Whenuapai airport - Domestic flights

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

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313620 9-Sep-2019 15:31

Your argument about NZ having reasonably high flights per capita ignores that Auckland Airport isn't a particularly large airport and has plenty of room to grow.

Capacity constraints at Auckland can be addressed as they are not land locked and don't have a curfew. Sydney has a similar profile to NZ and they are only developing Western Sydney Airport as Mascot is physically constrained.

No operator would be interested in an airport that runs 20 flights a day as it wouldn't make any money. An operator may start at 20 flights a day but they would look to rapidly ramp up with the ensuing noise, traffic and space constraints.

Luxon estimated $200 million would be required to make Whenuapai viable. International experience suggests you need at least the.same investment in the infrastructure around an airport to make it viable. Does $200-400 million of investment make sense for 20 flights a day?

While they may find an operator the operator won't be funding any infrastructure around the airport so that comes from the taxpayer. It just doesn't make.senee.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313731 9-Sep-2019 16:46

elpenguino:

Can't see it happening .............., let alone convincing the airforce to share their sandpit.

They already do at Woodbourne so why not Whenuapai?

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

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313734 9-Sep-2019 16:53

Handle9:

Luxon estimated $200 million would be required to make Whenuapai viable. International experience suggests you need at least the.same investment in the infrastructure around an airport to make it viable. Does $200-400 million of investment make sense for 20 flights a day?

If it were a new build airport I might agree with you regarding the extra $200 million. It's already an existing airport with most of the required infrastructure in place.

Frankly I struggle to see where they'd need to spend $200, million to start with. Unless they're looking at bigger facilities than would be needed initially to future proof the infrastructure.

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

Jase2985

13735 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2313753 9-Sep-2019 17:15

Technofreak:

I don't know where some people have got the idea that the proposal to use Whenuapai involves international flights or that there will be any freight operations involved. Neither of these apply.

an airline is unlikely to fly anywhere with out using its cargo hold, it doesnt make sense. so there WILL be freight of some kind involved. which adds a lot more complexity.

elpenguino

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2940

#2313754 9-Sep-2019 17:20

Technofreak:

elpenguino:

Can't see it happening .............., let alone convincing the airforce to share their sandpit.

They already do at Woodbourne so why not Whenuapai?

I already said why (not), parachute school and secret squirrels.

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

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313755 9-Sep-2019 17:21

Technofreak:

Handle9:

Luxon estimated $200 million would be required to make Whenuapai viable. International experience suggests you need at least the.same investment in the infrastructure around an airport to make it viable. Does $200-400 million of investment make sense for 20 flights a day?

If it were a new build airport I might agree with you regarding the extra $200 million. It's already an existing airport with most of the required infrastructure in place.

Frankly I struggle to see where they'd need to spend $200, million to start with. Unless they're looking at bigger facilities than would be needed initially to future proof the infrastructure.

The infrastructure for an airport for Jet ops (ie Christchurch, Wellington and Queenstown) are not in place. Basically you have runways, a tower and an apron. That's it. The apron may or may not be suitable for hardstands for commercial aviation, depending on the location of the terminal building. You'd also be building in a military base which is very challenging and expensive.

The infrastructure for an airport would be built from scratch because it is significantly different from a military airbase.

My job is airport infrastructure (I don't live in NZ) and personally I don't think $200 million would be enough for a viable airport in that location.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313777 9-Sep-2019 18:08

Jase2985:

an airline is unlikely to fly anywhere with out using its cargo hold, it doesnt make sense. so there WILL be freight of some kind involved. which adds a lot more complexity.

I might be wrong but I think the proposal was for turbo prop services. These aircraft don't have cargo holds.

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

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313788 9-Sep-2019 18:50

elpenguino:

I already said why (not), parachute school and secret squirrels.

There's plenty of places around the world where civil and military activities co exist quite happily on the same airfield. Williamtown and Tindal are two in Australia, secret squirrels and all.

A parachute school isn't a valid reason why civil activities couldn't take place at Whenuapai.

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

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313792 9-Sep-2019 18:58

Handle9:

The infrastructure for an airport for Jet ops (ie Christchurch, Wellington and Queenstown) are not in place. Basically you have runways, a tower and an apron. That's it. The apron may or may not be suitable for hardstands for commercial aviation, depending on the location of the terminal building. You'd also be building in a military base which is very challenging and expensive.

The infrastructure for an airport would be built from scratch because it is significantly different from a military airbase.

My job is airport infrastructure (I don't live in NZ) and personally I don't think $200 million would be enough for a viable airport in that location.

I don't believe there has been any indication of jet ops, so far as I was aware it's just turbo prop ops.

I don't work in airport infrastructure but I do use airport infrastructure everyday and have flown into and out of military bases as a civilian. Can you explain to this dumb pilot how the infrastructure for civilian operations are so significantly different to military operations? For example PCN numbers are PCN numbers, it doesn't matter two hoots what name/number is on the tail of the aircraft.

Also please humour me, how is building on a military base so much more challenging and expensive than for a normal airport?

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

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313799 9-Sep-2019 19:21

Technofreak:

Handle9:

The infrastructure for an airport for Jet ops (ie Christchurch, Wellington and Queenstown) are not in place. Basically you have runways, a tower and an apron. That's it. The apron may or may not be suitable for hardstands for commercial aviation, depending on the location of the terminal building. You'd also be building in a military base which is very challenging and expensive.

The infrastructure for an airport would be built from scratch because it is significantly different from a military airbase.

My job is airport infrastructure (I don't live in NZ) and personally I don't think $200 million would be enough for a viable airport in that location.

I don't believe there has been any indication of jet ops, so far as I was aware it's just turbo prop ops.

I don't work in airport infrastructure but I do use airport infrastructure everyday and have flown into and out of military bases as a civilian. Can you explain to this dumb pilot how the infrastructure for civilian operations are so significantly different to military operations? For example PCN numbers are PCN numbers, it doesn't matter two hoots what name/number is on the tail of the aircraft.

Also please humour me, how is building on a military base so much more challenging and expensive than for a normal airport?

The proposal is specifically based around Christchurch and Wellington routes (see link below). They are narrow body jet routes. This means you need a full stack of infrastructure and security to support the operations. You can save some money by not having PBBs but then you are likely bussing passengers which creates it's own challenges. This isn't the same as a regional airport such as New Plymouth.

Commercial aviation requires a full suite of civil operational tools and systems. None of these are present at Whenuapai. Things as simple as PCAs and GPUs which don't get used as often for military ops as running the APU isn't seen as big a deal as it is for civil aviation. BHS is the biggest system to be designed and once again isn't trivial as otherwise it can't scale up.

The security requirements are also quite different for military to civil as is the agency support. It is unlikely that the military will allow the commercial airport to use the existing security infrastructure as that would create a potential security breach for the military.

You will also have very different fuel consumption requirements from what is there currently. Auckland already has fuel constraints, getting fuel into Whenuapai would be challenging and likely they won't have the storage required and would require a separate civil tank farm.

The cost factor for doing any form of work in a high security environment grows significantly. Live airports are expensive places to work, the closest environment to working in a live airport/airbase is working in a prison. Every person on site needs security clearance and tools need to be signed in and out. It sounds trivial but your labour costs are normally at least 20% greater due to the environment.

None of these are impossible to surmount but they do cost a heap of cash and when there's no physical reason that Auckland can't increase it's capacity then it doesn't make sense.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/115574914/air-new-zealand-auckland-could-have-second-commercial-airport-at-whenuapai

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313805 9-Sep-2019 19:33

@Handle9

I think you're joining the wrong dots, though I might be wrong. I don't see where there's any talk of using jets.

I see Whenuapai as a destination like Tauranga or Hamilton. They don't have jet services but still have connections to Wellington and Christchurch.

I see these proposed routes to/from Whenuapai being operated by turbo props. Accordingly the fuel and other infrastructure requirements will be significantly less than for a jet operation. For a start there will be no AvSec requirements.

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

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313813 9-Sep-2019 19:49

Technofreak:

@Handle9

I think you're joining the wrong dots, though I might be wrong. I don't see where there's any talk of using jets.

I see Whenuapai as a destination like Tauranga or Hamilton. They don't have jet services but still have connections to Wellington and Christchurch.

I see these proposed routes to/from Whenuapai being operated by turbo props. Accordingly the fuel and other infrastructure requirements will be significantly less than for a jet operation. For a start there will be no AvSec requirements.

You're seeing what you want to see at this point. Air New Zealand have said they are looking at flights to Christchurch, not connections. The chances of Air New Zealand being interested in flying ATR72 between Auckland and Christchurch are somewhere between zero and none. They are two small and too slow for major routes like this to make sense. The extra flight time would make the travel time to AIAL faster than flying out of Whenuapai.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#2313833 9-Sep-2019 20:35

Handle9:

You're seeing what you want to see at this point. Air New Zealand have said they are looking at flights to Christchurch, not connections. The chances of Air New Zealand being interested in flying ATR72 between Auckland and Christchurch are somewhere between zero and none. They are two small and too slow for major routes like this to make sense. The extra flight time would make the travel time to AIAL faster than flying out of Whenuapai.

Flight to Christchurch V connections to Christchurch? Aren't we talking the same thing using different words?

We shall have to agree to disagree on whether or not turbo props would be used. Since Air New Zealand operate turbo props on long routes already I'd say the chances are much greater then you suggest.

Hamilton - Christchurch

Tauranga - Christchurch

Wellington - Queenstown

Wellington - Invercargill

I see no reason why they wouldn't do the same from Whenuapai.

Sure the flight time will be longer but the useful difference isn't as great as you might think especially when you take in things like the extra time needed to go through security for a jet flight. There are very few routes in New Zealand where jet speeds offer any appreciable benefit, that is one of the main reasons why we haven't seen Q400's used here in New Zealand.

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

#2313889 10-Sep-2019 06:51

I'm still not sold, sorry. I can't understand how the business case for a small airport with a limited number of flights, none of which can be transfers, no freight capacity, minimal extra jobs and into one of Auckland's fastest-developing greenfield residential areas with no public transport connections in any direction can possibly stack up.

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2313895 10-Sep-2019 07:25

GV27:

I'm still not sold, sorry. I can't understand how the business case for a small airport with a limited number of flights, none of which can be transfers, no freight capacity, minimal extra jobs and into one of Auckland's fastest-developing greenfield residential areas with no public transport connections in any direction can possibly stack up.

This how you accurately sum up a five-page, somewhat complex thread in a succinct sentence.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6