New 'Bonza' LCC launches middle 2022 with B737 MAX
Hyper loop surfers the same constraint as roads and rail, it is limited to the linked cities. Aircraft have the absolute ability to link (almost) any two airports on the planet and can change their plans daily. Tunnels are hideously expensive, crossing the Atlantic or Pacific, mind blowingly so.
Meanwhile in the real world, we have three rail gauges in Australia and a state governement so inept they buy rail cars too big for the tunnels they use.
Meanwhile in the real world, we have three rail gauges in Australia and a state governement so inept they buy rail cars too big for the tunnels they use.
And yes any HSR, MagLev or HyperPoop, will need to first only serve Melbourne/Sydney. The economy of scale is just not there for regional connections Intrastate. For it to be viable you could maybe have a stop in Albury or route through Canberra. Although direct Melbourne- Canberra-Sydney would be very expensive to build.
Hyper loop over long distance is just pipe dreams
just think of the cost and complexity of 1000 km of vacuum pressure pipeline big enough to carry a train, sorry but ain't going to happen in our lifetime.
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The name Bonza is also the title for a short Australian film made in 1989 about a dysfunctional family whose lives revolve around their cattle dog called Bonza. The writer David Swann, also penned another great Australian movie called Crackers (1998). It all makes sense when you join the dots.
From last weekend’s The Australian, New budget carrier Bonza has unveiled its slogan as “here for Allstralia”,
as it prepares to finalise its route network.
Future customers want to fly Hobart to Broome and Busselton to Broken Hill!
Living the dream.
as it prepares to finalise its route network.
Future customers want to fly Hobart to Broome and Busselton to Broken Hill!
Living the dream.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This interview with their CCO should give you warm and fuzzy feelings...
https://tickeroriginals.co/2021/11/2...tion-industry/
https://tickeroriginals.co/2021/11/2...tion-industry/
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The COO makes a solid case for the model she proposes.
If the entire management team have her focus and clear thinking they are quite probably on their way to a sustainable operation. Staying out of the three largest capital cities has merit. Qantas and Virgin may very well leave them alone to stimulate demand, thereafter they may have a shot or two. First to market has advantages and I would say the real battles will appear some many months after launch. Bonza would need to 'see off the heavies' at that first show down and from there, their prosperity will be significantly decided. Rex, may be a bit harder to assess....... could be more their patch and therefore they may want to challenge the new entrant from the beginning.
That said however, regional Australia has been deliberately kept small by government, industry and arguably by us all. The result for aviation means there's just not the aspirational momentum to permanently embed an airline that flies within the VFR market region to region. Basic living infrastructure and services are dismal for a first world country. Industries, whereupon cities and towns trade amongst themselves and therefore sustain themselves, don't exist here. When those foundations become a reality, the airline economics will become more certain. Its probably true to say there was a better chance at something like this fifty years ago.
If the entire management team have her focus and clear thinking they are quite probably on their way to a sustainable operation. Staying out of the three largest capital cities has merit. Qantas and Virgin may very well leave them alone to stimulate demand, thereafter they may have a shot or two. First to market has advantages and I would say the real battles will appear some many months after launch. Bonza would need to 'see off the heavies' at that first show down and from there, their prosperity will be significantly decided. Rex, may be a bit harder to assess....... could be more their patch and therefore they may want to challenge the new entrant from the beginning.
That said however, regional Australia has been deliberately kept small by government, industry and arguably by us all. The result for aviation means there's just not the aspirational momentum to permanently embed an airline that flies within the VFR market region to region. Basic living infrastructure and services are dismal for a first world country. Industries, whereupon cities and towns trade amongst themselves and therefore sustain themselves, don't exist here. When those foundations become a reality, the airline economics will become more certain. Its probably true to say there was a better chance at something like this fifty years ago.
Even community central hubs are winding back, as the mining and agriculture technology allows more self sufficiency rather than having third party dealers, medical facilities and even fuel and services hubs in a large local town. It can all be kept on site and stuff shipped directly from a major city as required, this by far has made a big impact on the viability of smaller country towns. These large operators relying more on FIFO than any RPT services.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very true and an all too easy problem to solve.
Why shouldn't government say to banks... be a banking institution in Australia but that means 25% of your branches must be in regional cities and then 25% of those must be in smaller towns. Why shouldn't government say to miners, be a miner in Australia but that means 25% of your workforce must reside in the regions etc. Same with private health providers/ private transport/ etc. etc. Its not unheard of, media laws govern ownership and by default, place of operation - why not for industry generally. Most of all, in time, they all benefit. In fact the early adopters would likely gain significantly as new markets grow. Australia should be a world leader at long distance transport efficiencies and technology. Why? because we had to get good at that to develop our own national opportunities (well, we would in this dream!) Thereafter everything else becomes self sustaining.
Then you'd say, region to region flying looks like a service the nation could use. This is a nation that regularly talks in terms of tens of billions of dollars. In no time that will escalate to hundreds of billions. I don't see this as a big deal. Other nations did this decades or even a century ago. When do we get out of first gear?
Why shouldn't government say to banks... be a banking institution in Australia but that means 25% of your branches must be in regional cities and then 25% of those must be in smaller towns. Why shouldn't government say to miners, be a miner in Australia but that means 25% of your workforce must reside in the regions etc. Same with private health providers/ private transport/ etc. etc. Its not unheard of, media laws govern ownership and by default, place of operation - why not for industry generally. Most of all, in time, they all benefit. In fact the early adopters would likely gain significantly as new markets grow. Australia should be a world leader at long distance transport efficiencies and technology. Why? because we had to get good at that to develop our own national opportunities (well, we would in this dream!) Thereafter everything else becomes self sustaining.
Then you'd say, region to region flying looks like a service the nation could use. This is a nation that regularly talks in terms of tens of billions of dollars. In no time that will escalate to hundreds of billions. I don't see this as a big deal. Other nations did this decades or even a century ago. When do we get out of first gear?
Originally Posted by Nulli Secundus
Why shouldn't government say to banks... be a banking institution in Australia but that means 25% of your branches must be in regional cities and then 25% of those must be in smaller towns. Why shouldn't government say to miners, be a miner in Australia but that means 25% of your workforce must reside in the regions etc. Same with private health providers/ private transport/ etc. etc.
How are you going do staff these government mandated banks? 25% of mining workforce forced to live in the regions? Are you going to use the old time pressgangs and barbed wire to get the staff to stay there? In NZ we have a huge problem getting health staff to work on the West Coast and small towns? how are you going to solve that problem?
Oh wait - this is a wind up, right?
What you are talking about is regulation of industry. It's proven to not work, in limited situations it has benefits, such as mine sites like Weipa have quotas of locals that must be met if available before outsiders are brought in. Migrant doctors have to spend time in rural areas first before moving to city areas.
This does not fix the overall problem which is, no one wants to live in these places. Try living in a small rural town with limited social life, soaring temperature in summer and flies that can carry you away like drones. Then you can try the mid sized support towns that are riddled with unemployed and drugs issues, and the heat and flies. 100+ years ago people moved to the country as cities were expensive cesspits of segregated class and crime, the country was a true escape from problems and a new start. There is nothing appealing in the country except for retirees wanting some land and peace. FIFO was the answer because it was way cheaper than what needed to be paid to locate workers to an area in some permanence, and yeah you will get some miners and laborers who see some life in the country. But a high end professionals with family, engineers, doctors, business leaders, nope, they want city life, and the services, luxuries and security that go with it.
Unfortunately the only tested way to make the country more appealing is to run the cities down to a level no one wants to live there.
BTW I grew up in rural Australia, and have spent quite a bit of time in the country.
This does not fix the overall problem which is, no one wants to live in these places. Try living in a small rural town with limited social life, soaring temperature in summer and flies that can carry you away like drones. Then you can try the mid sized support towns that are riddled with unemployed and drugs issues, and the heat and flies. 100+ years ago people moved to the country as cities were expensive cesspits of segregated class and crime, the country was a true escape from problems and a new start. There is nothing appealing in the country except for retirees wanting some land and peace. FIFO was the answer because it was way cheaper than what needed to be paid to locate workers to an area in some permanence, and yeah you will get some miners and laborers who see some life in the country. But a high end professionals with family, engineers, doctors, business leaders, nope, they want city life, and the services, luxuries and security that go with it.
Unfortunately the only tested way to make the country more appealing is to run the cities down to a level no one wants to live there.
BTW I grew up in rural Australia, and have spent quite a bit of time in the country.
Bonza has announced a number of new-hires in its senior leadership team, and perhaps provided a clue as to where it plans to base operations moving forward.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lamax
Since learning to fly in 1965 I've observed for around 20K hours the Australian aviation landscape from the front window of regional aircraft. In that time many dreamers have come and gone in trying to establish an airline in what they see is the great south land of undeveloped and undiscovered city pairs ripe for exploitation. In reality we are not the USA with dozens of Canberra sized cities scattered throughout our states and territories. All profitable city pairs in OZ that support medium sized jet transports are well serviced with little potential for extra capacity. There are many reasons for new entrants to fail in Australia, just one is that there are no further opportunities in terms of new markets to deploy 737/A320 sized aircraft at a viable utilization rate and load factor which would return a profit to investors.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's pretty obvious that they will choose Busselton Airport as a primary W.A. destination. It is rated CASA 4C and can handle fully loaded aircraft including A320 / 737 and A330. At one stage Jetstar was running flights between Busselton and Melbourne. Busselton is a holiday destination with access to the major wine-growing region of W.A. It's presently running a touch under 40K flights per year for FIFO bit that can be easily expanded.
There is also a plan to run Kalgoorlie Boulder flights but that won't be attractive to Bonza.
The next question is where from? Avalon VIC is quite likely, and SA and NSW airports will likely be involved.
There is also a plan to run Kalgoorlie Boulder flights but that won't be attractive to Bonza.
The next question is where from? Avalon VIC is quite likely, and SA and NSW airports will likely be involved.
At one stage Jetstar was running flights between Busselton and Melbourne.
40K flights per year for FIFO bit that can be easily expanded.
What have you been smoking?
Originally Posted by SLFAU
It's pretty obvious that they will choose Busselton Airport as a primary W.A. destination. ... It's presently running a touch under 40K flights per year for FIFO bit that can be easily expanded.
For the first quarter this year, when it was noted that FIFO was back above pre-pandemic levels, there were 15 flights (30 movements) a week. That would be 780 flights for the year.
Total movements for the airport for Q1-21 ran to a bit over 2,000. That's nearly 155 movements a week.
Last edited by MickG0105; 8th Dec 2021 at 23:24. Reason: Tidy up
