Whenuapai airport - Domestic flights

Forums › Travel (planes, train, cruise) › Whenuapai airport - Domestic flights

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313029 8-Sep-2019 14:51

eracode: @Technofreak

Good answer - we’re really not that far apart in our thinking. You’re more of an optimist and I’m a born cynic. I’m very sceptical about the economics. In the final analysis, overcoming the social barriers has a cost and becomes part of the economics. If the cost is too high, nothing will happen - and we both seem to agree on that.

Yes, I think we're not that far apart in our thinking. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

ratsun81

516 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 183

#2313032 8-Sep-2019 15:23

Technofreak:

About time there was another domestic airport north of the harbour bridge. I think Whenuapai would work well. The Civil/Military model works well at Woodbourne, I cannot see why it cannot work at Whenuapai.

An airport in that area would help with Auckland's congestion. People flying to/from Auckland will have the choice at several locations of flying to/from either the south of Auckland or the north of Auckland depending on where they need to go or where they live.

I think it's a great idea.

What problem are you thinking this is going to actually fix?

Congestion - Nope you will just move the problem to another congested area.

Theres noo way that putting more traffic into the Whenuapai and surrounding congestion mess is going to make anything better for anyone.

Until there is actual alternatives to driving to an airport you are going to have the exact same congestion issue.

Not to mention you are now trying to add a hellva lot more noise to a prime housing expansion location that is one of Aucklands largest subruban growth centres.

Quic Broadband

Use R212389ELFLL2 promo code for free setup at checkout.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313042 8-Sep-2019 15:56

ratsun81:

What problem are you thinking this is going to actually fix?

Congestion - Nope you will just move the problem to another congested area.

Theres noo way that putting more traffic into the Whenuapai and surrounding congestion mess is going to make anything better for anyone.

Until there is actual alternatives to driving to an airport you are going to have the exact same congestion issue.

Not to mention you are now trying to add a hellva lot more noise to a prime housing expansion location that is one of Aucklands largest subruban growth centres.

The problem of those people who have to travel to and from the north side of the harbour bridge to Mangere. This proposal removes traffic from the harbour bridge and the southern motorway networks.

Plenty of other cities have airports in close proximity, Manukau, Mangere, Wellington, why should the area around Whenuapai be any different. There's always been an airport at Whenuapai, anyone building in that area should have been aware of the risks of noise associated with an airport. It's not as it someone has just decided to open an airport in that location.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Nod

12 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#2313084 8-Sep-2019 16:08

Many, many years ago this WAS the airport for Auckland!

But I can't see it ever returning, even if all the Airforce flying is out of Ohakea.

And I know that Ohakea IS being upgraded to meet international standards, IE a stand by for international flights.

ratsun81

516 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 183

#2313188 8-Sep-2019 19:18

Technofreak:

ratsun81:

What problem are you thinking this is going to actually fix?

Congestion - Nope you will just move the problem to another congested area.

Theres noo way that putting more traffic into the Whenuapai and surrounding congestion mess is going to make anything better for anyone.

Until there is actual alternatives to driving to an airport you are going to have the exact same congestion issue.

Not to mention you are now trying to add a hellva lot more noise to a prime housing expansion location that is one of Aucklands largest subruban growth centres.

The problem of those people who have to travel to and from the north side of the harbour bridge to Mangere. This proposal removes traffic from the harbour bridge and the southern motorway networks.

Plenty of other cities have airports in close proximity, Manukau, Mangere, Wellington, why should the area around Whenuapai be any different. There's always been an airport at Whenuapai, anyone building in that area should have been aware of the risks of noise associated with an airport. It's not as it someone has just decided to open an airport in that location.

Good public transport, not 200 Million on another airport, as a north shore resident thats what i want to see. Not this silly political stunt by an outgoing CEO of AirNZ.

Moving from one congested area to another is not a solution, as someone that has to deal with congestion daily as well as when i have to catch a flight hearing this sort of thing really gets old fast.

Until alternative ways to travel are sorted out for this city no matter what the next great idea is it will always face the same problem.

Quic Broadband

Use R212389ELFLL2 promo code for free setup at checkout.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2313190 8-Sep-2019 19:25

Auckland needs another airport capable of taking flights in a civil defense sense; Whenuapai is outside the AVF so would not be likely to be interrupted by an eruption in South Auckland like Mangere would be. I think most of the modelling of disaster scenarios assume the airport is directly affected.

My understanding is that keeping Whenuapai as a military base would still give us that capability. But building another airport with no transport links and in an area with huge amounts of new residential is dumb.

Retain it as a military base and stop looking for excuses not to build mass transit to connect South Auckland.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2313192 8-Sep-2019 19:28

Technofreak:

The problem of those people who have to travel to and from the north side of the harbour bridge to Mangere. This proposal removes traffic from the harbour bridge and the southern motorway networks.

So we should totally disrupt the North West for the exclusive benefit of the small number of people from the Shore who happen to work at the airport? That's got to be an incredibly small number of people, given that most of the related businesses in the airport area would probably stay close to the international airport in Mangere instead of duplicating their operations just up the road.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313195 8-Sep-2019 19:38

Maybe I'm excessively cynical but I do wonder if there are significant redundancies about to be announced at Air New Zealand and this is a sideshow to deflect attention from that.

Air New Zealands performance has been poor this year (like many airlines) and these sorts of sideshows can be useful for them to deflect attention from their weak numbers.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313199 8-Sep-2019 20:07

GV27:

Technofreak:

The problem of those people who have to travel to and from the north side of the harbour bridge to Mangere. This proposal removes traffic from the harbour bridge and the southern motorway networks.

So we should totally disrupt the North West for the exclusive benefit of the small number of people from the Shore who happen to work at the airport? That's got to be an incredibly small number of people, given that most of the related businesses in the airport area would probably stay close to the international airport in Mangere instead of duplicating their operations just up the road.

This has nothing what so ever to do with people that work at the airport. I am at a total loss to see how you got that idea.

I thought it was blindingly obvious it was about passengers either from the north of the harbour bridge going to destinations that would be served from Whenuapai or passengers from destinations going to Whenuapai who need to go to the north of the harbour bridge. These people wouldn't need to travel across the harbour bridge nor on the southern motorway networks.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2313203 8-Sep-2019 20:23

Technofreak:

I thought it was blindingly obvious it was about passengers either from the north of the harbour bridge going to destinations that would be served from Whenuapai or passengers from destinations going to Whenuapai who need to go to the north of the harbour bridge. These people wouldn't need to travel across the harbour bridge no on the southern motorway networks.

At least people who work out there would be commuting each day. I'm prepared to wager that passengers coming from north of the harbour bridge make up a tiny portion of the traffic going across the bridge, and I'm not sure why we should reconfigure the entire North Western quarter for their benefit.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2313204 8-Sep-2019 20:26

Handle9:

Air New Zealands performance has been poor this year (like many airlines) and these sorts of sideshows can be useful for them to deflect attention from their weak numbers.

You're clearly looking at very different financial results to the ones I looked at if you think performance has been very poor.

Yes EBITDA was down on 2018's record results but the cost of fuel was the contributing factor to that (up $280 million for the year). In a cooling tourism and domestic travel market they've still achieved revenue growth and passenger growth. There is nothing to deflect from, unlike many big airlines (Emirates being a classic example) that seriously struggled with huge declines in profit and parking up huge numbers of aircraft due to weak demand.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313205 8-Sep-2019 20:27

GV27:

...I'm not sure why we should reconfigure the entire North Western quarter for their benefit.

To move money from the taxpayers and ratepayers to Air New Zealand of course!

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313216 8-Sep-2019 20:36

sbiddle:

Handle9:

Air New Zealands performance has been poor this year (like many airlines) and these sorts of sideshows can be useful for them to deflect attention from their weak numbers.

You're clearly looking at very different financial results to the ones I looked at if you think performance has been very poor.

Yes EBITDA was down on 2018's record results but the cost of fuel was the contributing factor to that (up $280 million for the year). In a cooling tourism and domestic travel market they've still achieved revenue growth and passenger growth. There is nothing to deflect from.

Their EBITDA is what I am referring to. I didn't say they were very poor I said it was poor which it was relative to previous years. $120 million drop in profit isn't a good financial result.

I also said it's not an Air New Zealand specific problem but the outlook for the sector for the next few years isn't great and is reflected in their profit. It's probably going to get worse before it gets better and profitability for the next few years will reflect it. The share price is and will be further affected and so on.

Regardless of this they will get beaten up by public opinion when they announce redundancies.

Maybe I'm being excessively cynical but it strikes me as something Luxon would do.

elpenguino

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2940

#2313235 8-Sep-2019 20:53

GV27:

Auckland needs another airport capable of taking flights in a civil defense sense; Whenuapai is outside the AVF so would not be likely to be interrupted by an eruption in South Auckland like Mangere would be. I think most of the modelling of disaster scenarios assume the airport is directly affected.

My understanding is that keeping Whenuapai as a military base would still give us that capability. But building another airport with no transport links and in an area with huge amounts of new residential is dumb.

Retain it as a military base and stop looking for excuses not to build mass transit to connect South Auckland.

I agree. Whenupai has ILS and presumably could take a domestic emergency landing if it really had to. Ardmore is much shorter at 1400m and isn't equipped with ILS AFAIK

Whenuapai's runway length is only 2000m which is why internationals are diverted to chch or Ohakea.

The airforce also have some activities at Whenuapai that might not mix with commercial aviation like parachute school and i think the secret squirrels go there to play with their toys too.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2313237 8-Sep-2019 20:54

Handle9:

Regardless of this they will get beaten up by public opinion when they announce redundancies.

I'm not quite sure where these redundancies you refer to would come from. They already run a very lean operation, particularly with offshoring heavy maintenance.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6