OT Royal Visit
Apr 7, 2014, 1:20 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Europe
Programs: UA:1K MM, AF:FB-Platinum; QR: PC Platinum, FI: Saga Gold
Posts: 2,934
OT Royal Visit
I saw pictures of the Royals arriving in Wellington. I was not aware that the NZ Air Force had VIP 757s... Or were they specially outfitted from other missions.
Hope the 757 did not pick them up in London ;-)
Hope the 757 did not pick them up in London ;-)
Apr 7, 2014, 2:03 am
#2
Ambassador: Air New Zealand
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Wellington NZ
Programs: NZ Elite, EK Gold, Qatar Gold, Amex Plat, Accor Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 1,426
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge & Prince George arrived in SYD from LHR on a scheduled QF flight then flew to WLG on the RNZAF 757.
Apr 7, 2014, 3:39 am
#4
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QFWP (LTSG), NZ (Jade), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,669
Thanks to Thai Kiwi many FTers enjoyed an inspection of one of the two RNZAF 757 during a Kiwi Do.
The 757 have a conversion with a forward portside cargo door to allow cargo pallets on the main deck. The seats are on pallets that can be configured for a mix of passenger/cargo, all cargo, all passenger. Also we sat in a configuration that had US style First Class seats, 2x2, with Economy seats, 3x3, further back. There are galleys, with cabin crew seats as well. IIRC the overhead bins and passenger service units (PSU) are fixed.
The 757 have a conversion with a forward portside cargo door to allow cargo pallets on the main deck. The seats are on pallets that can be configured for a mix of passenger/cargo, all cargo, all passenger. Also we sat in a configuration that had US style First Class seats, 2x2, with Economy seats, 3x3, further back. There are galleys, with cabin crew seats as well. IIRC the overhead bins and passenger service units (PSU) are fixed.
Apr 7, 2014, 3:41 am
#5
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 3,301
Flew on the old RNZAF 727's once (before they were replaced by the 757's).
All the seats were facing rear-wards. Apparently this is safer in case of a crash(?).
All the seats were facing rear-wards. Apparently this is safer in case of a crash(?).
Apr 7, 2014, 9:12 pm
#6
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Auckland
Programs: NZ Elite Partner/Silver (in own right), PR Classic, QF Bronze, UA Member, VA Red
Posts: 1,551
Apr 7, 2014, 10:58 pm
#7
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: QF LTG, VASG, NZ*S, OZD, IHG SpireAMB, HHD
Posts: 1,421
I was pretty sure we weren't going to make a second landing, but we did, thankfully.
A 90min AKL-WLG flight, after nearly an hour delay in AKL, wasn't a great way to start the day, though.
Apr 8, 2014, 12:40 am
#8
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: New Zealand
Programs: NZ*S plus various hotel programs
Posts: 945
I was on 415 too, sat a couple of rows behind the PM. Never expected so many other people here to be onboard!
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
Apr 8, 2014, 2:06 am
#9
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: QF LTG, VASG, NZ*S, OZD, IHG SpireAMB, HHD
Posts: 1,421
I was on 415 too, sat a couple of rows behind the PM. Never expected so many other people here to be onboard!
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
And we did get very close to the sea on that first attempt.
Apr 8, 2014, 3:31 am
#10
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: New Zealand
Programs: NZ*S plus various hotel programs
Posts: 945
Yes, 4A and I had a good chat with 4B and 4C as I was getting updates about planes aborting landings in WLG quicker than the pilot was announcing them.
I thought 4D was for Stephen Joyce who also missed the flight, with that announcement getting a few laughs from the various politicians.
I thought 4D was for Stephen Joyce who also missed the flight, with that announcement getting a few laughs from the various politicians.
Apr 8, 2014, 3:46 am
#11
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: QF LTG, VASG, NZ*S, OZD, IHG SpireAMB, HHD
Posts: 1,421
I was relaying my flightradar info to 4E as well on what the various planes were doing at WLG while we were waiting at AKL. I think those two JQs that turned around both landed back at AKL before we had even taken off.
Apr 8, 2014, 5:10 pm
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,196
Flew on the old RNZAF 727's once (before they were replaced by the 757's).
All the seats were facing rear-wards. Apparently this is safer in case of a crash(?).
All the seats were facing rear-wards. Apparently this is safer in case of a crash(?).
The RNZAF Andover did have rear facing seats as delivered by RAF and per RAF 'standard' of th70s - 90s.
Cheers, TK
Source. Flown on the RNZAF 727 many times.
Apr 8, 2014, 5:20 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,196
I was on 415 too, sat a couple of rows behind the PM. Never expected so many other people here to be onboard!
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
My other half was watching the first approach on flightradar24.com which showed us getting down to 200 feet before the landing was aborted. It certainly looked pretty low from the glimpse I got of the sea.
Note that the pilot will operate to the bold altitude - 300 ft for ILS16, as the elevation of the runway threshold is 41 ft (giving a height above the threshold of 259 ft).
Details here for the curious http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZWN_41.1_41.2.pdf
Cheers, TK
Apr 8, 2014, 11:37 pm
#14
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Dubai
Posts: 3,301
.
Apr 12, 2014, 6:19 pm
#15
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: NZ*G, United.
Posts: 194
FR24 is not too bad, but not completely accurate. The minimum height above the ground (runway threshold) for the Wellington ILS 16 is 259 feet, and for ILS 34 is 406 feet. Of course, there is always a chance of some 'pilot induced lag' at the decision altitude prior to continuing visually to land, or conducting a 'missed approach' by going around.
Note that the pilot will operate to the bold altitude - 300 ft for ILS16, as the elevation of the runway threshold is 41 ft (giving a height above the threshold of 259 ft).
Details here for the curious http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZWN_41.1_41.2.pdf
Cheers, TK
Note that the pilot will operate to the bold altitude - 300 ft for ILS16, as the elevation of the runway threshold is 41 ft (giving a height above the threshold of 259 ft).
Details here for the curious http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZWN_41.1_41.2.pdf
Cheers, TK