Air New Zealand

[goldeneye]

NZ have unveiled there upgrades to the longhaul fleet of 747 and 777 aircraft.

Heres a rundown of the new cabins - All info taken from NZ's handout in this weeks TTG.

Business Premier
Luxurious leather armchair converts to a fully flat 6'7.5" bed.
Ottomon footrest doubles as a visitor's seat.
Every seat has direct acces to aisle.
Video and audio on demand on own high res 10.4" screen.
Inseat power in ever seat.

Pacific Premium Economy (This is a new cabin)
Largest seat pitch in its class at 39/40", seat width of 18.5" on 747's
Extra seat recline with full leg rest and foot bar.
Video and audio on demand on own high res 8.4" screen.
Inseat power point
Exclusive premium cabin.

Pacific Economy
34" seat pitch on 747's
New seats with adjustable headrest.
Video and audio on demand on own high res 8.4" screen.

Overall the new services are very similar to VS.

The new classes and seats etc will be avail from october between AKL & SFO, then LON to AKL via LAX, and on selected LAX flights from Nov 6.

[SCOT747]

Does this mean they are getting rid of First Class?

[phillipas]

Does this mean they are getting rid of First Class?

Yes it does, they will go to Business, Premium Econ and Econ. Which is not surprising given that most long-haul flying into NZ is of the leisure rather than the business variety.

[Captain Rat]

Guess where the new flatbed seats came from.....They are licensed from Virgin Atlantics new Upper Class seats...

[ZK-NSJ]

well given that air nz fitted the entertainment system to virgins last few 747's, youd think it would be similar if not the same

[flyer55]

Has anybody else heard this one that Air New Zealand are planning to fly into LGW via SIN, BKK or Hongkong?

[757manipulator]

"unzed wun cleered too lund too sux leeft"

(My best kiwi accent:} )

Were did you hear this rumour?

[TheOddOne]

It'd certainly be great to see them back here again. It must be 12 years or so since they shuffled off up the road to Hounslow Municipal.

Cheers,
TheOddOne

[Vmike]

It's true. The route starts in September, LGW to Auckland via Hong Kong. My source tells me the primary reason for introducing it is complaints from pax about the appalling treatment they receive from US Immigration in LAX on the 2-hour stopover from LHR to Auckland. Apparently thousands of pax have written in saying they love AirNZ but will travel via the Far East, i.e. on a different airline, in future to avoid being treated like criminals by officious US Immigration staff.

[apaddyinuk]

Well Im assuming that this flight is merely in addition to the LHR ones via LAX as it would seem crazy to move out of LHR to LGW where they have no Star connections, especially considering BMI codeshare extensively out of LHR with them!

[Vmike]

It is in addition to LHR-Auckland via LAX.

[Skipness One Echo]

Excellent news for Crawley Internatioal. Will it be the new 777s I wonder?

[Buster the Bear]

I read somewhere this week that ANZ are to give up its route from Los Angeles to a city in New Zealand shortly.

[akerosid]

LAX-CHC is being axed; I've heard the new LGW-HKG-NZ route will be a 744 service as well.

Good to see some decent long haul routes ex-LGW.

[Flightrider]

Word on the street at LGW is a daily 777 LGW-HKG-AKL from third quarter of this year; and this will complement the existing LHR-LAX-AKL 744 service.

Great news for Gatwick.

[GrahamK]

Aye, but from what I understand, if NZ can get some decent slots at LHR for the service then it will be quickly switched from LGW to LHR. :suspect:

[flyer55]

Any info on what Terminal it will be using North or South?

[Wycombe]

Talking of LGW long-haul, I'm sure I've read that "Indonesia" may be on their way back to LGW aswell.

[kaikohe76]

Super news this & about time too. Well done Air New Zealand.

Continuing the thread of `V Mike's` post, having been subjected myself to the appaling treatment of bona fide passengers in transit through LAX, I vowed never again. My first taste of the US gestapo at LAX was well prior to the horrific events of Sept 11th. I was returning to the UK from NZ & in attempting to make a very quick connection at LAX, I could have well done with just a little help & consideration. Instead I was treated like dirt with no understanding whatsoever, that was it for me. Since then when travelling back home to Kiwiland, I would always have rather flown with Air NZ. The only reason why I have have until now not done this, was the thought of the transit stop in LAX

I for one will be booking on the east a bout route, hope it gets plenty of takers & the US authorities may just get the message, but then????

[akerosid]

I don't think it's going to change much; unfortunately, unfocused security is part and parcel of "the new security arrangement". Someone once compared security to religion; good idea in principle, but the things done in its name ...

I suspect that the transit via HKG will gradually (even quickly) become more popular than LAX, in which case NZ will probably swap acft, putting a -400 on the HKG route and a 777 on the LAX-LHR route. Perhaps they could even swap airports and have the LAX route originating in LGW?

I doubt if the Americans will care that much one way or another and I doubt it will change their behaviour. The man hours spent in getting people to go through Immigration and jump through all the hoops when they're not entering the country is not just wasteful, it's irresponsible and ultimately, does absolutely nothing to improve security. In any case, doesn't ANZ have to provide lists of passengers, like any other airline, so if the US authorities have this, what exactly is the point of subjecting tired passengers to this rigmarole. Surely there are considerably more pressing and important duties to which these officers could be assigned? (No rude suggestions now ... well, not too many.;) )

[Romeo Delta]

"unzed wun cleered too lund too sux leeft"
(My best kiwi accent:} )

"InZid wun, clid to lahnd, too six lift"

(the Kiwi accent to my ear)

US Immigration, in my opinion, is relatively sad. I'm a US resident, but I get a better reception in NZ than I do here at home (go figure). I think they're so intent on quelling the terrorist's urge to travel that they're willing to p!ss everyone else off as well.

"Make it unpalateable to travel to the US, and terrorists won't want to come here." (Don't you believe it!)

Hmmm... If NZ does an LGW-AKL via HKK, then they'd be a 'Round The World flier, and I may just have to try that. LAX-LHR, switch airports to LGW, LGW-HKK-AKL, stay a few days, AKL-LAX. Ahhhh, the heady days of Pan Am. :D :ok: How many airlines these days can claim RTW route structure?

[Desk Driver]

I've thought the new route has already been announced
AKL via SFO and into LHR alongside the AKL-LAX-LHR

[Marvin the Robot]

All these attempts at NZ accents read more like Brummie to me. :rolleyes: :}

[Flightrider]

From a purely Gatwick point of view, it would be desirable to have the LAX/AKL routing from Gatwick because there are no services from Gatwick to the US West Coast and it is a large gap in the airport's route structure. Oasis Hong Kong is due to start HKG-Gatwick in July with a 747-400 and after having not had a HKG link at Gatwick for years, two will come along at once.

However, I'm sure other considerations - not least the fact that NZ have a long-established operation on Heathrow/LAX - will outweigh the minor issues of what airport already has what service.

[yachtno1]

Good as gold marvin! ;) eh ?

[757manipulator]

All these attempts at NZ accents read more like Brummie to me.

Except Marvin I am a New Zealander, and Brum sounds nothing like us:ok:

Plus I've been to "dordleey" and "berrminnham" :p

[GroundScot]

Dont think we will see them at LGW for a l o n g time!

They are currently loosing in excess of USD8m/year, and the CGK route is just low yield bucket and spade [or sandals]

They have a daily codeshare arrangement with MAS into LHR which works well for them and offers a direct 90 mins connex at KUL......

Sorry - but sadly - they pulled out of the AMS and FRA for the same reason......... and have no European services.

[GroundScot]

oops should have read loosing more than USD850m a year ...........

[4Foxtrot]

You don't have to fly Air Noo Zillund to get a frosty reception from Homeland Securitah, but it is the reason I switched to Asian hubs (get your mind out of the gutter) when going to that part of the world. Used to be quite a good airline so I hope the buggers do bloody well mate.

[G-LOST]

Lets get this quite clear, as I thought this thread was about Air New Zealand. Garuda might be losing money, but Air NZ have made a healthy profit over the last couple of years...

I hope like hell that LGW takes off, I want a jumpseat to call my own in that 747 but I'll settle for an overhead locker to hide in, a few kindly words from the Captain and a pay-check.

LOST.

[kiwiandrew]

I've thought the new route has already been announced
AKL via SFO and into LHR alongside the AKL-LAX-LHR


not without changing the current ASA . NZ are limited to 7 weekly flights in each direction between the USA and LHR - these are already used up with the daily LAX service ... if they want to operate via SFO they will have to do one of the following


1/ operate it to somewhere other than LHR eg LGW or MAN

or

2/ renegotiate the ASA ( and it was only renegotiated a few months ago )

or

3 / drop LAX-LHR ( supposedly a good high yield earner so not likely )

[SCOT747]

Does anybody have any further update on this? Is there definatly a new service and when, where etc?
Thanks

[akerosid]

I had assumed that this route was being operated via HKG, but it now appears that, although it will be going ahead, it will be operated via SFO. ANZ already flies 777s to SFO, so it will be a continuation of that route. (This came from an ex-ANZ person).

I had also understand that one of the objectives of the route was to give UK bound pax an option to fly via a non-US port, because of irritation over Immigration procedures there.

[Le Bob]

On a recent flight from Fiji to LAX, the cabin crew were talking about new service to MAN at sometime in future. They didn't think it would be via LAX and thought B767/B777 maybe used. No timescales were mentioned.

[akerosid]

So, which will it be - via San Fran or HK?

Is there a start date set yet?

[Le Bob]

I agrre with the first comment about missing out US going east, but there is also a lot of competition in that direction.
The cabin crew seemed to think 2 - 3 x week via SFO would be the option with even an extension into Europe.
Must be an untapped market for both West Coast & NZ in Northern England.

[Globaliser]

AKL-SFO-LON won't remove the irritation of having to be subjected to US immigration procedures despite being on a direct transit, but at least SFO would be a step in the right direction, being a great deal more pleasant than the hell-hole that is LAX.

[thebeehive]

I have contacted ANZ and have been told they have no intention of operating into Gatwick so make of that what you will

[aeulad]

I was told by a NZ cc friend of mine that LGW is a dead cert, via HKG or possibly SHA.

Regards

Mike

[Flightrider]

The airport is certainly under the impression that ANZ are coming back, and it will be Gatwick-Hong Kong-Auckland daily with a 777. The whole point is that ANZ needs to have some alternative to LAX given the US immigration problems.

[phreegreens]

Article that tends to support the view that NZ will be adding extra services, maybe to LGW
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=3&ObjectID=10369967
There is an article in today's Times about holidays in French Polynesia, that mentions flights by NZ from LGW via LAX, but I suspect that is just a misprint.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2100-2101578,00.html

[Skyflier]

I have been told by someone who should know that when the second service is introduced if LGW has to be used (and NZ are still hoping to use LHR), the routings will be LHR-HKG-AKL and LGW-LAX-AKL.

Seemingly the biggest decline over the LAX issue is in C class pax who simply won't put up with the LAX experience (I'm one of them) and NZ hope to attract them back by routing the LHR service through the eastern hemisphere.

I don't know how related this is but I've been surveyed twice this year on SQ between SIN and AKL about alternative routings from the UK, particularly HKG and my view about services that don't offer F class - maybe they know something we don't.

[kaikohe76]

Hi Folks,

Has anyone in the know, got any confirmation or further recent info at all, re Air NZ's possible routes via the Far East rather than via US. There was also some talk on this thread, that they were looking at MAN as well as LHR & LGW, for me EGCC would be great, but commercial matters of course must take priority.
I contacted Air NZ on this matter & although they were quick to reply, they were very loath indeed to make any comment on just what is going on here.
Anyone on the inside with any updates at all please.

Many thanks.

[Ed666]

Sort of off topic but ..

Just out of interest is the 777 able to fly HKG-LGW safely?

Ie what altitude can the 777 maintain one engine INOP?

Would it have to route around a certain Mountain range or is it able to route as per 744 or A343?

[Desk Driver]

it's about the Diverts not the altitude so much?
A 7 can fly on one engine easily of course. I admit I don't know at what altitude but it can do it.

If Jal can fly 7's over Siberia in to TYO I'm sure NZ could make HKG over Russia & China. However it does raise the question of why have'nt CX ever used the & on HKG - LHR

[Globaliser]

IIRC, there may be an issue with the Himalayas? Doesn't one of the standard routes involve some careful analysis of the engine failure or depressuisation case at each point along it, because of the high MSAs? I wonder whether a 777 might have an issue of having to take less favourable routings to avoid the problem, and therefore suffer economic penalties compared to a four-engine aircraft.

I'd be interested to see if anyone who knows something about the topic has anything to say on this.

[Desk Driver]

Ouch! Globalizer

[Desk Driver]

Ouch! Globalizer

AF fly the 777 CDG - HKG

Does'nt every aircraft have a problem with the himalayas because you can't get low enough in a decomp emergency??

[Globaliser]

AF fly the 777 CDG - HKGFair enough - I didn't know they'd started doing that. LON can't be a problem then.

[Hotel Mode]

Does'nt every aircraft have a problem with the himalayas because you can't get low enough in a decomp emergency??

No, the only problem there is oxygen duration. The problem with a twin is maintaining MSA with an engine out. Though i dont believe its a major problem until MSA's are up past 20000 and theres not many airways like that.

AF may fly CDG-HKG with 777's but they certainly fly beck by a lowish MSA route via Beijing and outer mongolia. The high ground on the outbound around Urumqi is when theres much less fuel left.

[Ed666]

"Air New Zealand announces second London service via Asia
Air New Zealand today announced plans to launch a second daily service between Auckland and London flying via Hong Kong to London Heathrow Airport.
Commencing on 28 October 2006, the second service doubles Air New Zealand’s current capacity between New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
“Demand for travel between the United Kingdom and New Zealand has grown significantly since we first launched a daily service in 1998, with annual arrivals to New Zealand increasing by more than 10 percent on average,” said Air New Zealand Group General Manager International Airlines, Ed Sims.
“Over this time we have invested heavily to promote New Zealand as a destination, and this year, we will be increasing our current advertising and promotional spend by 50 percent in the United Kingdom and Europe markets to ensure we drive further growth,” he said.
“The additional capacity will leave us better placed to take advantage of the demand we have created, especially during peak seasons when our flights are 90 to 100 percent full. More excitingly, we can stimulate new demand with higher frequency and new routing options, including the world’s only current round-the-world service on one airline.
“We will also be the only Star Alliance carrier to operate between Hong Kong and London, which is fantastic news for our Star partners and customers,” said Mr Sims.
Air New Zealand will operate the route utilising newly refurbished Boeing 747-400 aircraft. The 393-seat aircraft includes 46 lie-flat Business Premier seats, 23 Pacific Premium Economy seats and 324 seats in Pacific Economy.
Mr Sims said Air New Zealand’s research has found New Zealanders prefer to fly their national carrier to and from United Kingdom.
“Kiwis have recognised that one of the world’s longest journeys is more enjoyable on our new long-haul service featuring lie-flat beds in Business Premier, extra comfort and legroom in Pacific Premium Economy, and on-demand digital video entertainment and more personal space in every seat,” he said.
Air New Zealand will operate the following schedule, subject to timeslot, capacity and regulatory approvals:
Flight No. Schedule Flight Time
NZ88 Departs AKL 2359
Arrives HKG 0615+1 11:16
Departs HKG 0815
Arrives LHR 1330+1 13:15
NZ87 Departs LHR 2115
Arrives HKG 1700+1 11:45
Departs HKG 1900
Arrives AKL 1045+1 10:45
“These arrival and departure times offer favourable connectivity at Hong Kong and Heathrow airports. The transit time of two hours in Hong Kong is equivalent to our Los Angeles stopover, and is one of the shortest for travel between London and Auckland,” said Mr Sims.
Sales for the second United Kingdom service are available from today. Return economy class airfares from Auckland to London start from $2615 excluding airport taxes."
Source: ATI

[Desk Driver]

So the mystery is revealed at last.

Good old Ed' A man I have a lot of time for

[kaikohe76]

Air NZ East a Bout

ED666,

Many thanks for the info via your post, great news, I'm sure the new route will be a major success

[Globaliser]

Thanks from me, too, Ed. I know a few Kiwis who will be cheered by this news.

Thanks, also, to PPRuNe. It just goes to show that many of those rumours are absolutely spot on.

[Vmike]

Told you so!!!:)

[Globaliser]

Read someone elsewhere pointing out the bleeding obvious that hadn't occurred to me: NZ will join a select band of airlines that have offered, at some stage, round-the-world flights all on its own metal: AKL-HKG-LHR-LAX-AKL.

[RevMan2]

AF fly the 777 CDG - HKG
Does'nt every aircraft have a problem with the himalayas because you can't get low enough in a decomp emergency??

You don't have a problem if you refit your fleet with supplementary oxygen capacity (cf LH FRA-SHA) to allow you to maintain altitude until you're clear of the sharp pointy bits.

[KAG]

AIRBUS has strengthened its foothold in Australasia after wining an order for 14 A320s to replace 15 Air New Zealand Boeing 737-300s.

The order continues a march by the European manufacturer that has seen it go from a handful of aircraft at Ansett at the beginning to decade, to winning significant orders at Qantas, Jetstar and Air New Zealand.

The latest jets, destined for Air NZ’s domestic routes, join 12 A320s already deployed on short-haul international routes. Air NZ also has purchase rights for another 11 planes, including the possibility of moving to the bigger A321.

The 14 aircraft list at more than $US1 billion ($1bn), but the airline said today it had bought them at a discount “that reflects the current market conditions”.

“This is a very good time to buy aircraft,” said Bruce Parton, Air NZ’s group general manager (short haul airline).

“The industry is at the bottom of a deep cycle, so demand for aircraft is limited, creating favourable conditions for buyers with strong balance sheets like Air New Zealand.”

The airline expects the first aircraft to arrive in January, 2011, with the remainder progressively introduced through to 2016.

It said the fuel-efficiency of the A320s would be driven by an advanced IAE engine with improved fuel-burn - the A320 also boasts 171 seats, compared to 133 on the B737-300, which would allow Air NZ to both increase capacity in the domestic market and reduce carbon emissions.

The bigger aircraft would also allow the carrier it to overcome capacity constraints at some New Zealand airports, Air NZ said.

Airbus said the A320 had won the Air New Zealand contract after an intensive and robust evaluation, and the carrier would reap the benefits from a common brand of aircraft across its domestic and short-haul fleet.

[Oxidant]

More like they got a good deal & it fitted in with the rest of the long term Company plan.

[captjns]

Mazel Tov! Live long and prosper! May Air New Zealand have nothing but joy with their disposable airplanes.

[Oxidant]

Er, they have ....... 737-300 :E

[KAG]

Er, they have ....... 737-300

They don' t want the NG? With the low US$, it should be a good deal right?

[Oxidant]

Not sure, (Just having a pop at captjns). At the end of the day a common fleet saves on a multitude of costs, (maint., crew training etc, etc)
The bean counters probably came down with a better deal from Airbus.........

[MTOW]

The answer might be found in paragraph 4 of this link in the Middle East forum. http://www.pprune.org/middle-east/335400-caravan-me-forum-classic-1st-scroll-cafe.htmlIn less time than it takes to say "sell-cheap-an'-milk'em-dry-with-the-cost-of-spare-saddles-oolala-m'sieur",

[ZK-WDR]

Apparently they went with the A320 as they have a more convenient table in the cockpit for their laptops :}

[White Knight]

Besides the Airbus cabin is far more comfortable and spacious for the pax compared to the narrow Boeings....

[captjns]

Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot:E.

Did not mean to offend any Airbus Drivers. I will say that the Airbus is a very comfortable ride in the back. And the cockpit sure looks more user friendly too.

[KAG]

Which one is the most cost efficient/fuel efficient, 320 or NG?

[captjns]

Which one is the most cost efficient/fuel efficient, 320 or NG?

Well... Boeing, naturally will say the NG wins hands down:ok:... and Airbus on the other hand, naturally will say Airbus wins hands down:ok:.

Light loads, the NG can putter along happily at FL410 burning about 33kgs per minute. Not sure about the Airbus capabilities however. Anyone shed light on regarding fuel efficiency for the IAE V2500 motor?

[Checkboard]

Air NZ was known for achieving discounts on its aircraft purchases by buying the last of the "superseded" models off the line. While they have 737-300s they aren't as old as that sounds, as they were the very last off the production line (same with some other types they operate).

[Tempestnut]

Just like the 787's they have on order, the last off the line :=

[TwoOneFour]

Can't imagine those A320s will be last off either :}

[Skipness One Echo]

They were in at the start with the B747-400, indeed they wore one out and had to scrap it.

[Oxidant]

Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot.


Tosh,:rolleyes: I have about 4,000 hrs on the 737 (300-800), 757/767 & nearly the same on 319,320 & 321.
I was initially sceptical of the FBW etc, but that's the same for the 777. So in the end they are all just aeroplanes. However, the "Bus" is the nicer (quieter, roomier, more comfortable) place to work in!

[remoak]

May Air New Zealand have nothing but joy with their disposable airplanes.

Yeah... but at the end of the day... the pilot flies the Boeing, while the Airbus flies the pilot

Two of the more stupid comments on PPRuNe in recent times (and no, I don't fly an Airbus).

[Yorkielondon]

Air New Zealand 777 HKG layover?

Network timetable question...Air New Zealand cut their HKG-LHR 777 service to 5 p/week for winter sched from daily but the AKL-HKG remains daily...all timings remain standard. My question is that by my estimates they must now layover a 777 for almost 36 hours twice per week in HKG?

Anyone know if this right-seems amazing to leave an aircraft downroute for that long (as a good ex network planner!)