe146s/F28s on Norfolk, they might be 'able' to do it but they were not ideal for the route.

You'd think there would be a lot of 733s on the market for really cheap these days, lots of crews around able to fly it?

capt moonlight

12th Jun 2007, 01:41

I find it very interesting to see various human traits demonstrated on this site about various subjects.
It must be obvious to all that people invent facts to prove their points or are so gullible they simply regurgitate so called facts given them by others with vested interests.
It would appear that ringbinder as a customer of the airline in good times and bad holds more credance than others and it is with this perspective that I tend the following.
Solomons have chosen the wrong aircraft for their Brisbane/Honiara sector as has been proven time and time again in recent weeks with massive delays,cancellations and lack of proper service. It is not unreasonable by any stretch of the imagination for a full fare paying passenger to expect that they can travel on a prebooked flight and that their baggage will travel with them.
So lets look at the actual facts given me by staff
ERJ 170 Dry Operating Weight 22067 kgs
Max Take Off Weight 37200 kgs
Zero Fuel Weight 29600 kgs
Therefore it can carry 15133 kgs of which 7600 kgs must be fuel resulting in best possible payload of 7533 kgs. Allowing 100kgs for pax plus baggage it can carry aprox 76 pax with 7600 kgs of fuel.
However with a published block time of 3hours 30 minutes and a diversion to Santo of 1hour 30 minutes it would require 5 hours of fuel +var res +fixed res+approach and landing. I don't know it's burn rate but lets be optimistic and say it averages 1600 kgs per hour . That gives us 8000 + 800 + 800 + 400. THis 10000 of fuel means 5133 kgs of useful payload or aprox 50 passengers.
It's not rocket science to see why people aren't able to travel and that as good as this aircraft may be it is the wrong choice for this operation.
I think someone insinuated in a previous thread that people with vested interests are putting themselves ahead of the interests of this airline and as time time goes by this appears to be becoming a stronger possibility.
.

flash8400

13th Jun 2007, 10:49

Capt Moonlight, thanks for the great information.

What is Solomon Airlines going to do to fix this issue?

I am guessing they are losing money due to not being able to sell the 10 or so seats on each flight and they must have a fuel burn penalty carrying the additional fuel on every flight. Airlines are expensive to run at the best of times.

Exciter Box

13th Jun 2007, 12:03

My thoughts on Flash’s questions:

Fuel burn penalty: Not really an issue as no matter what aircraft does the service the aircraft will have to carry it, btw the jungle jet is comparately lean anyway.

Loss of pax carriage: yep a , big issue, if you use Capt Moonlights figures the SAW aircraft loses 26 seats out of the 76 available. That is a 35% loss in revenue.

One would have thought that the contractor (Sol Air) would have crunched the numbers though.

Maybe no-one else wanted the contract and it was just left to the SAW jungle jet to do the best it could do.

Have to agree with the previous posters who said the 733 was a pretty good aircraft for that service.

apacau

13th Jun 2007, 22:43

SAW are getting one or more E190s as i understand it. Would putting an E190 on the route solve the current problem, as i believe they have better range and capacity?

Solwata

14th Jun 2007, 01:02

Just one small problem with Capt Moonlights Equations.

Realistically cant get much more than 9100 kgs of fuel into that E170 fuel tank.

Save an extra 900kgs for carriage of Pax and bags.

Therefore 5133 + 900 equal 6033, equal aprox 60 pax using your reasoning.

Make the figures show what you will:rolleyes:

capt moonlight

14th Jun 2007, 01:36

Solwata if the aircraft can only carry 9100 kgs of fuel then you are right it could carry another 9 pax however not on the BNE/HIR route as they need 10,000 kgs to be legal . If your fuel figures are correct then how are they legally operating this flight when the nearest alternate is aprox 600nms away. Even if it is possible with LRC then the margins must be tight in an unforgiving enviroment and .60 seats available out of 76 seats aint real flash and forget about freight or excess bagage.
I stand by my statement wrong airplane for this route. If your fuel figures are correct then I think I would be looking to the 737 operators with both plenty of fuel and load capacity as I can't tread water for long if a ditching was nesscessary.
You say you can make the numbers show what they will but the science of fuel burn is a finite calculation.

Solwata

14th Jun 2007, 14:33

Hi capt moonlight.

Sorry, not meaning to take the wind from your sails, just saying, that if you are going to use precise math to make an argument work, you should be consistent with the application of your equations. No point being precise about one set of figures, and approximate on the remainder, i was impressed with your knowledge of the empty weight. But working out fuel planning based on a published bock time kinda defeats your basis on precision. Any chance you could find the actual distance of the journey from the maps.

Hence the term making the figures work. Being scientific, you would apply precision for all of your equations, not just partial. As you imply, it is too easy to get other people believing the figures one can present.

The zero fuel weight for that aircraft would also be 30140 kgs, plus a modification to raise the MTOW is also available, but wasnt implemented on that aircraft during the time it was with its previous owner.

Regards to my fuel figures, personally unable to push more than 9160 kgs into the tanks on a -2 c day. Albeit only via pressure refueling, no fuel nozzles in this part of the world, so unable to ever try out the over wing refueling method.

Irony though, is the fact that the previous owner of the ejet, has upgraded to 737s ;)

wallabyblue

14th Jun 2007, 22:56

Word from a lesing compnay mate of mine in the US is that Solomon Airlines are in the market attempting to source a B733 to replace the E170.

Its a tough market to find aircrfat so they may have problems getting one quickly.

capt moonlight

15th Jun 2007, 08:28

wallabyblue if your right then someone in that airline needs their arse kicked for not doing their homework and wasting megabucks or maybe they knew all along but the incentives were too great.
If the nations of the pacific could swallow their pride and get together they could probably justify a fleet of 3 B737s creating a viable network for all. Can't see unsustainable national pride letting it happen though.
solwata no problem but I think you will find figures used (including times )reasonably accurate. Even if you run the figures through GC mapper you come up with simular figures.I still don't see how they can carry the fuel reqd if you are correct. I can guarantee the ZFW is 29600 and not 30140 as I have seen it on their paperwork along with the other quoted figures. From what you say it appears even the previous owner saw the benefit of the B737I'm sure the E170 is a great a/c for shorter sectors with closer alternates but not for this route.

amos2

15th Jun 2007, 08:42

You got any Pacific Island airline experience Moonlight?...
or are you just an airline wannabe wasting our time?
Know anything about Island Reserve for instance?

capt moonlight

15th Jun 2007, 13:51

2 hour island res is no less then the alternate requirements yes lots of pacific time

witwiw

16th Jun 2007, 01:32

Thanks Moonlight for the figures, possibly explains the "operational reasons" my associates were given for being bumped off the Solomon's flight to another carrier a few weeks ago. This Embraer is certainly shaping up to be a bit of a dud for this specific operation.

If Wallabyblue's info is correct then at least the airline has recognised that the 737 is the best aircraft for the job. What they now need to realise is that they shouldn't try and go it alone. The former Air Nauru struggles on in a new format and name (Our Airline) and logic would suggest that they join forces with Solomons and combine resources. Wouldn't this bring immediate benefits to both, some additional funds to the former and an immediately successful (and profitable) operation to the latter? An earlier post states that the Our Airline is cutting back on services to some destinations so their aircraft must have a degree of availability coming up. Apparently Solomons used them on a regulary basis before (as Air Nauru) and was satisifed, so why not now - unless it's the island pride thingy Moonlight mentions? Pride, in whatever form, often comes at a huge cost.

capt moonlight

19th Jun 2007, 10:31

I see in today's Island Star even the locals are insinuating corruption of the airline management and are asking for the minister to investigate.

ringbinder

23rd Jun 2007, 23:13

Yes, there appears to be emerging concern in Honiara - will be interesting to see if they genuinely set about fixing the problem or just go looking for scapegoats - a very Pacific response to problems, generally.

A couple of business associates tried to book on another carrier to come here early next week, they are on stand-by. Seems the passengers are deserting the Embraer big time. Hardly surprising.

capt moonlight

3rd Jul 2007, 06:00

movin up when the governments of the pacific learn to work with each other instead of letting outside interests try and make a fast buck , so I guess that means never !!!!!!!!!!!

Amelia_Flashtart

3rd Jul 2007, 09:11

Our Airline left Honiara this afternoon with a number of stranded SolAir passengers on board and remaining passengers have been told that this aircraft is scheduled to depart Brisbane again for Honiara at 1930 this evening to carry stranded SolAir passengers from Brisbane. It seems that this aircraft will then leave Honiara again tonight and return to Brisbane carrying more of SolAir's stranded passengers in an attempt to reduce the backlog and keep passengers happy.

At 1700 ZUJI shows this as a rescheduled departure for SolAir from Brisbane with two flight numbers, presumably one SolAir and the other as Our Airline.

Very frustrating for those trying to catch connecting flights from Brisbane - but full points to SolAir management for adressing the situation before it deteriorates any further.

Hopefully SolAir management will take action to resolve these problems for the long term.

This is not a great situation for a recovering economy in a country that has great tourism potential but only IF it is possible to guarantee to get people here and home again.
:hmm:

ithinkso

5th Jul 2007, 07:17

you ever seen the way melanesians travel. the 400 is a better option for solomons.

e170, doesnt have the legs. nearest alternate is at least an hour away, and its weather is usually worse than aggh.

Grivation

5th Jul 2007, 10:39

Any truth in the rumor Airwork (Toll freight contractor) will be basing a 733QC in Brisbane next month?

IAW

6th Jul 2007, 01:34

I heard they were looking for a third freighter, but I don't know if they are specifically looking for a QC. Being that they are pretty focussed on building a viable alternative to AaE I doubt you'd see them taking on something as significant as Solair's ops. Freight is their game and I think they'll stick to that.

capt moonlight

6th Jul 2007, 06:52

Papers in honiara say that sol air board has been sacked.The ceo/chief pilot has survived so it appears they still haven't caught on > supposedly losing $1.000,000 per week

Pushback

6th Jul 2007, 07:53

Maybe they could do a deal with "Our Airline"

capt moonlight

7th Jul 2007, 07:59

Not while it is probably in the financial interest of people in charge to keep out sensible options. The interest of the Solomons needs to be put before personal interests before common sense shared ops could occur

Windy Chester

7th Jul 2007, 12:55

Unless more big changes are made, they will still continue to loose money hand over fist. I dont think the E170 is helping matters. Makes you wonder how much longer they can operate loosing that kind of money.:ugh:

waav8r

11th Jul 2007, 04:58

This from Solomon Star today - perhaps the newly appointed Attorney-General Julian Moti can help The Honorables in their inquiry:ok::
WEDNESDAY 11th July 07 NEWS UPDATE
Submitted by Moffat Mamu on 11 July, 2007 - 8:19am. Headlines | Nation
PM steps in over airlines
By ROBERT L. IROGA
PRIME Minister Manasseh Sogavare has intervened and ordered a thorough assessment of the operations of Solomon Airlines.
It includes the performance of both the Government-owned airline’s management and new Embraer E170-100LR jet.
The Prime Minister’s order comes with the airline facing major operational and financial problems since the new plane took over international services two months ago.
There have been complaints of passengers, luggage and freight being offloaded because of weight and space limitations operating between Brisbane, Honiara, Santo (Vanuatu) and Nadi (Fiji).(See also report page 3)
The 75-seater is the smallest of a successful range of regional jets built by Brazilian plane maker Embraer.
Mr Sogavare’s order comes just days after the airline’s board was sacked last week by Minister of Finance Gordon Darcy Lilo.
Minister Lilo is believed to have been unhappy with the role the board played leasing the E170, and how it spent money on the plane’s launch.
Mr Lilo is believed to have supported the leasing of the E170 based on the advice he was given by the board.
Mr Sogavare told the Solomon Star yesterday that the assessment would give the Government insights into the operations of the national carrier.
Asked whether the performance of the airline’s management will be included, Mr Sogavare said: “Yes, they are also part of it”
On the possibility of replacing the E170, Mr Sogavare said the Government will need to look at the findings before taking any moves.
The new jet, painted in national colours, is leased from Australian charter operator SkyAirWorld. Solomon Airlines is the first commercial carrier to use an E-Jet in the region.
Australian low-cost airline Pacific Blue is expected to soon use E-jets on some of its Pacific Islands routes. But it is believed to be planning to fly a bigger E190 on these routes.
In a Solomon Airlines news release announcing the launch of the E170 service, chief executive Ron Sumsum said: “The E-170 exemplifies our new direction and sets standards for comfort, reliability and fuel efficiency in its class.”
The E170-100 replaced a bigger and older Boeing 737-300 that Solomon Airlines leased from a Spanish company.

ringbinder

12th Jul 2007, 05:57

Managed to be on board that Our Airlines rescue flight a week ago along with quite a few disgruntled "Solomon Airlines - never again" passengers. The Embraer operation is rapidly turning into a joke and it is hardly surprising that the goverment has finally decided to act - although, being familiar with that part of the world and how things work, I'm a little sceptical about their determination to really fix things or just make examples/scapegoats of a number of individuals.

The crew on the rescue flight had some interesting comparitive figures - seems the 737 can take a minimum of 10,000 kgs of payload still carrying full fuel tanks and having enough fuel to approach Honiara several times and then go to the alternative aerodromes in Santo or Nauru. The Embraer struggles with 6000 kgs and allegedly only has one opportunity to land at Honiara before going to their sole alternative of Santo. Raises the question of what happens when the weather is crook at Santo?

The crew said if they relied only on one alternative they could get the payload up towards 12,000 kgs. Solomon Airlines needs to get serious about a decent aeroplane that can do the job properly. Maybe they should consider an alliance with a proven and established operator?

I for one am glad there is the option of a more reliable and better able carrier to serve my needs and interests in relation to Honiara. I am more than sure I am part of a growing support base for the other carrier, and will only be travelling with Solomon Airlines in exceptional circumstances (ie no other choice).

amos2

12th Jul 2007, 08:48

Just goes to prove...light a/c on international ops doesn't work!

But hey!...any RPT pilot knows that!!

LOKI12

14th Jul 2007, 02:01

Does anyone have an update on what is happening with Solomon Arlines since the announcement by PM for assessment to be done?

Animalclub

15th Jul 2007, 02:57

brassplate

Why can't they just share an aircraft?

It's been tried before... Fiji Airways was owned by 6 or 8 Pacific Island nations but came a cropper because of the politics involved. Certain islands wanted daily services where there was traffic for just once a week services... and a Prime Minister said to me "I want my country's airline name on the side of that jet".

I agree your solution would be ideal... I doubt it will happen.

JMara

15th Jul 2007, 18:13

CEO charts course for airline’s future
By MOFFAT MAMU/Solomon Star 28th June

NO aircraft in the world will make Solomon Airlines successful except its business culture and sound management guided by its policy to improve the industry.
This was the statement of newly appointed Solomon Airlines chief executive officer Captain Ron Sumsum in response to criticisms over the company’s decision to get the Embraer E-170.
Recently some citizens have criticised the aircraft because of its small baggage capacity and size.

“Since becoming CEO two months ago, I have been focusing completely on stabilising Solomon Airlines’ operations. To ensure we provide reliable and comfortable service.”
Mr Sumsum said work has already progressed to implement a long-term strategy to rebuild the company into a successful and profitable carrier.
But he said the caompany’s viability is based on the establishment of a new business culture that recognised the importance of implementing and adhering to company’s procedures and policies.
“This must be our number one focus and it will not happen overnight,” the CEO said.
“Unfortunately this is an area that the company’s past management completely ignored, so we’re starting from scratch,” he said.
The Ni-Vanuatu CEO, who has vast experience in the airline industry, said the E-170 is only an interim, yet integral step into a long-term strategy of the airlines.
“Our comprehensive analysis determined that the E-1760 even though it has some limitations provides the best initial solution for our long term strategy.
“This aircraft is world-renowned for its operating efficiency and customer comfort - it has wide leather seats, no middle seats, large windows and ample headroom,” he said.......Leather seat?:ugh:Looks like the analysis was not "comprehensive" enough.

Kwaj mate

16th Jul 2007, 02:58

Our Airline is still Air Nauru under another color scheme.
Their finances are a joke, and could fall like the house of cards at any time.
The Solomon Islands needs to be assured of air communications in good times and bad. To rely on Nauru is a very exposed position to be in.
Look at their loyalty to the Marshall Islands business community. We built up our relationship with Australian markets and then had taken away from us, all due to bad planning and no support by ON management.
Solomon Airlines and their government should be very wary of ON policies.

chimbu warrior

16th Jul 2007, 03:53

Whatever you think about Air Nauru/Our Airline, they have survived for a long time (35+ years).

Every airline is potentially a hose of cards, but this one has played their cards pretty well, all things considered.

All I can suggest about the MAJ route is that perhaps it was unviable for the 733; not every port can justify the type of service they would like. Does Air Marshall Islands offer a connecting flight to Tarawa to meet ON?

capt moonlight

16th Jul 2007, 08:44

Kwajmate
I think you need to research your facts or maybe you are just a bitter loser who did nothing to support this airline. I travelled a number of times on this route and don't think I ever saw double digit passenger numbers. All this when they had return fares advertised in local papers as low as $150.
As far as their finances I guess only their management know but they seem to have made their airline more efficient and continue to offer a service which has been going for 35 years plus while others have been and gone or never started.
I think you will find the demise of this route more due to lack of support from the Marshalls along with excessive airport and fuel charges.
If this small airline had as much loyalty from the Pacific as it has given to it then the region's air services would be a lot more stable.
I think Chimbu warrior is closer to the truth then some bitter poster twisting the facts. Anyhow that's what I think !!!!!!!!!

motaderim

16th Jul 2007, 10:43

There's no reason to bag OA/ON. The Marshall community was too slow in kindling the Aussie market. They're probably too busy filling up flights to HNL and/or GUM anyway. Meanwhile OA was trying to sustain the loss incurred weekly due to the lack of public interest. Or else the market is too small for a Boeing service. Why not make connections in TRW as others suggested? You still end up in MAJ at the end of the day. What would you do if you're so business minded?

ringbinder

16th Jul 2007, 11:08

Kwaj,

and then had taken away from us, all due to bad planning and no support by ON management.

I think you need to come to grips with reality, it wasn't for lack of support by ON management but rather because 6 months of services that lacked the support of the local Marshallese community was more the reason the services were terminated. The ON management couldn't have offered more support than to keep a less than viable service going for as long as it did whilst awaiting the loads to build up.

I happened to be in Majuro when Our Airline had their launch and the reception from all levels (President down) was most enthusiastic but it hasn't translated into bums on seats. I now have a most expensive alternative option via Guam or Honolulu for any trips I wish to make to Majuro in the near future.

I do travel a considerable amount in the Pacific in the course of business and have seen a lot of airlines/aeroplanes come and go. As someone has already said, Our Airline/Air Nauru has been around for more than three decades which is not too bad an effort considering the vagaries of aviation in the Pacific. If anyone lasts it will be them, methinks.

flash8400

16th Jul 2007, 12:14

Currently on the ABC Website

Name:Australian Aviation Lover
Subject Strategic Aviation
Visit Time 14/07/2007 2:42 PM

Remark: I am interested as an lover of Australian Aviation and giving a Australian Companies a fair go that I am a little suprised by this 730 Report. This report was done with such a bias that I have never seen before from the 730 report. I would have to think that either Nonee Walsh had either a personal interest or a personal relationship with one of the people complaining about the safety of Strategic Aviation's/The Portugal Companys Aircraft. What I have been told by people in the industry is that Strategic Aviation's employees are very well trained and that the people that have most to gain from this report and any other attention was a company that most of the 3 masked individuals are employed by and that 1 is in fact a Director of that Company:=

Gee so much for fair go and maybe these people are less interested in safety of an aircraft and it passengers and more of destroying a companies name to then come in and profit from that companies demise.

Maybe we should also be looking at that company's "shonky" dealings with a south pacific airline and government and having the wrong aircraft.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/guestbookcentral/img/spacer.gif

Name Bias?
Subject ADF Troops and Transport
Visit Time 14/07/2007 8:41 AM

Remark: I am another ex-Strategic employee.

What is this reporters connection to SkyAirWorld? 3 SkyAirWorld employees dishonestly doing the playing dirty on their old company and Nonee seems to be the sole member of the media of Skyairworlds press releases - bias?

What are they trying to achieve? Could they do it better - I doubt it, look at the bunfight going on with Solomons Airlines!

Hifly is safe - I wouldn't have been with them if I thought I was in danger.

Really what a beat up! Surprised the ABC let themselves be sucked into this.

Kwaj mate

16th Jul 2007, 15:14

The ERJ170 would be an ideal aircraft for services into MAJ, TRW and NAN.
The Marshall Island's Amata Kabua wanted to operate the BAE146, but Saab talked them into their 2000. Another interesting political decision.
Perhaps Nauru could operate a -145 or the -170 to support their 733 services and make INU a hub as they did 20 years ago when they had 7 aircraft operating (4 737-200s & 3 727-100s).
Yes, the launch of the ON service into MAJ was a great occasion, but never fully supported by ON management. They were too busy trying to make the Solomons toe-the-line in respect to supporting the one-airline policy that they think the Island States owes them. If there was any space on the aircraft beyond HIR, it was for INU residents and the Kiribati traveling public. The TRW-MAJ service was only put in place to pressure Kiribati and Fiji to reinstate their rights to the very profitable TRW-NAN link, which failed.
Historically there have been gaps in ON's operations over the years, with the suspension of their AOC (by both Britain and Australia); groundings; and the non-payment of lease fees or general lack of funds to pay QF and Haeco maintenance charges during that time.
Taiwan currently pays for the shortfall in revenue (or overpayment of their executives) to keep the airline going. Given the political situation of the Pacific these days, who'll guarantee Taiwan will keep topping up the till every they need an engine change or "C" check ?

ithinkso

17th Jul 2007, 01:25

e170 sydney canberra, perfect. 1200 over water no etops, wtf??? even a 733 at max zfw out of bn, can only carry a top of descent alternate. you reach circuit height your staying in hir. and it can rain heavily for hour without repose. asl the antononv drivers who waterskiied themselves into the bushes.

ask the qf boys who take island reservers and land with little orange lights on how it can rain in hn.

carry on!

capt moonlight

17th Jul 2007, 09:22

Short and sweet answer Ithinkso is totally wrong. B737-300 can go to Hir make a couple of approaches and still get to Nauru or make a couple more and still get to Santo. ZFW 48307 MTOW 62822 Burn<2400/hr
Kwajmate the maj services were started prior to discussions re Nadi so your timetable is a little incorrect and although you appear to be knowledgable you are also wrong about Taiwan and exec salaries. You still sound to me like a bitter person with an agenda to push. The same attitude which proves the Pacific nations will never work together for a sensable solution.
I could say more but I don't think I would change your slanted bias.

Sal-e

17th Jul 2007, 13:19

Yes, most certainly a tinge of bias in your tone, kwaj. If you care to look at how OA is now operating, you will find very little fat and government involvement. It is now running like a well oiled and lean machine. A lot of retrenchments and painful restructuring took place which never would have occurred in the past. Routes that don't at least break-even are discontinued after a reasonable trial period. In MAJ's case, a drastic drop in the USD/AUD exchange probably contributed to the lack of public interest there.
You compared OA with it's predessessor ON. Yes, it is still state owned but there is no other resemblance, especially in the area of finances. Taiwan does not prop up coffers. OA runs under it's own steam. If there's anything OA took from ON, it's the impecable safety record and longevity/experience in the region.
With it's painful restructuring and established experience and safety record, now, more than ever, is the time to invest in OA at a government level in the form of shares, regional support, codeshares, open skies etc etc.
The obvious first place to seek support is the Solomon Islands, followed by Kiribati, Marshalls, etc etc.
Until this happens, many more millions will be lost by those stubbornly trying to establish their own flag carrier.
The name Our Airline was purposefully coined to avoid nationalism and self interest. Only after Nauru's neighbours decide to be part-owners can this be realised.

Kwaj mate

17th Jul 2007, 23:54

A simple fact - the Taiwan government has a budgeted funding account for the 'Our Airline' operation and is not allocated as an aid project. Also the Nauruan government has sent a former Speaker of the House to Taipei as their Consul. He is very well respected in diplomatic circles and a very, very nice bloke. They are protecting their future flow of aid funds and ensuring the airline is also funded for the short term at least.
Finally, if you knew the salary levels of the ON 'management team' you'd know why they need the might of the Taiwan economy behind them. In Micronesia we are paid a reasonable salary for our efforts.

capt moonlight

18th Jul 2007, 00:32

Kwajmate wrong again The money from Taiwan is to assist in the purchase of the aircraft just as they did for Marshalls in buying their Dash 8
Also OA is operating under an Aussie AOC and therefore has to maintain the high Aussie standards thrust upon them. They therefore have to pay real world market rates for staff. Even still their pay rates are a small fraction of what Solomons pay their execs and certainly less than they would earn in Australia or o'seas.They also carry out more duties then just flying so on an hourly basis are probably more productive than you and your Micronesia counterparts. I didn't see them nearly bankrupt their airline recently by refusing to fly as Air Marshalls did. I won't let this thread decay to a slanging match but simply say don't comment on things you don't really know about. You state as fact things that are not fact

Windy Chester

19th Jul 2007, 12:53

According to Solomon Star, just not the passengers who are unhappy about the E-170

Finance Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo fired the former board amidst allegations it wrongly advised Cabinet in the acquisition of the controversial new Embraer 170 jet.
The leased 76-seater plane has led to a series of problems for the airline because of limits on its cargo and passenger carrying capacity.

apacau

19th Jul 2007, 22:02

This month's Aust Aviation has a feature on SkyAirWorld and is singing the praises of the E170 on the Solomons route (though there is reference to some of the issues raised here...)

capt moonlight

21st Jul 2007, 22:06

Doesn't say much for the quality of Aus Aviation articles does it?

Magoodotcom

22nd Jul 2007, 01:50

This month's Aust Aviation has a feature on SkyAirWorld and is singing the praises of the E170 on the Solomons route (though there is reference to some of the issues raised here...)

Whilst the article clearly DOES sing the praises of the 170, it doesn't appear to apply those praises directly to the Solomons route except in a quote which Sumsum made when the service was launched.

Whilst it comes across as being more a profile of SAW as a whole, the article clearly points out the 170 has limitations on the direct BNE-HON services, a fact clearly conceded by SAW management, and I think even suggests a (far more appropriate) SAW 190 may see service on the sector sooner rather than later.

Cheers

Magoo

Sal-e

22nd Jul 2007, 21:02

Magoo, you just couldn't help yourself but to write about the E170 on your 170th post??:}

Magoodotcom

22nd Jul 2007, 22:51

Hmmm...what's a 'something-171' then? :uhoh: :}

Pure coincidence Sal-e I assure you! ;)

Cheers

Magoo

ithinkso

22nd Jul 2007, 22:57

glue sniffing?? excellent.

last time i flew the route in a 73, with a max zfw of 48.0, that left 4.5 over the top in hn. oh by the way son until recently didnt have refuelling for jets. oh and by the way they only carry 3000 litres surplus at the moment, oh and by the way when was the last time you saw son or vila, without at least an inter, oh and by the way who the f... would carry nauru as an alternate?? vila was the only viable alternate before, and it is less so now since it no longer has a llz. if your happy to arrive in vila with 30mins in the tanks, your a braver man than me.

happy to share the araldite with you guys

ithinkso

22nd Jul 2007, 23:07

by the way moonlight, your mtow is wrong, high by about a tonne and a half. a heavy 73 burns more than 2500/hr, and the leg being etops you also have to run your apu. any approach in hir is going to cost you at least 1.2t, landing weight hir will be your limiting factor due to the sector length. burn is about 8.0.therefore bout 12.5 max uplift out of bn.

i dont know what approaches they have there now, but in the past half of the time none of the nav aids worked,(vor and nbd), vila and son were the same. nou was the only real safe place to hide.

734 was a better aircraft for the sector.

more glue anyone??

ithinkso

22nd Jul 2007, 23:17

yes we did do syd-perth against jetstreams in the 73, however if you were there, you would know that that aircraft was limited on zfw, and never went out at max zfw. either youre relying on hearsay, or your memory is short.

ithinkso

22nd Jul 2007, 23:25

once again, 733 max payload around 13000. not 10000. 3 extra tonnes of juice makes a difference sweety. check you own figures. maybe airlines that limit their payload by 3 tonnes arent with us anymore??? can it be true, im right again????

witwiw

22nd Jul 2007, 23:35

ithinkso,

Why wouldn't Our Airline use Nauru as as alternate? It is part of their network and, looking at their schedule, if they missed out on Honiara and went to Nauru then at least the show is somewhat back on the rails. The schedule shows them returning to Honiara about 10 hours later on the way back to Brisbane so any Honiara passengers wouldn't be drastically inconvenienced. Sounds like a perfectly good call to me considering their particular operation.

I assume the Our Airline aircraft has standard 16 tonne tanks so, if Capt. Moonlight's figures are correct, then they should burn about 8 tonnes on the trip. That leaves around 8 tonnes for approaches and a diversion. Around 90 minutes to Vila would burn a bit bit less than 4 tonnes so wouldn't they arrive there with a bit over 3 tonnes? That is more than the 30 minutes you suggest so you figures look a bit dubious. If the operator you went to Honiara with arrived with 4.5 tonnes then I would be concerned they were cutting it too fine. You know, " an airspace above you, runway behind you" type of thing.

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 00:04

you are right 16.0 is full tanks.

however with a max landing weight of 52.8 and a burn of 8t.( usualyy a bit more than that) that limits your take off weight to 60.8 tonnes.

with a max zfw of 48.3 this means 12.5 max uplift in bn. 12.5-8 equals 4.5 over the top in hn. if the weather is good there allow for 200kg approach visual circuit starting at 4000' over the vor. leaves 4.3 on landing. if however you dont get in the first time or god forbid a go around due to a stray dog, you are gonna burn AT LEAST 1.2 in the manouvere. that leave 3.1 tonnes on your next landing.

in other words, you are ....ed if you miss the first time and cant get in a second time.

these are the real figures and they are indiputable.

yes, using nauru as an alternate is possible, but the aircrqaft would be full, and would still be max landing weight limited back into hir, leaving you with the same dilemma, as far as fuel goes.

to be honest i havent been to either place for about 12 years, so things may have improved as far as services go, but the figures are always going to be correct.

ya

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 00:15

and last time i looked this was supposed to be a money making exercise, not a tankering one

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 00:31

no company insists that. its illegal.

but when the forecast is fine, there is no reason to carry more than the minimum fuel. we always carried an alternate into hn, however..... it was always a minumum fuel alternate, and if you werent sure you could get in the first time, it was usually a decision at top of descent, as i previously mentioned.

from memory, the zfw's were always near max, and yes this did require offloads many times due to weather/lighting. i was just saying to the tossers who questioned my figures before hand that they should perhaps get their figures straight. we can all go full tanks everywhere if we want, but airlines dont tend to last too long doing that. nor do pilots tend to stay employed.

look at air nauru, yep they'been going for a long time, but theyve always been propped up by the government in the past, the government is bankrupt, so therefore, so is the airline.

capt moonlight

23rd Jul 2007, 00:45

ithinkso---ithinknot
you must like talking to yourself with four posts in a row.
Firstly my MTOW is correct ! There are a number of variants and if you looked up the boeing manuals you would see they vary greatly.Secondly the 400 might have your burns but the 300 certainly doesn't. In fact at very low weights it will burn less than 2000 kgs/hr and therefore 2400 kgs/hr is a pessimistic figure. Thirdly the sector is operated non-etops therefore no APU required. Forthly I don't know what approaches you do but standard planning for a 300 is 400 kgs for an approach not 1200 kgs. The navaids in the region are working and have been for a long while and were only recently flight tested by NZ.
Just saw your latest post and I hate to burst your bubble but since when does MZFW limit your max fuel load??? I always thought it controlled your minimum uplift not maximum. Using your figure of 60800 brw minus 33500 baw would leave a payload of 27300 of which a minimum of 12500 would need to be fuel. You could go with full tanks and still carry 11300 kgs of pax /bags and cargo. So I don,t see how that means your f---ed to use your terms. Your figures may not be" indiputable" but they are certainly disputable and in fact incorrect. As far as using Nauru as an alternate you are again incorrect as a good proportion of your pax would be off loaded at their destination and would therefore allow the uplift of more fuel for the return landing and if required due weather fuel above your landing weight can be carried as long as it is burned prior to landing.

capt moonlight

23rd Jul 2007, 00:53

Ithinknot
You critisise others for using rubbery figures but use them yourself. Unless you have the actual figures they are using then your comments are guesswork at best. As far as Air Nauru financial status once again I think your comments are 12 years out of date.

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:05

moonlight, get a grip.

most companies allow a 300kg approach allowance from 1500' to landing.

the approaches in hn all start at 4000'. thats the first one you do,( which may burn 300kg), after your go around with repositioning, you will burn at least 1.2. fact.

as far as offloading pax in nauru, why would you do that. the sector is brisbane - hir. so all the pax would be going back to hn. therefore, as stated you are in exactly the same boat. fact.

max zfw in a 733 is around 48.3. you are correct when you state this. if you find prior to departure, your zero fuel weight is 48.3,(which it invariably was), it is one of the limitations for your dispatch, as well as a max landing weight hn . fuel will be added ontop of it. if you require more fuel than you can fit, you must reduce your zero fuel weight to add the fuel. this is pretty basic stuff. therefore reducing your payload. therefore losing revenue. fact.

yes the payload you state is correct(roughly), however if you care to check i i was talking at max payload. and with 12.5t departure bn, you are f...ed if you dont get into hn on the second attempt. fact

by the way a heavy 733, that is up near max weight,(just so your not confused), will be limited to around fl 330 for the first hour or so of flight. it used to, does, and always will, burn over 2500/hr. noramlly around 2.6-2.7 at that altitude and weight. LRC or ci40 will result in these figures. fact.

i appolgise for my poor spelling, but if thats all youve got, bring it on, get your facts straight, have some semblance of an idea about what your talking, and maybe one day youll get that job. maybe a fact??

oh ya

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:07

wheres RON, wasnt that reposessed, or did they just give it up. was that a wheel lock on it in melbourne.???

oh no we're out of beer, fuel er up and lets go get some. the bird **** will last forever, hopefully so will the detainees.

ohhhh, whiplash

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:10

and by the way, it is an etops sector. 400nm, rk, hn. fact

check it

capt moonlight

23rd Jul 2007, 01:32

Ithink not
Getting personal checking profiles .You seem to have a personal agenda and therefore logic has gone out the window. Things have changed a lot since you were in the region apparently.It had to in order to allow survival. I don't want a slanging match just a sensible discussion.
Standard flight planning approach 400kgs. fact
High terrain into Hir from the west means engines at idle for most of the approach therefore burn almost nothing. fact
You are quoting Air Nauru and their network doesn't end in Hir and would therefore have pax for other ports. fact
120 seats full of pax doesn't reach your MZFW. fact
In the 300 you can carry full load and fuel sufficient not to be F---ed and still be well and truly profitable. fact
You can make a number of approaches into Hir and still divert. fact
If your 300 was making those fuel burns then I think it needs a service as 2400kgs/hr is more than achievable. fact
DON'T WORRY ABOUT MY EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND DON'T BELIEVE ALL YOU READ IN PROFILES AS VERY FEW OF THEM REVEAL REAL IDENTITIES. fACT
The days of RON are long over and the hard working crew at the new (not only in name ) Our Airline are working hard to mould an operation to benefit all concerned so they should be encouraged . Anyhow that's what I think.

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:35

wasnt quoting air nauru, by the way

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:41

here endith your lesson,

the figures i have quoted are correct.

the arrival from brisbane is from the south. inbound on the 190 radial.

the fuel burn figures i have quoted are correct. talk to someone who does your flight planning, if you have someone.

as i said, its all fine if you get in the first time, but , very slowly now, each approach after that will cost you dearly in fuel, and very very slowly now, this means your alternate options are very greatly reduced.

melanesians carry lots and lots of baggage. do some time in the region and you will find it to be one of their only similar traits.

by the way i didnt read your profile, i didnt have to.

lesson over, have a nice day.

capt moonlight

23rd Jul 2007, 01:42

Only etops if you go direct

ithinkso

23rd Jul 2007, 01:50

even less fuel over the top, even less payload, even less revenue

and i said, your lesson is over.

capt moonlight

23rd Jul 2007, 01:52

Thanks for the lesson but I don't think you can teach me anything of benefit.
You too have a nice day !!!!!!!!!!!

capt moonlight

24th Jul 2007, 05:24

See from papers in Hir today that now they are sacking part of the newly appointed board. From frying pan into the fire

Kwaj mate

26th Jul 2007, 00:56

I see Tony Hughes is on the Board - very well respected in international finance circles & the original Governor of the Reserve Bank - a very nice Pom married to a Western lady... perhaps the best bloke in the whole country to have on there;
Also Gideon s back - formally an accountant & auditor of very high repute, and also former GM of the airline, another excellent choice.
This will see positive moves

Animalclub

26th Jul 2007, 01:42

Kwaj mate
Certainly agree with you on Tony Hughes. A real gentleman... and doesn't suffer fools... or politicians.

ivan ellerbai

26th Jul 2007, 01:48

It's a pity this thread has deteriorated towards a personal level as it has been the source of some interesting and, in the main, reliable material. It has, particularly, provided good comparisons between two different aircraft and their suitability for a common task but this has been lost in the developing spat. I have been moved as a result to get busy on the net and dig up figures of my own (with the help of some LAME mates) in order to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Obviously two previous posters dispute the fuel burns of a 733. I've been able to confirm the following from having access to a Boeing 733 Performance Manual using the already agreed upon 60.0 tonne landing weight limited BRW for this HIR operation. At this weight the 733 can go straight to FL330 and the ISA burns once there are a little under 2500kg/hr. By the time it gets to HIR it's at 52.0 tonne and (having had the ability to step to FL370 by then) the burns are around 2200kg/hr - so an average a little under 2400kg/hr is reasonable.

Using the specific figures for this aircraft (CASA web search to get the MSN, then an FAA/APRMO search to get the original owner/operator and finally "MyBoeing Fleet" (LAME access) to get specific weights) there is a spread of 26.0 tonnes between the empty weight and the 60.0 tonne BRW. Allowing 14.0 tonne for fuel leaves a payload capability of 12.0 tonne. This equates to 120 pax/bags on average. I'm unaware of the configuration of this particuar aircraft but 120 seats is about average for a 733. It seems, then, that this aircraft can operate BNE-HIR with more fuel than the limiting 12.5 tonnes mentioned elsewhere and still be full of passengers.

One poster doubts there are any operators constantly suppressing the MZFW in this day and age but it appears IE/SAW are doing just that. Figures from an E170 pilot (SAW aren't the only Australian operators of the E170) indicate that the E170 requires full tanks for this operation. More website visits (incl. Embraer) confirms that a consequence of this requirement is a limited payload (ie less than MZFW) of around 55 - 60 pax (some 20% of capacity). The E170 pilot supplied figures indicate a burn of 4500 - 4800 kgs to HIR, so let's say 4600 kgs average. This is 3400 kgs less than the 733 but the latter can shift 60 more passengers for this extra fuel or, put another way, at a higher direct cost of less than 60kgs/fuel per pax which is pretty cheap or profitable (3400 kgs at around $1.20 kg versus the revenue from 60 pax) depending on your standpoint. Add the respective purchase costs (US$12m for a 733 from a desert somewhere against the US$25m for the E170 from HK) plus the loan servicing/leasing costs and the figures clearly go one way.

I'm not interested in personal profiles, teaching people lessons or the job status of anyone, so let's keep this thread on track and return to the higher level of debate and information that was previously so.

ithinkso

26th Jul 2007, 04:14

ivan, the region about which you are referring usually sits at around isa plus 20 on the ground. and wait for it, bout isa +15 at cruise levels.

generally you wont reach fl370 on a leg of this length, at heavy weights, even with step climbs, because of the higher temperatures, and because you would have to spend over 40mins at the higher level for it to be of any benefit,(the leg's just too short). just take it from someone that has flown the route on many, many occasions and with over 30 years experience in the area, that the route is constraining on just about all of the aircraft types that have been used for the route,historically speaking. especially when there is weather involved.

it seems though, that you have done your homework, so....

best wishes.

teaki

26th Jul 2007, 12:26

thumps up ivan!!!!

enough getting up n personal dudes!!! time to give a hand to a failing airline!! don't we all want to have a bird to fly and be successful?

what do u think of the government intervernin and sacking the "board" for misinformation? one would think that they're acting upon the advises from the airline management team and if anyone should take the axe, should be the management.......um sure anyone with a nations "national airline's" interest at hand would have done all the economics and feasibility studies before embarking on such decision!!! they are employed and paid to run the day to day airline business.

with the new board selection (thumps up), wont be surprised if they're axed too, again due to mismanagement and being misinformed by management!!! :{ :ok:

capt moonlight

27th Jul 2007, 07:43

Ivan
A job well done. I totally agree about getting personal but some people can't accept that the figures given are from actual experience and not from guesswork.
Ithinkso without getting personal I wouldn't call 3 hours + a short sector. I hear ATC clearing the a/c on this sector at FL 360/370 all the time.

Sal-e

28th Jul 2007, 06:26

The recent reshuffling/sackings is not a bad thing. Tony and Gideon are certainly additions with experience and excellent track records. I know both of them personally and am confident they will add sensibilities and common sense to further decisions. I have a feeling they will lean towards a joint operation with the Nauruans simply because it makes sense. Of course they may insist on some control which I believe OA is in a positon to agree. I dread great opposition by the nationalist types from both camps and there is quite a few of them. I hope lessons learnt from both airline's recent history can come to play.

JMara

28th Jul 2007, 13:45

Yes...It seems they have the board all sorted out for a better Solair :D.However I still think to completelly overhaul Solair the management or who ever misinformed the last board on the E170 should be shown the door.

ivan ellerbai

29th Jul 2007, 02:14

OK, ITS, even if the figures are based on ISA+15, then the relativities between the E170 and the 733 basically prevail and the 733 will burn no more than an extra 3700 - 3800 kgs kgs than the E170 and not the 3400 kgs I reckoned. Still means less than 65 kgs per pax for the extra 60 pax so, constrained or not, the 733 does a pretty reasonable job and better than anything else on offer. It is full (seat wise), after all, unlike the aircraft that IE is using.

Sal-e

29th Jul 2007, 12:18

ima birdbrain,
You are right about GS. But as far as local politicians go, he does okay if surrounded by the right people.
The really ideal aircraft (at least on paper) would be the A320 series (A319-A321). The only thing is it hasn't proven itself in the pacific like the 737 range has (absolutely unparalleled at around 40 years of 737 service in the pacific without a major incident to date, discounting Aloha). Maintenance would also be a major issue for the bus.

Tee Emm

29th Jul 2007, 13:58

Out of curiousity, are the My Airline B737-300 take off performance calculations mentioned above, based on general take off charts figured out by the crew for each take off or does the airline provide individual runway analysis and obstacle clearance charts for all its ports? Big difference in weights sometimes and the latter much safer.

ithinkso

31st Jul 2007, 23:22

i was only ever saying the 73 was the machine for the job.

there are specific runway charts available for hir. these make a difference on the long runs, ie hn-bn. the limiting factor for the shorter legs is the max landing weight at the destination. ie honiara-nauru.

donkey punch

1st Aug 2007, 02:38

i suppose you have a secure job then?

donkey punch

1st Aug 2007, 02:43

these issues are important and if not addressed could mean the end of the company, do you understand now, or are things different in the i.t world? you dirty little black bandit

witwiw

1st Aug 2007, 06:51

Well, Black Bandit, isn't that an angry outburst from someone who has had nothing worthwhile to add to this thread. I can't discern where there has been any complaining bunch of complaining rather some verifiable figures re two different aircraft have emerged that many of us would otherwise not have access to.

As Donkey Punch says, there a real issues at stake for those in Solomon Airlines and this forum provides an avenue for those issues to be aired and discussed. All very acceptable unless, BB, you don't believe in free speech and you are uncaring for the plight of others.

It might be better if you refrained from posting until such time as you can offer something of benefit.

GAFA

2nd Aug 2007, 10:00

I hear the E150 (I know it's 170 but it can't carry 70 pax) went U/S again the other day and Our Airline operated the services for Solair for 2 days. More pax who have had enough of the E150.

Sal-e

3rd Aug 2007, 13:47

There's a definite message here isn't there. Share the OA 737. Enough said.

teaki

10th Aug 2007, 11:26

havent seen BB's comments, but i suppose tis not professional to write personal emails swearing at fellow ppruners!!!!!! tis a disgrace!!! as witwiw said plis refrain from posting til u have some constructive things to say as the plight of airline workers and the company is at stake.

have friends working there who r quite unsure of the turn the airline might make as the instability of the government might mean the new board of directors for the airlines might change if the motion of "no confidence" against the prime minister is successful!!! :{

lets just hope that common sense and justice prevails!!! :ok:

ringbinder

11th Aug 2007, 04:38

Am waiting for some business colleagues to turn up, were due on the IE flight yesterday but now hear they are coming on a service on Sunday. Why didn't the E170 operate on Friday? And is it the E170 on Sunday or are my colleagues in for a treat by travelling in a 737 where their bags will arrive with them?

Sal-e

11th Aug 2007, 17:13

Hahah enough said. Why continue torturing themselves?

yowie

12th Aug 2007, 13:19

ring,sal'e,
Show me the money!!:\

Sal-e

12th Aug 2007, 15:25

Oh the Solomons have a lot of money to go halves (or thereabouts) with the Nauruans with the promise of
With a bit of political will and impetus, they can do it and go a long way with this.
What the Solomons don't have is money to continue burning with the Embraer as this will continue to lose more and more.

The Kiribatis did something similar with the acquisition of their ATR72. Again, they tried to muscle it in the name of national pride and now,

1. had lost their OA B737 run to Nadi, AND
2. the ATR72 (costing them a few millions),
3. AND Air Pacific has secured the route from TRW to NAN at a far greater expense to their government and people.

JMara

12th Aug 2007, 19:57

Solair will never get themselfs organised regardless of who is on the board.As long as management who have been there for decades are there nothing will change.Jim Bradfilds did a good job though when he was there.

capt moonlight

13th Aug 2007, 04:21

I see Our Airline has been covering their flights the last couple of days. Is there a problem with the E170

pohm1

13th Aug 2007, 05:34

Is there a problem with the E170 ????

Mate, there's TEN pages of problems:ok:

P1

Dreamliner73

13th Aug 2007, 09:18

Noted parked at the Old ITB Brisbane for the last few days. Is this the end of the operation of the E170 to Solomons.

Visual Landing

13th Aug 2007, 09:34

Looks like it.

ringbinder

14th Aug 2007, 00:07

Colleagues arrived on the Our Airline 737, were told by the crew that OA would also be operating a service the next day as well. Seems to fit in with the word around Honiara that the E170 won't be seen out here for a while yet.

cnic

14th Aug 2007, 05:59

There seems to be whisper that solair has lost their jet due to lack of payment, can anyone confirm.

chimbu warrior

14th Aug 2007, 07:21

Solomon Star)

Solomon Airlines international flights remained suspended yesterday because the financially-struggling airline has not met lease payments for its Embraer 170 jet, the Solomon Star reported.
- ADVERTISEMENT -

The newspaper said the Australian company the plane is leased from, SkyAirWorld, grounded the plane in Brisbane on Friday.

It said Solomon Airlines has to pay up before flights can resume.
The plane is the airline's only international jet. Its loss forced the cancellation of Brisbane-Honiara-Brisbane and Honiara-Nadi (Fiji)-Honiara flights.

The new chairman of the Solomon Airlines board, Central Bank Governor Rick Hou, did not return telephone messages left for him in an attempt to get comment.

Hou was appointed to head a new-look board brought in to try and solve the Government-owned airline’s continuing financial problems.

Airline chief executive Ron Sumsum, when contacted, said a written statement would be issued. But this had not yet been received, the Solomon Star said.
From Brisbane SkyAirWorld chief executive David Charlton confirmed that the company has stopped use of the E-170.

“We are suspending flights until payments are made,” Charlton said.

Charlton said as soon as the payments are made, Solomon Airlines can resume its flights.

He could not reveal how much Solomon Airlines owes them. But it is believed to be a substantial amount.

Charlton also revealed that this is the second time that the company had suspended services because of non-payment of lease fees.

Earlier, when services were suspended, Solomon Airlines said that the plane had encountered technical problems.

Passengers stranded in Fiji on Saturday are believed to have been brought to Honiara on an Air Niugini flight.

The Solomon Star reported this week that the Government has paid $22 million to support Solomon Airlines since it leased the E-170 this year. The Brazilian-built jet replaced a Boeing 737-300 the airline had previously leased for its international flights.

The airline’s financial woes came to light in June when staff salaries were paid three days late.

There have been constant capacity problems with the E-170, with luggage, freight and passengers offloaded because of weight limitations.

Meanwhile, there are reports a team from Air Vanuatu is coming to Honiara this week to discuss the launch of a Honiara-Port Vila-Brisbane and return service.

Air Vanuatu general manager Terry Kerr confirmed they were planning to fly a Honiara-Port Vila route some time later in the year.

Air Vanuatu plans to start operating a 185-seat Boeing 737-800 from January, replacing its present 135-seat Boeing 737-300.

Asked if Air Vanuatu would lease a 76-seat E-170 aircraft, Mr Kerr said “absolutely not”.

He said Air Vanuatu has opted to go the larger Boeing 737-800 as passenger numbers in the region are continually increasing.

“We felt to go to a smaller aircraft would not make any sense at all apart from obvious operating limitations that EMB 170 would have on our routes such as weight limitations,” he said.

constance

14th Aug 2007, 10:49

From the SMH, Ozjet stepping in to fill the gap:

Solomon Airlines pulls jet from route
August 14, 2007 - 3:59PM

The financially-troubled Solomon Airlines has had a jet pulled from its Brisbane to Honiara route after failing to meet lease payments to a Queensland air charter company.
But a rival Victorian company looks ready to step in to fill the gap.
Solomon Airlines provides the main air link between the Solomons and Australia, flying seven times a week between Brisbane and Honiara.
But use of the Brazilian-made Embraer 170 jet on the route was suspended on Friday by Brisbane-based SkyAirWorld because of overdue lease payments.
SkyAirWorld's chief executive officer David Charlton said Solomon Airlines had indicated it hoped to have everything back on track and the plane back in service soon.
Charlton said suspension of flights due to non-payment of lease fees had happened once before since his company started flying for Solomon Airlines on May 20.
"But I see this as a hiccup, not a major issue," Charlton said.
However, Solomon Airlines has turned to another Australian air charter company, Melbourne-based OzJet, to fly the route, at least in the interim.
An OzJet Boeing 737-200 flew the route on Saturday and on Tuesday.
OzJet's chief executive officer Willie O'Neill said his company was in discussions with Solomon Airlines to "rebuild their schedule".
He said SkyAirWorld had contracted to use a 76-seat aircraft but it could only carry 55 passengers on the route and this was not returning enough money for Solomon Airlines.
"The aircraft was inappropriate. We will be in discussions with Solomon Airlines to hopefully address the shortfall," O'Neill said.
In a bid to turn around the fortunes of Solomon Airlines, the Solomons government recently appointed a new board, headed by Solomons Central Bank Governor Rick Hou.
He and airline executives were in a meeting and could not be contacted.
The Solomons government has pumped millions of Solomon dollars into the airline since it leased the Embraer in an effort to help resolve the carrier's troubles.

Sal-e

14th Aug 2007, 15:59

The 737-300 and -400 were perfect for the BNEHIR run.

The -200, hardly. Air Nauru did that for a couple of decades using NOU to be able to maximise loads. Very expensive if loads not there.

The Solomon's may do what the Norfolk Islanders did and opt for OzJet to do their service. The Norfolks lost out big time on that one in more ways than one with OzJet being the only winner, and only just.

A deal with the Vanuatuans can't be at all efficient for the Solomon Islanders. How can you possibly not get penalised in seat/mile costs if you have to fly from HIR to BNE via Vila? The paying Solomon's public will grimace at that thought. Wantok to wantok relations (Melanesian Spearhead group) should not come at a penalty for one party and benefit to the other.

The solution comes back to what we've hammered again and again. Partnership with the Nauruans. Is this solution to be avoided at all cost? If so, why? And how could that be rectified?
A few simple probing questions may go a long way in solving this dilema.

ivan ellerbai

14th Aug 2007, 23:01

Been doing some more research given that Ozjet have been operating a couple of charters for Solomons Airlines (as have OUR Airline, as a matter of interest) and seeingOzJet's chief executive officer Willie O'Neill said his company was in discussions with Solomon Airlines to "rebuild their schedule".

Sal-E has it in one, the 737-200 isn't the best replacement for the E-170. It certainly offers some improvement in payload by about 2 - 2.5 tonnes which only brings the loads up to around what they thought the E-170 was going to carry but at greater cost overall. Still leaves no real scope for expansion other than increases in frequency - expensive!! IE really need to look at the situation and, whilst national pride is very important, it needs to be cast aside in the interests of the best possible outcome for the Solomonese, particularly, and the passengers, generally. The wrong decision will see ticket prices higher than they need be - ask the passengers travelling to/from Tarawa and Nandi, fares about double what they were when Air Nauru operated. It's time some sort of alliance developed between interested (island nation) parties that would bring results (profits) to those parties. Engaging the services of yet another external operator along the lines of the deal with the E-170 will only bring about similar results as have just emerged. It's merely changing horses midstream if they do that - simple. Incidentally, did IE conduct "due diligence" when they were assessing the contract/payload/viability etc? It would appear it wasn't too thorough. They now have the chance to finally get it right - hope the chance isn't wasted.

capt moonlight

15th Aug 2007, 08:37

Out of the frying pan and into the fire using the B737-200. Where is SumSum?
He seems to have gone very quiet since the E-170 has been grounded. Very different to the guy bragging about how his decision to get the E-170 was to be the savior for the airline in their inflight magazine. He bragged about his vision and bagged other airlines in the Pacific. Solomons would be doing well if they could make as much from their services as he and selected others make in their paypackets each month. When will the Nations of the Pacific use each other and keep money in their region instead of sending it offshore to others such as SkyAirWorld and Ozjet.

The solution is so easy and obvious but becomes so hard because of so called National pride. GET TOGETHER WITH OUR AIRLINE AND MAYBE BUY ANOTHER B737-300 AND PROVIDE A CHEAP,VIABLE,SAFE AND LOCALLY OWNED AIRLINE FOR THE REGION BY THE REGION .

Animalclub

15th Aug 2007, 23:07

c'mon kosrae, solomons, kiribati, marshalls, tuvalu, nauru, ponape, anyone else? you all deserve a regional airline that works for all of you and that keeps the jobs and monies home.

I agree brassplate but can you imagine the s**t fight that would go on in appointing any sort of management or forming a route structure.

I've always found it almost impossible for the island nations (as much as I love 'em) to agree on inter island matters - but when there is trouble or donations available from outside the region, that's when they do offer a united front.

As one High Commissioner put it to me "there's plenty of guilt money out there - especially from Europe" and that may be the answer. Get the EU to sponsor an airline which would suit the island nations as a group.

ringbinder

15th Aug 2007, 23:27

As a long time (and suffering) traveller to the Solomons and being familiar with the way things go in this part of the world, it comes as no surprise the circumstances surrounding Solomon Airlines and their venture into the big league. They only had to look around and see the results of the past when small nations try to go it alone with international operations. Unless you've got a pretty decent tourist base to underpin an operation (e.g. Vanuatu, Fiji) then you are always going to have difficulty with the "bottom line". Nauru, although it seems to be managing with Our Airline, has had its troubles in the past so no-one is immune.

From my perspective and experience out here, and if I was managing the airline, I'd need to see it undergo the drastic sort of overhaul that Our Airline went through. I speak with the crews there regulalry (wouldn't travel any other way to Honiara now) and they tell me of significant job cuts over their network, salary cuts, changing suppliers for better prices/value (meals), dual jobs (the hosties clean the aeroplane on turnarounds, pilots doing other duties in addition to flying) etc etc. It would appear only because management has bitten the bullet that they are surviving. This is exactly what Solomon Airlines needs and they would be well served to take on a similar model, better still as previous posters suggest, they could do very well by joining forces with Nauru and making it an airline "for the region by the region". (nice concept, Capt. Moonlight)

If I was a manager with the current Solomon Airlines I'd be very concerned with the apparent vested interests of a certain few who are (desperately, by now) trying to protect their positions and handsome salaries - salaries that are seemingly over and above the industry standard for what they do. It is these few that are blocking the proper resolution of Solomon Airline's problems and until they are taken out of positions of influence then nothing of significance will ensue. Obviously they have the ear/s of politicians but I often wonder about the quality of the advice these pollies are getting.

cnic

16th Aug 2007, 02:40

The only answer in the Pacific is to take the airlines out of the hands of the politicians who want free flights, take the seats of paying customers and want positions on boards (air vanuatu classic case 30 odd people on a two plane airline board). APNG is going from strength to strength, they own all their aircraft(no loss due to no payment)except the 737 but how long till they do?. They have no obligation to employ wantoks, maybe they would be the best to take this route. I doubt that air van will come to the rescue seeing that sumsum and kerr are not on the best of terms (personal reasons).

flytie

16th Aug 2007, 07:04

So does anyone know what is going to happen with SAW now???:confused:

Sal-e

16th Aug 2007, 15:13

I think they should cut the fat (as the Nauruans painfully have), leaving only the very best of each field, and join the Nauruans on 'Our Airline' (whoever thought of that name is a wise man, very proud yet unbiased) as an equal share holder.

JMara

16th Aug 2007, 19:55

Solomon Star headlines" Airline back in the air with another jet"......

This sounds very familiar........Breach Air Vanuatu contract for the Spanish 737,Spanish 737 for the E-170 and now......Airlines back in the air with another jet!! only after signing a 3 year lease agrement 3 months ago with SAW.....this Sumsum fellow:suspect: and the key players of management:confused: need to go.......hope the new board members can see this.

teaki

17th Aug 2007, 02:52

SOLOMON Airlines international flights remained suspended yesterday because the financially-struggling airline had not met lease payments for its Embraer 170 jet..........
The regional news magazine Islands Business reported this month that the Government has paid $22 million to support Solomon Airlines since it leased the E-170 this year.
Solomon Airlines is in deep trouble.

The Islands Business report said the $22 million of Government funding went to:
meet the lease and associated costs of the E-170;
l pay staff salary increases of up to 14 per cent;
l and for the hiring of executives lured from Air Vanuatu.
Islands Business reported the airline’s financial woes came to light in June when staff salaries were paid three days late.
Islands Business said there are constant capacity problems with the E-170, with luggage, freight and passengers offloaded.
.........................
Meanwhile, there are reports a team from Air Vanuatu is coming to Honiara this week to discuss the launch of a Honiara-Port Vila-Brisbane and return service.
Air Vanuatu general manager Terry Kerr confirmed they were planning to fly a Honiara-Port Vila route some time later in the year.
Air Vanuatu plans to start operating a 185-seat Boeing 737-800 from January, replacing its present 135-seat Boeing 737-300.
Asked if Air Vanuatu would lease a 76-seat E-170 aircraft, Mr Kerr said “absolutely not”.
He said Air Vanuatu has opted to go for the larger Boeing 737-800 as passenger numbers in the region are continually increasing.
“We felt to go to a smaller aircraft would not make any sense at all apart from obvious operating limitations that EMB 170 would have on our routes such as weight limitations,” he said.
...............

:{

cnic

17th Aug 2007, 12:20

I think that anyone who knows Kerr and Sumsum would know that it is very unlikely that they would meet.

ringbinder

18th Aug 2007, 00:13

The reality here is that Mr Sumsum will not be the one determining whom meets whom. There is a general feeling that the sooner Mr Sumsum has nothing to do with Solomon Airlines, the better. The matter is now with the government and the board are effectively not functioning except as directed. The governement is going to decide the course of matters henceforth. The only concern now is that they get it right.

PLANEOZLOVER

18th Aug 2007, 03:19

Another Article in the Solomon Star.:uhoh:

Airline back in air with another jet

Airline back in air with another jet (http://www.solomonstarnews.com/?q=node/14815)

Submitted by drupal on 15 August, 2007 - 12:15pm. Headlines (http://www.solomonstarnews.com/?q=taxonomy/term/35) By ROBERT L. IROGA
SOLOMON Airlines was yesterday back flying international services using a Boeing 737-200 operated by Australian charter airline OzJet.
But the Government-owned airline now faces possible legal action over its failure to pay for the Embraer 170 jet leased from another Australian airline, SkyAirWorld.
SkyAirWorld said it is continuing to charge Solomon Airlines for the E-170 jet now sitting on the ground in Brisbane.
SkyAirWorld grounded the 76-seat E-170 on Friday, saying Solomon Airlines failed to make payments for leasing it.
This stopped Solomon Airlines operating international flights Brisbane-Honiara-Brisbane and Honiara-Nadi (Fiji)-Honiara.
Solomon Airlines now switching to an OzJet plane has angered SkyAirWorld.
It says the Solomon Airlines agreement to lease the E-170, which began in May, is for a minimum of three years.
SkyAirWorld chief executive David Charlton told the Solomon Star last night that he was not told about the changes Solomon Airlines made.
“I contacted them every day but they never respond,” he said in reference to Solomon Airlines’ management.:ugh:
Mr Charlton said since the grounding of the E-170 on Friday they have continued to charge Solomon Airlines.
They will continue to do so for the next three years if Solomon Airlines breaches the agreement, he said.
He did not rule out legal action, saying SkyAirWorld will look at all possible options.:sad:
Mr Charlton has declined to say how much Solomon Airlines owes it. But it is believed to be substantial.
It has also emerged this was the second time SkyAirWorld had grounded the E-170 because Solomon Airlines had not paid lease fees. The previous grounding Solomon Airlines blamed on a technical problem.
Finance Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo told the Solomon Star yesterday that Solomon Airlines has now entered an arrangement with OzJet to provide a 110-seat Boeing 737-200.
Mr Lilo also confirmed Solomon Airlines is in deep financial trouble.
He described its financial status as “bleeding”.
But the minister is confident that with the powerful new board he has appointed the airline can be revived.
The new board is headed by Central Bank Governor Rick Hou and includes former governor Tony Hughes and former Solomon Airlines chief executive Gidoen Zoleveke Junior.
Mr Lilo said one of the factors being looked at is the rights Nauru’s Our Airline has to operate Brisbane-Honiara-Brisbane in competition with Solomon Airlines.
Our Airline uses its 130-seat Boeing 737-300 on the route, as part of a service that also goes to Nauru and Tarawa (Kiribati).

Maybe the options David Charlton is talking about is getting an ABC reporter to do another 730 report. Oh hang on he has already done that on another company hasn't he . Just love that blackened out segment but eyebrows never lie do they?????? :=

It must be expensive having an aircraft on the ground and not doing any work, keep invoicing the ATO will love you for that. :D

capt moonlight

18th Aug 2007, 07:06

I note in the media that all the talk is of rescue by Air Van or Ozjet however it appears to be Our Airline doing most of the flights.
Talking to the aircrew on OA they tell me they have done 3 or 4 times more flying then any other airlines who are supposedly assisting. Also unlike others they are only charging discount rates for the flights and are not trying to take advantage of Solair's bad times.What more needs to be done to show which is the best way to go. FOR THE REGION BY THE REGION Anyhow that's what I think !!!!!!!

Shagtastic

18th Aug 2007, 08:57

A short interlude anyone?

http://stage6.divx.com/user/Neillithan/video/1026910/Baginski---Fallen-Art

bigjet787

18th Aug 2007, 23:07

You have it in one PLANEOZLOVER, it seems that velvethammer (DC aka the spin doctor) and the rest of his staff dont have anything to brag about so they have vanished. At least the 7:30 Report may have something actually worthy to air this time instead of a made up story by ex employees. :D

I think someone needs to ask who was the GM when these allegations supposedly happened? Yep thats right!!:ok:

At least SOLAIR now might have a chance to start making a profit again with Ozjet & Our Airline helping out. They are starting to get the right aircraft on the job.

One other option is Pacific Blue. This unfortunately is not viewed by some Pacific Nations as an option but it could group together a number of nations quite quickly with low overheads and a good fleet.

Either way Ozjet/Our Airline/Pacific Blue or some body else will get the job as SAW obviously can not make SOLAIR profitable, especially when you pay full price for half an aircraft:ugh:

ivan ellerbai

19th Aug 2007, 01:49

Dug up some figures on departures from BNE in relation to Solomon Airlines flights after Capt. M's claims that OA are doing much of the work - seems to be true. Following flights using Solomon flight numbers:-

Saturday 11th service operated by Ozjet (OJ)
Sun. 12th service operated by Our Airline (OA)
Mon 13th - OA dedicated flight plus normal service via HIR to Nauru
Tue 14th - OJ (plus OA's normal service from HIR under OA flt number)
Wed 15th - OA
Thu 16th - Dedicated service by OJ plus OA's normal flight via HIR to Nauru,
Fri 17th - OA's normal service from HIR plus OA additional flight to HIR
Sat 18th - OA flight from HIR
Sun 19th - OA service

That's 6 dedicated services plus 2 normal services in their own right by OA, 3 services to OJ, none to Air Van.

It's easy to see where the help is coming from despite the claims in the papers to the contrary.

teaki

20th Aug 2007, 13:16

mate, doesnt matter how many powerful board they (solomon airlines) have, wont make any difference!!!!! as long as the mole is still there, wont do any difference. need to find the cause of the problem then they wil be able to fix it. mind you, solair um sure makes alot of money from what i gather from friends working there that not only the airfare is very expensive but domestic specially is making alot of monie from many pax travelling domestically and extra flights created to cater for the high demand!!!!!!!!!!! :ok:
and lets just hope the GM not making special bonding with the politician, specially the finance minister, gordon darcy!!!!!! :} decision makers still there!!! bingo!!!! :*:*

Melanesian Blue

21st Aug 2007, 00:11

Too right teaki……Mr Sumsum is the mole!
Sacking the board three times won’t do much if sumsum and his bum chums are still in the background.

Just received sources claiming Our airline is a lot cheaper to charter than the Skyairworlds E-170 jet on BNE-HIR-BNE route. Makes you wonder why this was not considered in the feasibility study, if ever there was one. The realistic thing for solair to do now is get rid of their international service entirely if they can. Hand the problem over to Our airline and not ozjet as for obvious reasons already debated about in this Forum. Also stop wasting Solomon taxpayers money and start investing it back into your domestic services where it belongs.

ithinkso

21st Aug 2007, 04:02

had the pleasure of meeting sumsum a while ago, the man is a gentleman, and is about as switched on as you can get. doubt the problem lies anywhere near him.
.

cnic

21st Aug 2007, 04:15

Sumsum a gentleman that is the funniest thing I have heard all day, he is there for himself and no one else ( his only there for that enormous paycheck and nice house in brisbane). I still can not believe that he was sold such a lemon though, I always thought he was a bit more switch on then that.

ithinkso

21st Aug 2007, 04:22

basically every expat that works for any airline,is there for themselves. thats why they leave the comfort of their own countries to look for the salaries they cant attract at home.

why would anybody go to the middle east? if they werent being compensated appropriately??

JMara

21st Aug 2007, 05:34

I have also met Sumsum,he comes across as a gentalman,seems switched on as you say but mate, he has not done his homework and has put Solair into a bigger mess than it already was in..........He being the only signature on the contract with SAW puts all responsibility on him.....no one else...........so you say switched on? I think not.I have just read on the local paper as well www.solomonstarnews.com (http://www.solomonstarnews.com) that Solair is disputing the contract with SAW as they promised X amount of seats but only got 50 for the BNE-HIR sector........Sumsum needs to go!

Melanesian Blue

21st Aug 2007, 05:38

Most expats I know working for the airlines are genuine people. Meaning they actually care about the airline and hope to put something back into the job. There’s also a difference between being Compensated appropriately and excessively. By the way this is the pacific not the middle east.
The way I see it with other Solomon nationals is …….If you’re not performing then start packing your bags.

ithinkso

21st Aug 2007, 05:59

agreed, 100%. most pilots and management care about the airlines they work for, because if they dont, they will cease to work for said airlines.

i have no experience in working for a "small" airline, however, regardless of size, if quality people are needed, they must be paid for. regardless of location in the world. small airlines, in many instances have management that wear mutliple hats, so to speak. in a large organisation you have people to do just about anything,(pencil sharpening ladies), the smaller ones do not. therefore people who are charged with multiple duties should be paid accordingly.

if you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys.

best wishes.

p.s.: if someone offered you more money, to do the job you're already doing, only a fool would knock it back,(no matter how excessive).

capt moonlight

21st Aug 2007, 07:25

Only a fool or someone with integrity. Not everybody is ruled by the dollar and some people even care. They like to think they give value for money to their employer

Melanesian Blue

21st Aug 2007, 09:33

He was Director of Operations for Air Vanuatu for less than a year before he moved to the Solomon islands. This is his first C.E.O job. So I’m not sure what sort of quality people you’re talking about….He may be a great pilot if that’s what your referring to but we only have to look under our nose to see what his discission to acquire the E-170 has done to the Solomon islands economy. I totally agree that if quality people are required they must get paid for. But “Quality people normally produce positive results” and that is yet to be seen.

Sal-e

21st Aug 2007, 13:35

I tend to agree that maybe the Solomon Islands should forget entirely about the pains of starting an airline from scratch together with all it's inherent risks.
Why do that to themselves when far bigger investments are beckoning? The Solomon Islands are one of the most beautiful places in the Pacific. Their tourist industry is yet to be properly tapped in to. They are mineral and numerous other resource rich. Restarting their airline will only be a source of corruption and a further loss of millions for them.
Another reason they should remain with Nauru's 737 is Taiwan's involvement with that whole deal. Taiwan was happy to finance Nauru's 737 with the possiblity of sharing it with the Solomons. How would it look to the Taiwanese if the S.I and Nauru weren't able to co-operate being a couple of the few remaining diplomatic partners they have? I dare say they'll only tighten the purse strings of aid. Maybe they should pipe in to encourage more cooperation.

Animalclub

21st Aug 2007, 16:29

Sal-e... are you saying that Megapode and Dennis Buchanan's Solair were right by concentrating on the domestic services within Solomon Islands and collecting a royalty from airlines taking up the international rights?

There's one or two problems with that... in that the carrier that operates the service controls the frieght load. FJ used to send freight BNE-HIR on the circuit BNE-SYD-NAN-HIR thus Solair didn't receive any royalties. Mind you, I've been informed that IE didn't receive any royalties on frieght or passengers at all . This could be wrong!

Sal-e, I reckon you are on the right track. The country is too small for the financial risks involved.

ithinkso

22nd Aug 2007, 01:52

you see the thing is this:

there is no risk starting an airline in the solomons. the populatiion is large, they are resource rich and the biggest money spinner of all is the boys misbehaving. ramsi, has, and will be the saving grace of solomon airlines. the money they pump through the airline is truly massive.

when solomons first commenced with their own machine they had money in the bank courtesy of the australian government. a bit of financial mismanagement may have gone on, the wrong aircraft may have been chosen, but this still wont bring about the downfall of the airline. there is too much money being made anyway. its about cash flow.

as far as hooking up with OA, anyone with any experience in the area will know the solomon government wouldnt even consider it. im sure the nauruans would be more than happy to assist.

the difficulties follow:

as im sure you are all aware, the solomon islands government has signed the open skies policy. this means that basically any airline with the inclination can start operating to the solomons. they just need infrastructure to support their operations. at the moment only solomon airlines can provide this. if ie doesnt want to assist their competitors, the competitors must provide their own infrustructure, that is locally based staff.

virgin has looked at the route. jetstar is presently looking at then route. air vanuatu is looking at the route. air vanuatu, that has operated the route in the past made alot of money from it. air vanuatu has infrastructure very close by in the area.

remember soloms will have a difficult time finding a leasing company that will allow them to operate on anything but a cash up front basis. they parked up an ilfc machine a few years ago and the latest default with the 170 make the whole thing very risky for any decent sized leasing agent. for the lease of a single aircraft, they are reluctant, to take the risk that is involved with solomon airlines in particular. there are smaller leasing companies around but the smaller leasing companies tend to have much higher leasing costs than the biggies. economy of scale.

to lease their own aircraft economically means they will have to have their own crews. this is one of the largest investments. time for training is crucial. qantas wont touch them for training due to unpaid bills in the past. i am ignorant here, but are there any other classic version sims in australia apart form the qantas equipment.

to have their own crews, they will have to pay them accordingly, or they will simply leave once they have any time up on the machine. bonds do not work in the pacific. they crews will have to be expat, probably based in australia, which means higher expense.

as mentioned above these are all difficulties, not risks. the passenger base available, in theory, means solomon airlines should basically be running the entire region. nauru, kiribati, vanuatu. they have the position geographically. if they can get a decent aircraft, 737 300/400,nothing will stop them. not even political interference. there is simply too much money floating around.

who cares anyway.

Melanesian Blue

22nd Aug 2007, 08:51

First of all Solomon airlines was developed with the hope to promote travel and tourism into the solomons islands. Not to promote ramsi boys misbehaving. Also Ramsi won’t be in the solomons forever so they are not the saving grace of solair.
I don’t really understand your open skies policy. Why is the minister for finance saying in the press they are looking at ways to stop competition from Our Airline on BNE-HIR-BNE route? Also why can’t Air Niugini uplift passengers from HIR-NAN-HIR with this so called open skies policy? We already have Two airlines servicing our routes so why don’t we utilise them?
As for your comments stating there is endless money floating around and we are resource rich? Well look around the corner at our northern most closes neighbour the Nauruans. They were also resource rich at one stage but made bad investments.
The truth is we cannot run an airline so as the New Solomon Airlines board chairman Rick Hou puts it “why should we own an international airline at all“.
“the international sector is an area where we can make money out of it without actually owning an airline.” “In my opinion, if we can’t manage it why should we?

Now he’s a man who puts national pride aside and uses a bit of common sense. And by the way I do care because I pay taxes not for people to misuse.

Sal-e

24th Aug 2007, 05:22

I must say that I'm glad that someone as high up as the chairman of the board, Rick Hou, has the sense and the nerve to even stutter something as obvious as that.
Hopefully, the days of overly ambitious and pie dipping Solair staff management types, consultants, and politicians are numbered in dealing with airline management.
Let the issue lay to rest with all benefitting from a single airline for that region. What Solair will miss out in employment will be gained in higher employment for the tourist industry and business.
Let OA handle what they're experienced and good at, a sound and safe operation of it's aircraft.
Finally, let all work together for the betterment of all. Money is to be made here.

ringbinder

25th Aug 2007, 10:12

The truth is we cannot run an airline so as the New Solomon Airlines board chairman Rick Hou puts it “why should we own an international airline at all“.

It's encouraging that a local has the gumption to go public with such a comment in this forum. From my business oriented viewpoint here, a lot of the locals feel this way but aren't yet ready to voice that opinion openly. But openly stated opinions are just what is necessary so that those with control of the purse strings make sure they understand the feelings and get it right this time. One local concern is that there will simply be another aircraft leased along the lines of the Spanish arrangement, albeit with a more regionally based operator, and consequently the dollars will continue to be bled away from the country whilst they pursue an independent airline operation. There are better options, and, for one, Captain Moonlight's notion of "by the region ....." etc needs to be carefully considered by the new Board along with any other viable options. To be hamstrung by "tunnel vision" in that having your own airline is the only solution is hardly a credible review of the debacle that has occured with SAW and the E-170 and making sure the same mistakes aren't repeated.
The opportunity exists for Solomon Airlines to become quite a player in the immediate region - but this will only occur if there is proper consideration, consultation and co-operation. The danger is that a quick fix (and ultimate further disaster) will be pursued in a face saving exercise.

capt moonlight

27th Aug 2007, 06:25

I see Solomons have cancelled flights again today. How long before commonsense prevails and a joint operation is set up to help stop the bleeding by all concerned

Sal-e

28th Aug 2007, 02:02

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: :ugh::ugh:

teaki

29th Aug 2007, 09:37

very true mate, no one is an exception!!! but mind you, um sure no one in their right mind would do that by sacrificing an entire airline company and all those staff who experience living from paycheque to paycheque!!!!!!! makes you think that there are people who are so inhumane and upthemselves that that nothing else matters!!!:{

Melanesian Blue

29th Aug 2007, 12:05

http://www.offthemarkcartoons.com/cartoons/1999-09-11.gif
http://www.offthemark.com/siteimages/spacer.gif

cnic

29th Aug 2007, 21:17

Word is that solair has to pay in advance to get a service it seems that no one believes that they can be trusted to pay the bills after the fact. The kitty must have been empty this week. When is the board going to get a new management team and get things back to normal.

Skystar320

30th Aug 2007, 04:37

Gold Picture!

ringbinder

30th Aug 2007, 06:56

Here I am waiting for business associates to arrive into Honiara so that discussions can take place that will potentially provide employment, inject some money into the local economy and otherwise be of benefit to the community generally. However, Solomon's flight on Monday was cancelled (local whisper is that the fuel bill wasn't paid so the fuelling company [Shell?] would not fuel the aircraft in Brisbane), Tuesday's was overbooked as a result of Monday's cancellation, Wednesday's was never even a possibility to operate and today's flight has been delayed some 8 hours. My business associates are becoming mightily pi**ed off. It is a joke how they (Solomon Airlines) are operating presently and the business community here is becoming uneasy at the lack of confidence that is developing amongst overseas contacts (aka financiers for new ventures) and the harm that will inevitably follow if that confidence is too battered. It is essential that the Solomon Islands has a reliable air service - and right now that isn't even partially available (other than Our Airline's Monday and Thursday service) and there is nothing worthwhile even being touted to solve matters. Island pride appears to be part of the problem, along with advisors who really are out of their league (ie the Embraer decision) so the new Board really needs to bite the bullet and make some hard decisions. Won't make them popular but only then can they get things running. Nauru has done it with Our Airline and that appears to be sticking in the craw of many here - and, despite a coalition between the two countries being one obvious solution, it probably will be discounted for the wrong reasons without a proper and thorough assessment.

In the meantime I'm keeping my fingers crossed that my much delayed meetings will go ahead before it's too late and the investors pull out.

Melanesian Blue

30th Aug 2007, 08:18

Surge in Our Airline bookings

Submitted by Moffat Mamu on 30 August, 2007 - 12:33pm. Nation (http://www.solomonstarnews.com/?q=taxonomy/term/25) OUR Airlines has experienced a big surge in passenger numbers after the grounding of the E-170 recently.
A spokesman for Our Airlines said they experienced increase mostly from panic passengers who originally booked with Solomon Airlines.
Another Our Airlines official, however, said that they were always busy since Solomon Airlines signed the agreement with SkyAirWorld.
“We have always been busy,” the spokesperson said.
Our Airline is monitoring the Solomon Airlines situation with interest and will consider what action to take.
It’s likely that Our Airlines will increase its flights to and from Honiara to meet the growing demand as a result of the grounding of aircrafts leased by Solomon Airlines.
Since Monday, Solomon Airlines has suspended flights to Honiara.
The Airline has not given the details of the cancellation of the flights. It is believed that the airline doesn’t have money to pay for jet fuel.

waav8r

31st Aug 2007, 04:08

SOLAIR MAY END OWN JET FLIGHTS
Submitted by Moffat Mamu on 31 August, 2007 - 10:54am. Headlines | Nation

By ROBERT L. IROGA

SOLOMON Airlines may have to end its own international flights, the chairman of the Government body which owns the financially-troubled airline admitted yesterday.
Investment Corporation of Solomon Islands (ICSI) chairman Martin Maga said Solomon Airlines may instead have to what is called “code share” with other airlines.
This would involve having seats on scheduled services these airlines operate, instead of operating its own plane and flights.
Mr Maga said the airline company is in a serious financial situation and this looks the best option.
Solomon Star understands that the Solomon Airlines board is carrying out a study that will determine the airline’s future.
It’s understood that the board will submit its findings to the Investment Corporation, which will in turn forward them to the Government for the final say.
The Investment Corporation and airline board are expected to meet today.
New Solomon Airlines board chairman Rick Hou earlier told the Solomon Star that they were given up to two weeks to give options to the Government. These were to be possible ways out of the problem.
The financial crisis became public when Australian airline SkyAirWorld grounded the E-170 jet it leased to Solomon Airlines for international flights.
Solomon Airlines had failed to keep up lease payments.
There are also reported to have been problems with the 76-seat E-170. These are believed to have involved problems with passenger and cargo capacity because of the weight of fuel it had to carry on its over-water flights.
Since the grounding on 10 August, SkyAirWorld has continued to charge Solomon Airlines for the aircraft. This is reported to be around US$27,000 (about $194,000) a day.
Solomon Airlines organised charters with another Australian airline, Oz Jet, using a Boeing 737-200 to maintain services on the busy Brisbane-Honiara-Brisbane route.
But two weeks later Solomon Airlines was in trouble again. These flights were suspended on Monday after the airline failed to pay for fuel for the plane.
Some Solomon Airlines passengers are also believed to have been carried on flights operated by Nauru’s Our Airline, Air Niugini and Fiji’s Air Pacific.
Solomon Airlines already has a code share arrangement giving it some seats on Air Pacific’s weekly Nadi (Fiji)-Honiara-Nadi flight.
Our Airline’s Boeing 737-300 has rights to operate on the Brisbane-Honiara-Brisbane route. It has also sometimes operated flights for Solomon Airlines.
There are also other possible partners. Air Vanuatu and Air Niugini are both understood to have had representatives here for discussions.

chimbu warrior

31st Aug 2007, 20:46

Solair seems to have become an acronym: sooner-or-later-air (mostly later)

sinala1

1st Sep 2007, 00:17

I wonder if Pacific Blue have been looking at picking up Honiara?

ivan ellerbai

1st Sep 2007, 00:32

Since the grounding on 10 August, SkyAirWorld has continued to charge Solomon Airlines for the aircraft. This is reported to be around US$27,000 (about $194,000) a day.

Sorry, either the maths is wrong or there has been a massive shift in the exchange rate. US$27k is no more than A$40k. Still, not bad for not flying an aeroplane. What were SAW charging when they did fly to/from HIR? And was that inclusive of the "commissions" that prevail in the Pacific?

cnic

1st Sep 2007, 01:33

I doubt that Pacific Blue has the insurance to go into Honiara the same reason that Qantas pulled out their aircraft, the war zone part of the insurance was to expensive and just not worth it. Mr Sumsum has been very quiet through all of this has he quietly left the building? Last heard that he was not allowed to leave the country until this matter was sorted, cancelled many meetings in Australia because of govt ban on travel. Anybody know whats going on.

Park n Shop

1st Sep 2007, 02:41

Whats happening to the boys that left HK Express to join S.A.W?
Are they doing any flying at all now the sh&t has hit the fan with Solomons.:bored:
Seems a shame to lose some good people to something that seems to be going nowhere.
It's a pity they didn't hang around longer as the guys on the 737 are flat out.:ok:

capt moonlight

1st Sep 2007, 05:32

Ivan I would say they are talking Solomon dollars and not Aussies

ivan ellerbai

1st Sep 2007, 06:09

Ah yes, my mistake!!! My comments otherwise remain pertinent ..........

Still, not bad for not flying an aeroplane. What were SAW charging when they did fly to/from HIR? And was that inclusive of the "commissions" that prevail in the Pacific?

Sal-e

3rd Sep 2007, 14:04

So a man avoids visiting his aunty in the village because of her atrocious cooking which she insists he eats and finishes. To avoid disrespecting her, he always ate her cooking. Afterward, and without fail, he would have the worst case of the runs:uhoh: and gastro:yuk:.
She catches him one day, brings him home and cooks for him. He cannot, for another moment, be dishonest with his aunt any longer and endure another night at the latrine. He blurts out, "why don't you just wipe your food on my a$$ and get it over and done with:bored:?!!?
Quote: Old village myth, Solomon Islands.
Maybe a lesson to be learnt from this charming story.

ringbinder

7th Sep 2007, 11:15

What have they done? Poor old Solomon Airlines have just released their new international schedule, and it DOESN'T serve the business community in Honiara one bit. It might be with a 737 (at least they got that bit right at long last) but:-

(i) there is no service from Australia on a Monday.
(ii) there is no service back to Australia on a Friday
(iii) there is a sevice to Honiara on a Tuesday with a return on a Thursday - effectively a bit more than one day for business travellers to conduct whatever otherwise they arrive here/leave here on a weekend day when nothing much of substance occurs.

And this is from a company that touted the importance of frequency - you only need to read the well publicised early comments from their now struggling CEO Mr Sumsum on that point and which clearly do not add up/add up any more.

It would appear Our Airline has clearly just been handed passengers in significant numbers because of their Monday/Friday flights to/from Honiara.

It is of concern that those responsible for sorting the woes of Solomon Airlines have botched the opportunity to rectify the abysmal state of affairs and provide the islands with decent connections.

It is not clear yet which airline will be providing this new service, other than today's Solomon Star reports of "an Australian based airline", but the business community here hopes that Solomon Airlines venture into using such companies is far more successful and less costly than the Sky Air World/Spanish carrier debacles. Given the woeful connections on the new schedule it would appear that this Australian airline is just fitting things into its current committments and that the Solomons Board are incapable of pursuing a proper and lasting solution.

At the risk of sounding defeatist after all my years in the Pacific, I'm not surprised at the lesser outcome.

ivan ellerbai

7th Sep 2007, 11:51

This answer the question of "the Australian airline"? From the IE website a few minutes ago.

http://www.flysolomons.com/_derived/main.htm_cmp_ice010_hbtn_p.gif
Schedule Advice

Solomon Airlines is pleased to advise our revised schedule (http://www.flysolomons.com/schedule.htm) effective from 4 September to 25 October 2007.
For our International travellers, we offer scheduled flights between Brisbane and Honiara on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday and Sunday. All services are operated in conjunction with Oz Jet Boeing 737-200 series aircraft.

yowie

7th Sep 2007, 13:35

The vultures circle!:hmm:

Sal-e

8th Sep 2007, 00:17

Reference to the above tale on 'aunties cooking', it seems they still prefer to go through the gastroentiritus phase. tut tut tut, seems some folks just refuse to learn.

gas-chamber

8th Sep 2007, 05:38

It could have something to do with the fact that in the old days when Nauru was extremely wealthy, they treated their poorer Pacific cousins with utter contempt.
For sure the Ozjet relationship will go the same way as all who have dealt with Solomons before. Not paying is just a Pacific thing. Ozjet will learn the hard way.
Agree with Sale and Moonlight etc that the sensible solution is for these poor Pacific islands to put their differences aside and run a joint venture airline. Maybe Canberra needs to make aid available for such an airline, but with strict conditions attached, like no gravy train salaries, an impartial board of directors and an equitable sharing of jobs, schedules, revenue etc.
But trusting the Nauruans ? Yeah, right, they have reformed, they all got religion last week and they really really want to help their brothers out. Sorry Moonlight and Sale, I know you probably work there, but who in their right mind would trust the Nauruans to share and be fair, with their history?

Sal-e

8th Sep 2007, 08:12

Sorry to disappoint you but I'm in the sandpit. Which reminds me, the Nauruans used to be called the Arabs of the Pacific. You have some valid points there on that one. They did lord it over their neighbours for a couple of decades. But even their neighbours can see that they (Nauru) are a shadow of their former selves. In fact, they are 'below average' as far as standard of living goes.
The Solomons should realise that a few leaders of the past, most of whom a 6 feet under and who had ruined Nauru and it's reputation and who had left no inheritance behind for it's people, are no longer there. Instead, a desperate ragtag of a government is trying it's darnest to patch up whatever damage that has been done and should therefore understand.

ivan ellerbai

8th Sep 2007, 14:17

Some simple comparisons:-
-200 vs -300.

-200 published schedule Brisbane to Honiara v.v: 3 hours 40 minutes.
-300 published schedule Brisbane to Honiara v.v: 3 hours.
assuming ground times the same for both, an extra 40 minutes flying time in a -200.

-200 fuel burn Brisbane to Honiara v.v: 8.5 - 9.5 tonnes (conservative??)
-300 fuel burn Brisbane to Honiara v.v: 7.5 - 8.5 tonnes
at some 70/litre ex Brisbane = around $900 extra in fuel costs for a -200.

-200 payload Brisbane to Honiara: 9 tonnes.
-300 payload Brisbane to Honiara: 12 tonnes.
equates to 30 more passengers and their bags in a -300.

Now, thirty extra passengers and bags or 3 tonnes freight (or combination thereof) for at least $900 less in fuel costs per trip would seem to indicate the -300 is a better choice.

What on earth possessed Solomon Airlines to pick such an aircraft for their services? Sure, an improvement over the E-170, but not as good (or as economically sound) as the alternative available (and I'm assuming, offered).

Melanesian Blue

8th Sep 2007, 23:03

It seems the Solair advisers are a few cans short of a six pack!!

Its pretty obvious what the best solution is, so why continue to throw money out the window? but then again look who the Attorney General is!……………… some how I doubt Canberra coming in to help!

gas-chamber

8th Sep 2007, 23:06

If the 300 really does knock 40 minutes off the sector it may be going direct on an ETOPS route. The 200 is just as quick as the 300 and cruises at the same mach numbers.
Does CASA realise that the ON airplane is ETOPS? Or maybe OJ is doing a refuel somewhere to get the payload but not telling the punters that on the schedule?
No argument the 300 is the better airplane, but see my previous post. If it was owned by most anyone else but Nauru it would probably be used. And we don't know what the OJ deal is - maybe they are taking all the commercial risk?

witwiw

8th Sep 2007, 23:30

Looking at Ivan's figures, then a -300 could shift the same payload on three trips versus the -200's four trips. Further very significant savings but at the expense of frequency which could be a problem. Would've thought a Monday/Wednesday/Friday service with the -300 would be the go.

I seriously don't think Ozjet would be silly enough to take the entire commercial risk!!! According to their AOC, they do not have approval to operate RPT services to Honiara so can only operate charters. That, by its very nature, would indicate someone else is paying them (and continue to do so, hopefully, after the SAW episode) and that other party is taking the commercial risk.

As for Our Airline being "owned by most anyone else", my understanding from the hoo-hah when the airline was launched is that other island nations have been invited to take a stake in the airline - hence the name. This would dilute the Nauruan ownership and give whomever invests some direct control as against being at the mercy of a charter operation.