Air NZ chosing A330?
Persona non grata
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia.
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NoseGear,
Sorry I missed your comment before.
Yes, although I don't think too many of the collectors throughout the World, would actually waste them on a bumper.
Or check out my web site at
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~holgatedc/index.html
Best regards,
Lame.
Sorry I missed your comment before.
Yes, although I don't think too many of the collectors throughout the World, would actually waste them on a bumper.
Or check out my web site at
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~holgatedc/index.html
Best regards,
Lame.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nosey
Pilots fly what they are given, not what they want by the way.
Hmmm, the Eagle Boys beg to differ. However you are of course correct (unfortunately) in most cases. If only the punters gave a damn how they got from A to B (B must be a very cool place, everyone seems to be going there!)
Go
bus!!! 
Persona non grata
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia.
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air NZ Examines Aircraft Alternatives
25/04/2004 09:22 AM - David Stone - The Independent
Air NZ is working towards a crucial decision about replacements for its B767-300ER (extended range) aircraft, with Airbus and Boeing vying for the company's order.
The outcome will likely be known by mid-year.
While Boeing's B7E7 would appear the ideal replacement (The Independent 7 April) and might well live up to the manufacturer's "Dreamliner" tag, its availability only in 2008 rules it out for this round. Rather, it will be a strong contender for future acquisition.
When Air NZ acquired its B767-300ERs in the 1990s, they were seen as an attractive mid-sized plane for the airline's North Asian routes - Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and originally Korea - as well as for the indirect services to North America via Nadi, Rarotonga and Tahiti.
But although those planes are still relatively "young," averaging eight years, Air NZ is looking for aircraft with improved range and performance to better enable it to compete with the Asian airlines, in particular, and to operate to new markets.
With the recent negotiation of more liberal arrangements with China, Shanghai offers huge possibilities if the route can be served by a suitable aircraft.
The most likely candidates for replacing the B767-300ERs appear to be Boeing's 777-200ER and Airbus' A340-500.
Various models of both aircraft "families" are operated to New Zealand by foreign carriers: B777s by Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Korean Air and A340s by Emirates and Cathay Pacific.
Both are efficient aircraft, bigger than the current B767-300ERs, carrying slightly more than 300 passengers in three-class configuration, but can fit in about 50 more people if Air NZ intends to continue providing only business and economy class on the routes involved.
They also have much greater cargo capacity.
The major difference is the B777-200ER is twin-engine, while the A340-500 has four engines.
The range of the Boeing plane - up to 14,315 kilometres - is more than adequate for the Asian markets and indirect trans-Pacific routes to North America.
The Airbus, however, has a longer range - up to 16,390 kilometres - sufficient for non-stop services to Los Angeles and San Francisco and beyond - but Air NZ is refurbishing the B747-400s for those routes and on to London.
Both Airbus in Toulouse and Boeing in Seattle are being visited by Air NZ executives, who are examining all aspects of the alternative aircraft and their performance including the implications for ANZES, the company's important engineering subsidiary.
The stakes are high for the two manufacturers now and in the longer term.
Airbus sees the A340-500 as furthering the inroads it made by persuading Air NZ, hitherto an all-Boeing airline, to switch its narrow-bodied planes from B737s to A320s.
Boeing sees the B777 as the means o f introducing Air NZ to the wider B777-B7E7 family for the airline's future requirements.
For its part, Air NZ might see benefit in continuing to have both Airbus narrow-bodied and Boeing wide-bodied aircraft in its fleet.
Against these considerations and a hardheaded assessment of the characteristics of the rival aircraft, Air NZ will also want to get the best possible financial deal.
On past evidence, unless Boeing can convince Air NZ to its view that the B777s provide the more efficient and appropriate option, Airbus might repeat its A320 strategy with a deal the airline feels it can't refuse.
25/04/2004 09:22 AM - David Stone - The Independent
Air NZ is working towards a crucial decision about replacements for its B767-300ER (extended range) aircraft, with Airbus and Boeing vying for the company's order.
The outcome will likely be known by mid-year.
While Boeing's B7E7 would appear the ideal replacement (The Independent 7 April) and might well live up to the manufacturer's "Dreamliner" tag, its availability only in 2008 rules it out for this round. Rather, it will be a strong contender for future acquisition.
When Air NZ acquired its B767-300ERs in the 1990s, they were seen as an attractive mid-sized plane for the airline's North Asian routes - Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and originally Korea - as well as for the indirect services to North America via Nadi, Rarotonga and Tahiti.
But although those planes are still relatively "young," averaging eight years, Air NZ is looking for aircraft with improved range and performance to better enable it to compete with the Asian airlines, in particular, and to operate to new markets.
With the recent negotiation of more liberal arrangements with China, Shanghai offers huge possibilities if the route can be served by a suitable aircraft.
The most likely candidates for replacing the B767-300ERs appear to be Boeing's 777-200ER and Airbus' A340-500.
Various models of both aircraft "families" are operated to New Zealand by foreign carriers: B777s by Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Korean Air and A340s by Emirates and Cathay Pacific.
Both are efficient aircraft, bigger than the current B767-300ERs, carrying slightly more than 300 passengers in three-class configuration, but can fit in about 50 more people if Air NZ intends to continue providing only business and economy class on the routes involved.
They also have much greater cargo capacity.
The major difference is the B777-200ER is twin-engine, while the A340-500 has four engines.
The range of the Boeing plane - up to 14,315 kilometres - is more than adequate for the Asian markets and indirect trans-Pacific routes to North America.
The Airbus, however, has a longer range - up to 16,390 kilometres - sufficient for non-stop services to Los Angeles and San Francisco and beyond - but Air NZ is refurbishing the B747-400s for those routes and on to London.
Both Airbus in Toulouse and Boeing in Seattle are being visited by Air NZ executives, who are examining all aspects of the alternative aircraft and their performance including the implications for ANZES, the company's important engineering subsidiary.
The stakes are high for the two manufacturers now and in the longer term.
Airbus sees the A340-500 as furthering the inroads it made by persuading Air NZ, hitherto an all-Boeing airline, to switch its narrow-bodied planes from B737s to A320s.
Boeing sees the B777 as the means o f introducing Air NZ to the wider B777-B7E7 family for the airline's future requirements.
For its part, Air NZ might see benefit in continuing to have both Airbus narrow-bodied and Boeing wide-bodied aircraft in its fleet.
Against these considerations and a hardheaded assessment of the characteristics of the rival aircraft, Air NZ will also want to get the best possible financial deal.
On past evidence, unless Boeing can convince Air NZ to its view that the B777s provide the more efficient and appropriate option, Airbus might repeat its A320 strategy with a deal the airline feels it can't refuse.
