PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   FJ A330-200 damaged at NAN (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/561812-fj-a330-200-damaged-nan.html)

BNEA320 22nd May 2015 01:11

FJ A330-200 damaged at NAN
 
Travel Alerts - Fiji Airways Official Site


earlier this week one of the 3 FJ 330's was damaged, which messed up their schedule.


Presume anyone flying from OZ or NZL to LAX could have easily been put on a nonstop service to LAX, but the question is, why don't they seem to have a contingency in place for such situations ?


It's seems they are trying to run a 3 aircraft long haul schedule now with 2 long haul aircraft (apparently some of the NAN/OZ services have been downgraded to 737's, so maybe VA & JQ are carrying some of FJ pax.


Surely with QF owning something like 46% of FJ & NZ owning something like 3%, they could find a suitable replacement aircraft from QF or NZ ?


Although with all QF's 763's now gone, no help.
(AFAIK NZ used to fly A 763 nan/lax/nan 10 years ago)


Read somewhere that FJ have or are looking at getting another 330 later this year, this time a 330-300 . Bet they wish they had it now.

Snakecharma 22nd May 2015 01:52

The 330 was damaged in LA on the ground.

Even with QF ownership QF wouldn't give them an aeroplane to replace the damaged one, they would need to hire it at exorbitant rates.

The FJ crews may or may not be able to operate the VH tailed aeroplane, depends on the licensing issues as well as what their regulator would require with regards differences GE vs RR etc, don't even know if they could operate it EDTO if it was a dry lease.

If QF crewed it it would be even more expensive and I would venture prohibitively so.

So the long and short of it is that Fiji would be forced to make do with the equipment they have in the short term and if the repair takes longer than expected figure it out from there.

Either way it will be costing someone a bucket load of money and insurance won't cover a fair chunk of it

BNEA320 22nd May 2015 04:21

no it was damaged at NAN. Flight was due to go NAN/LAX.


Fiji Airways A330 plane damaged | FijiMala


FJ could charter in anyone(it's Fiji traffic rights you're talking about)


It would make sense for QF to do it if they have the aircraft available.


RATES ?
When you won 1/2 of the airline, charging high rates, means charging yourself.


It doesn't sound like a 3 day fix.


Imagine there would be plenty of 767's sitting around in USA eg. who's owners would be glad to get some work for it for a week or 2.


Airlines chartering from other airlines don't pay silly adhoc rates.

Snakecharma 22nd May 2015 04:32

BNE apologies I misread the article I read a day or two ago...

c100driver 22nd May 2015 05:29

Airlines short leasing off other airlines do pay silly ad-hoc rates! Longer term leases are still expensive but are negotiable.

Most american B767/A330 operators do not have 180 EDTO approvals, they can get away for the majority of their operations at 120 EDTO to get to Europe.

EDTO is quite conservative and tied to tail specific airframes, airline operations procedures and crew training so it is not easy to move a tail into an operation quickly.

The main issue would be to find a tail that has similar weight specification to be able to operate the sector. The Air NZ B767-300 has a much higher TOW than the QF B767-300 which can be a huge limitation on available range. While I am not familiar with the A330 I am sure that the TOW would be the same differences between tails/fleets. No point paying for a TOW weight you don't need.

Another issue could be catering set up, if your operation uses non-standard equipment set up or the leased aircraft is non standard then up then you also have to arrange lease of special catering gear.

BNEA320 22nd May 2015 06:51

what about LAX/HNL/NAN then ?


What we were really getting at is, you'd think they have contingency plans when an aircraft goes U/S somewhere.


+ just remembered FJ 737's did used to fly NAN/HNL/YVR, so they could fly NAN/HNL/LAX.

c100driver 22nd May 2015 07:24

NAN HNL needs 180 EDTO, the B737NG can be 180 approved. Long trip in a narrow body😝

Bankstown 22nd May 2015 09:02


Originally Posted by c100driver (Post 8985520)
The main issue would be to find a tail that has similar weight specification to be able to operate the sector. The Air NZ B767-300 has a much higher TOW than the QF B767-300 which can be a huge limitation on available range. While I am not familiar with the A330 I am sure that the TOW would be the same differences between tails/fleets. No point paying for a TOW weight you don't need.

What MTOW does Air NZ have? Most of QF's were 185T.

maggot 22nd May 2015 09:18


Originally Posted by Bankstown (Post 8985725)
What MTOW does Air NZ have? Most of QF's were 185T.

Depends which way the placard faced

Chocks Away 22nd May 2015 09:23

"Contingency plans"...
You're kidding aren't you?
In the past maybe but have a look at the Top brass there and why they have been rolling over so many management positions :ugh:
It's a very hard sector to find replacement airframes for, as eluded to above.
Seat purchases on competitors flights on a similar route are really the only get out of jail card otherwise. Is that what they have done now BNEA320?
QF aren't active board members and have tried to be kicked off.
Fierce jingoism rules there now while they tolerate expats who fill the shortfall for now.
Profits? Yeh sure.
Contingency? Our new planes won't break down/ go u/s... :rolleyes:
:ugh::ugh:

BNEA320 23rd May 2015 01:11

all airlines that we know have contingency plans in case of aircraft going U/S.


Eg. An airlines used to work for had contracts at right prices, in place in case of such thing happening.


eg.


1) contact airline A


2) contact airline B


etc.


For example, Nauru Airlines have an old NZ 733, sitting at BNE most/all of week.


So FJ could move one or more of their 738's or 737-700 onto NAN/SYD/NAN instead of A330-200 & they could bring in Nauru Airlines 733 to replace 738 or 737-700.


What would you rather, be delayed a lot of hours or be put on an older aircraft ?

BNEA320 23rd May 2015 01:13

FJ do NAN/HNL/NAN nonstop in both directions once a week. They go via CXI & APW for other 2 services a week now. Not a big deal.


What would you rather do ?


Be delayed 10 hours or more or fly on a 738 instead ? Most people would say the latter.

Ken Borough 23rd May 2015 03:39

The contingency plan for most airlines in these parts are the same and very simple: ring Qantas' Network Operations Centre.

ACMS 23rd May 2015 05:43

Ring Qantas......ha that's funny Ken. They are short of Aircraft themselves lately....:D

Ken Borough 23rd May 2015 07:48

ACMS,

I know it sounds funny but that's what happens, and has been ever thus.

Wonderworld 23rd May 2015 10:26

Ken is on the money. Got lots of calls in my section to review pax numbers to see if flts could be consolidated to release acft for a charter to FJ, LA Etc etc.

BNEA320 24th May 2015 05:26

FJ still showing delays over over 5 hours on NAN/AKL/NAN today + a charter flight NAN/AKL/NAN.


Maybe they've found a aircraft for one rotation ?


NF, PX, ???


Maybe an F100 of PX ?

Capt Fathom 24th May 2015 11:22

Is there a point to this thread? :confused:

BNEA320 24th May 2015 22:32

yep to see how quickly FJ can get it's act together(hoping that all of FJ is not on "Fiji time" ie. whenever)

ASY68 1st Jun 2015 04:59

FJ received another B738 in the last two weeks so that could be where the extra frame came up BNEA320?


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:47.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.