Q300 fleet going?

Reply

Old Jun 1, 17, 1:18 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 5,526
Q300 fleet going?

https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/airnz-2017-investor-day-presentation.pdf

Anyone else spot on page 60 - it refers to 23x Q300s exiting the fleet by 2020.
cavemanzk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 1:44 am
  #2  
Moderator, Hilton Honors
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: hopefully travelling
Programs: up in the air
Posts: 70,689
Originally Posted by cavemanzk View Post
https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/airnz-2017-investor-day-presentation.pdf

Anyone else spot on page 60 - it refers to 23x Q300s exiting the fleet by 2020.
Thanks for the link.

I think you are misinterpreting. The slide on pg 65 refers to unencumbered aircraft. That just means they are aircraft that are not restricted by leases or financing (by 2020). While this opens up the option of selling owned aircraft, it doesn't necessarily mean they are planning to be sold.
Kiwi Flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 1:49 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: NZ Elite *G, HHonors Diamond, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 4,056
That's been rumoured for quite some time... Even the fact some were never painted lead many to believe some would be going a lot sooner than expected due to the large fleet of ATR72's still on their way.

Just wait for the pullout next from places such as Gisborne and Kerikeri as they let Air Chathams take over.
sbiddle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 2:20 am
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 5,526
Originally Posted by sbiddle View Post
That's been rumoured for quite some time... Even the fact some were never painted lead many to believe some would be going a lot sooner than expected due to the large fleet of ATR72's still on their way.

Also that fact that 72-500s got replacement seats, yet the Q300s only had there seat covers replaced.

Maybe an top-up of a few more ATR 72-600s, and the Q300s could be sold off.
cavemanzk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 2:40 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: NZ Elite *G, HHonors Diamond, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 4,056
The only problem with the ATR is that it can't operate into many airports such as KKE without a significant load reduction.
sbiddle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 2:46 am
  #6  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 5,526
Originally Posted by sbiddle View Post
The only problem with the ATR is that it can't operate into many airports such as KKE without a significant load reduction.
Finally some thing make New Zealand airports think to the feature, upgrade before its needed or lose your services If only that would work for AIAL...
cavemanzk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 3:12 am
  #7  
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 779
Also the Q300 have no direct replacement. The Q400 is ATR72 sized and faster, so not helpful when they have gone with the ATR72-600. So if they are going to replace the smaller plane with anything with would be the ATR-42 which is the size of the size of the Q300. Going the the ATR42 if they want a smaller plane will be handy as there is commonality with the 72.

The Q300 average age is 10 so in the next few years+ will be up for replacement. The ATR72-500 average age is 16 and they start to get replaced this year with new ATR72-600s (The ATR72-600s thus far have been to replace the Q300s doing Beech runs and growth).

All that said AirNZ sees the Q300s being used past the ADSB requirements introduction as we now have two Q300s with ADSB over the last few weeks. Seems to be added when the Q300s have about weeks maintenance in Nelson.
nzkarit is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 1:33 pm
  #8  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 5,526
Originally Posted by nzkarit View Post
All that said AirNZ sees the Q300s being used past the ADSB requirements introduction as we now have two Q300s with ADSB over the last few weeks. Seems to be added when the Q300s have about weeks maintenance in Nelson.
Installing ADSB would help with getting an better re-sale price, being that most major airspaces now require it.
cavemanzk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 17, 1:50 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: NZ Elite *G, HHonors Diamond, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 4,056
Not to mention if Q300's were sold to somebody such as Air Chathams they would need this anyway.
sbiddle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 17, 7:01 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Programs: Air NZ Koru, Air NZ ELT *G, IHG Rewards Spire Elite, Emirates, Flying Blue, QANTAS
Posts: 177
Air NZ pull out of Gisborne? Now way. They price jack out of here like you would not believe. No competition and full flights and if they are not full they just cancel. With IRD, ACC, MBIE, DOC, MAF, CYPS, Land Court, MOE all having significant footprint in Gisborne spending tax payer $ to fly in and out there is money to burn on that route.
kiwicyclo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 17, 11:01 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Auckland
Programs: NZ*GE
Posts: 2,131
Definitely going, wouldn't be surprised if it goes all ATR
Rebound is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 17, 5:45 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QF (LTSG), NZ (Jade), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,634
Originally Posted by Rebound View Post
Definitely going, wouldn't be surprised if it goes all ATR
ATR is finalising the ATR 42-600 specs as the 72 is too big for some missions/airports around the world, runway and climb issues, and it is the only 50 seat turbo-prop offering in the near future.
The 72 is more expensive to run, not just the operating cost due to weight and size, but the fact that it needs 2 cabin crew for not much additional capacity.
Blackcloud is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 17, 6:06 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South
Posts: 117
Originally Posted by Blackcloud View Post
ATR is finalising the ATR 42-600 specs as the 72 is too big for some missions/airports around the world, runway and climb issues, and it is the only 50 seat turbo-prop offering in the near future.
The 72 is more expensive to run, not just the operating cost due to weight and size, but the fact that it needs 2 cabin crew for not much additional capacity.
The 42-600 already exists (it just sells in low numbers). What ATR are working on is a sub-variant with improved short field performance that may appeal to some operators.

As for 42 vs 72, I would look at it the other way around. The 72 is marginally more expensive to operate but the seats you gain more than offset that cost. It is not uncommon for operators to stick with the bigger machine if possible but impose payload restrictions on routes where necessary. Here in New Zealand for example, the 72 had operated into Keri Keri and Whangarei on charters before; it's not unexplored territory.
waterwingsNZ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 17, 6:09 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: NZ Elite *G, HHonors Diamond, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 4,056
Originally Posted by waterwingsNZ View Post
Here in New Zealand for example, the 72 had operated into Keri Keri and Whangarei on charters before; it's not unexplored territory.
And both airports face serious restrictions on loadings using the ATR.
sbiddle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 17, 8:26 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South
Posts: 117
Originally Posted by sbiddle View Post
And both airports face serious restrictions on loadings using the ATR.
In the region of a 2-3 tonne hit on max takeoff weight under certain conditions. Manageable given Auckland is a short sector.
waterwingsNZ is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread