Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NZ Expansion To N. America?  
User currently offlineBoeingFever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 54
Posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6625 times:

So I know NZ flies to in N. America:

LAX
SFO
YVR


With (4) direct and (4) 777-200ER from Boeing/ILFC and (4/3) 77W on order along with (8) 787-9... What are their goals for the 77W and 787-9?



I know they fly:

AKL-LAX 2x daily
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

AKL-SFO 1x daily

Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

NZ002 on final @ LAX.


Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
95 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6591 times:



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

Not with 77W. They will be kept busy with AKl-LAX-LHR/AKL-HKG-LHR which takes 6 airframes and maybe AKL-SFO-MAN.

You MIGHT see ORD when the B787 arrives. BUT you have to remember NZ is a VERY small market (not quite 5 million, if everyone comes home for Christmas!) Some how I doubt AKL-ORD will really work. AKL-LAX/SFO-ORD MIGHT, but don't count on it. DEN, given its also a *A hub is a possibility.

Anything other than that would be a big, but pleasant surprise.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6577 times:



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 1):
You MIGHT see ORD when the B787 arrives. BUT you have to remember NZ is a VERY small market (not quite 5 million, if everyone comes home for Christmas!) Some how I doubt AKL-ORD will really work. AKL-LAX/SFO-ORD MIGHT, but don't count on it. DEN, given its also a *A hub is a possibility.

Qantas had intentions of starting AKL-DFW with 744ERs a few years ago. I'm not sure why that didn't pan out, but AKL-ORD is a similar route, and the massive feed on the U.S. side just might make it work.


User currently offlineNZ1 From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 2251 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6556 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD? I know the 77W could fly this route with no issue's...

What if any other destinations is NZ looking at for N. America?

ORD is on the list of routes being looked at. But so are about 5 or 6 other North American cities. Like Gemuser said, I doubt anything concrete will happen until the 787 arrives.

NZ1


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6408 posts, RR: 38
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6550 times:

Boeing tried pushing the 77L for the AKL-JFK market just like the SYD-LHR. NZ haven't ordered any. I don't have any substance so I'll leave it for someone else to talk about.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

Actually, it doesn't fly daily. AKL-NAN/RAR-LAX comes to 5x weekly, 3 through NAN and 2 through RAR. And they have since closed the likes of AKL-PPT-LAX.

Did you forget HNL or isn't that exclusively part of North America?

I think NZ has plans for brand new markets such as South America, places in Asia where they don't currently operate to and maybe South Africa. The 77W is primarily a switch for the 744s when they pull them out of service sometime around 2010/11 IIRC, when the 77Ws start arriving. There are quite a few more options for the 787. One of the next routes we could see involving North America could be the continuation of AKL-YVR to LHR.

[Edited 2007-11-28 23:05:35]


It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 6518 times:

Would NZ ever do a AKL-South Pacifc Island-SFO route, or add on MAN to SFO?

It seems like tourism alone could drive the Pacific Island route out of SFO.


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 6484 times:



Quoting Trvlr (Reply 2):
Qantas had intentions of starting AKL-DFW with 744ERs a few years ago. I'm not sure why that didn't pan out

Actually it was SYD-AKL-DFW because the aircraft didn't have the range for SYD-DFW. It didn't pan out because with the extra stop it offerred no advantage over LAX. SYD-DFW is expected to start with either A380/B787 when sufficient are delivered.

Quoting Trvlr (Reply 2):
AKL-ORD is a similar route, and the massive feed on the U.S. side just might make it work.

Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineRdwootty From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 902 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 6482 times:

Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes

User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5621 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 6439 times:



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR.

I find this VERY hard to belive! It would be BIG news in this part of the world. Can't see anything in the NZ Aviation thread about it. It needs checking out.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6377 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

NZ is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6376 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

ORD is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6354 times:



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes

As much as I like UA and the new seat products they are going to offer, I find this very hard to believe, although, with AF as well coming into the market who knows it might just be the case.


User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7089 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 6307 times:



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):

I might want to check that, I would imagine that it would be big news over here as mentioned before if thats the case.


User currently offlineFly2CHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 6280 times:

Remember NZ already tried DFW on an AKL-PPT-DFW-LGW rotation in the late 80s. Didn't work then for several reasons.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR

I doubt NZ would ever give up LAX-LHR.


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6408 posts, RR: 38
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 6241 times:



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):

Can you give me any reasons at all why NZ might want to give up on the flight that brings a hell of a lot of dough for the company? Even repositioning this flight to the likes of SFO instead of LAX seems crazy. We'll see what happens soon.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineDavidByrne From New Zealand, joined Sep 2007, 1634 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6184 times:

Last I checked, NZ schedules for summer 2008-09 were not available on their web site. The last dates for which schedules were available were in October. So maybe don't read too much into it at this stage?


This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
User currently offlineKoruman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6168 times:



Quoting NZ1 (Reply 3):
ORD is on the list of routes being looked at. But so are about 5 or 6 other North American cities. Like Gemuser said, I doubt anything concrete will happen until the 787 arrives.

I'm told that the destinations under consideration are:

Denver: UA hub but no O+D traffic
Las Vegas: US hub, minimal O+D traffic
JFK: unlikely, as turned down opportunity for TN codeshare last year
Toronto: probably via HNL as AC codeshare
Chicago: UA hub, but less O+D traffic than Toronto

Dallas, Houston and Miami are ruled out by minimal Star Alliance feed.


Without wanting to get anyone in trouble, my understanding is that the following, in probable order, are the next most likely North American sectors to open:

1. AKL-YVR-LHR
2. AKL-LAX-MAN
3. SYD-LAX
4. AKL-SFO-MAN
5. AKL-HNL-YYZ
6. SYD-SFO
7. MEL-LAX
8. AKL-NAN-SFO
9. AKL-ORD
10. AKL-JFK

Personally, I think that SFO and LAX have such good connections that Las Vegas, Denver or Chicago offer no benefit to passengers flying to the eastern states.

I bet that the new Boeings are used on increased onward services to the UK, and that if there is any North American expansion it will be to Toronto.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR.

Air NZ only load their schedules 330 days in advance, which might explain why nothing is visible in "late 2008".

For your information, LAX-LHR has just been increased back up from a 777-200ER to a 747-400 due to high premium class demand.

In actual fact, if Air New Zealand offers new services to the USA it is not so much likely to be to a new destination as from a new port. My money is on the re-opening of Sydney-Los Angeles and the extension of Auckland-Los Angeles to Manchester.


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6138 times:



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
My money is on the re-opening of Sydney-Los Angeles

I bet UA would have something to say about that, mind you I would love to see UA back on the LAX or SFO to AKL run as soon as, as well although again NZ m ight not be happy with that either.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4807 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6139 times:



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
With (4) direct and (4) 777-200ER from Boeing/ILFC and (4/3) 77W on order along with (8) 787-9... What are their goals for the 77W and 787-9?

The 772ERs are all pretty much fully deployed although there is effectively some spare capacity there since SIN was dropped. The 773ER are to replace the 744 (which operate AKL-HKG-LHR, AKL-LAX-LHR, AKL-SFO, also AKL-MEL, AKL-BNE on occasion) from 2011... it is only 4 ordered but several insiders have confirmed that the options have effectively been guaranteed to be taken up. 7x773ER to replace 8x744 does not quite add up especially due to the smaller capacity... either NZ is waiting for the 7810 or is waiting to see what happens in the market as there is no real reason why they couldn't continue to operate at least a few of their 744s if they were needed for a few more years pas 2011.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
Would NZ ever start up AKL-ORD?

Possibly but not until the first 8x787s come on line. So not until 2012 I think at the earliest and even then it will be competing with the likes of JFK, DFW, DEN however I'd say ORD and JFK are the front runners.

BTW nice pics!
 Smile

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 5):
Would NZ ever do a AKL-South Pacifc Island-SFO route, or add on MAN to SFO?

It seems like tourism alone could drive the Pacific Island route out of SFO.

Possibly... but probably only if NZ were to switch its USA hub to SFO which is unlikely even tho SFO has a nicer airport. SFO itself is actually quite a small market, it just gets boosted by transit pax from other locations (Seattle etc), those pax can just as easily (although more painfully being LAX) fly via LAX to the islands.

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

The idea I think is that ORD would be taking some traffic for sure, but traffic is still expected to grow so its effectively only reducing the need for capacity growth thru LAX. ORD is a big hub for UA so basically the NE USA (which makes up about half the USA population), eg NY, and the other old states.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 7):
Just a side note, the flight NZ1 is not going to operate from LHR from late 2008. The timetable seems to indicate the transfer to a UA flight for the sector LAX-LHR. I assume this is in part due to the situation for passengers at LAX of clearing US immigration even though they are not leaving the secure zone??It will also free up aircraft for other routes

The timetable probably hasn't been made yet or is being altered is all. LAX-LHR is one of NZs most valuble routes and quite frankly the UA product is rubbish compared to NZ so NZ wouldn't want to be putting its pax thru that.
In fact part of the reason why NZ started up the AKL-HKG-LHR route was to free up seats on the LAX-LHR route which they can then command a premium on.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineQF108 From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 333 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6112 times:



Quoting 777ER (Reply 10):
ORD is on the list of possible stops in the USA, as is JFK. JFK if I remember correctly has more priority then ORD

Does NZ have the rights to carry cargo LAX-JFK like QF does with flight 107/108 and from all reports that is a very profitable sector because of the freight. If they do is there any chance we may see NZ 5/6 operate AKL-LAX-JFK.

Hopefully not for my Super Shuttle drivers sake, he had never heard of Qantas, asked about 6 times the name of the airline, so is less likely to know NZ if they start service, to be fair he was battling Thanksgiving traffic !



Blessed are the Cheesemakers !
User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 6035 times:



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Many, many places in the Midwest and eastern U.S., and maybe even a couple better-timed connections to Canada, too.


User currently offlineFLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 5960 times:



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
Toronto: probably via HNL as AC codeshare



Quoting Koruman (Reply 16):
1. AKL-YVR-LHR
2. AKL-LAX-MAN
3. SYD-LAX
4. AKL-SFO-MAN
5. AKL-HNL-YYZ

There is a real demand for a direct YYZ/HNL/YYZ link, unfortunately it has always been a notoriously low yielding route. If NZ could use HNL as a "filler" while bulking out the majority of the load on the YYZ/AKL/YYZ sector it could work, however the whole marketing strategy of the 787 is point to point, direct non-stop service.

Recently flew NZ on their new YVR service, and every aspect of their service in Biz Premier was absolutely flawless and outstanding! It also appeared that they could easily increase their Pacific Premium Economy cabin from the current 18 seats. Several customers at the gate wanted to upgrade to the intermediate class of service, but was packed on both flights. Was speaking to one of the manager's, and just to further feed the rumor mill, AKL-YVR-MAN, is also under consideration as opposed to # 2 & #4 on the above list.

Staff on NZ are amazing ambassadors for their country which set the stage for an incredible holiday!



Above and Beyond
User currently offlineKoruman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 5953 times:

Quoting Trvlr (Reply 20):
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 6):
Where would ORD get feed from that wouldn't just as readily go via LAX/SFO/YVR?

Many, many places in the Midwest and eastern U.S., and maybe even a couple better-timed connections to Canada, too.

Except that thanks to the priorities of the American education system, hardly anyone in those places could even find New Zealand on a map of Australia and New Zealand. There is no market whatsoever.

The market from North America to New Zealand is basically the Pacific Coast and Canada. One of the reasons why Air NZ has just opened a YVR route is because its research showed that even in Montreal and Newfoundland there was more knowledge of New Zealand and interest in visiting than there was from any US location more than 50 miles from the Pacific Ocean. That's why Toronto might precede Chicago.

The market from New Zealand to the USA is basically to Los Angeles, San Francisco and Microsoft in Seattle. If there was a significant market to New York (which there isn't) then Air NZ would have accepted Air Tahiti Nui's offer to place its code on AKL-PPT-JFK.

Theoretical connections to Indianapolis, Cleveland, St Louis and Pittsburgh are irrelevent because nobody flies between New Zealand and those cities, or vice versa. Nobody even flies between NZ and Texas.

[Edited 2007-11-29 06:36:53]

User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3140 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 5906 times:



Quoting BoeingFever777 (Thread starter):
I know they fly:

AKL-LAX 2x daily
AKL-NAN-LAX 1x daily

AKL-SFO 1x daily

AKL-NAN-LAX x 3
AKL-RAR-LAX x 2
AKL-TBU-APW-LAX x 1

All services (x) by week and served with 767-300ER. Services to Fiji used to be more regular before the coup. Flights were 3 x daily between AKL and LAX.

N.B. There are also thrice weekly 777-200ER services to YVR.

Personally, I'd like to see the 787-9's start MEL-AKL-JFK/EWR.

Regards
MH



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineBA744PHX From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 335 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 5895 times:

how about PHX? could NZ run AKL-PHX-ORD/YYZ? both PHX-ORD/YYZ are Star hubs

25 NZ107 : I remember NZ1 stating after they ordered the 7 that at least another one was going to be bought. I think it had something to do with the shareholder
26 Jfk777 : Given New York's(JFK) importance to the world, I would think ANZ would fly there. ORD can be served via UA connections in LAX & SFO. ANZ flies half wa
27 NZ107 : A direct flight would be more preferred, both LAX-LHR and AKL-JFK. I'm pretty sure they'll stick to that. LAX-LON has been in the schedule for a long
28 Sebring : A 767-300 could do it, and I don't AC to retire all of its 767s when the 787s arrive. Some of the newer ones were delivered at the beginning of this
29 Gemuser : As well as Koruman's elegantly expressed comment on demand, there is also the fact that from ALL of the mid west ORD is a backtrack and so is the eas
30 2travel2know : I really doubt that NZ would study an AKL-MEX and moreover, flying MEX-AKL could be quite restricted due to MEX altitude. Bear in mind that a stop in
31 Bartond : Agreed to a certain extent. However, is there enough of a market for another new city for Air New Zealand? I think they would beef up their SFO fligh
32 Koruman : Unfortunately, no way. The LHR-LAX flight thrives because the length of the flight and number of time zones crossed mean that NZ's single daily fligh
33 DavidByrne : I thought that NZ had fifth freedom from anywhere in the US onward, with the sole restriction being the limitation to one daily flight from Californi
34 NZ1 : Remember, 4 are owned, and if a buyer can't be found, we could still fly them for a while until additional 773/789's are delivered. NZ1
35 Post contains images Zkpilot : yup thats what I was referring to
36 BoeingFever777 : Would you say they would do this with what a/c? That is one hell of a long flight... Where does DEN fall into the mix with having UA connections ther
37 777ER : Highly doubt NZ would give up LAX-LHR considering its the money maker route. Have you ever waited for a flight to ORD or DEN in LAX? The only flights
38 ZKSUJ : I think its mainly to do with cabotage rules man. So only PAX continuing will be allowed on board. As for the short flight, they do trans tasman whic
39 Koruman : That is because the North American flights leave Auckland in the evening and arrive in North America too late for east coast connections. That would
40 Zkpilot : They would use a 789 for AKL-JFK (or a 788ER/LR,789ER/LR if those are available) it is capable of doing it. DEN would be useful except that it suffer
41 Burj : I live in upstate NY (east of CA) and I'd be interested in visiting NZ as I have family that just moved there. Just how long would the flight be from
42 Bartond : You'd be looking at about 18-19 hours of actual flying time, but add layovers in there and you're probably up to about 24 total hours for your trip. J
43 MotorHussy : Most Americans can't find the U.S. on a world map if the borders and titles aren't drawn in (no offence to my American friends, just a PBS documentar
44 Post contains images BoeingFever777 : Dont believe all the BS you watch mate... Not an insult to me but many other anetters would your A$$ for that. Has/is NZ looking or ever looked at th
45 MotorHussy : LOL, that's if they could find it. But seriously, by virtue of our interest in aviation, we're very good with geography - so we've got the top echelo
46 Burj : So a non-stop AKL-JFK is possible, right? There are non-stops between NYC and Singapore and NYC and Bangkok. Just wondering if a AKL-JFK-LHR would wo
47 Darenw : Wouldn't a non-stop flight to NY be closer to 16-17 hours? Its not as far as Singapore-New York which is around 18 hours
48 MotorHussy : It's certainly within the performance range of the 789, but I think it could only really work if NZ could get enough feeder traffic from Australia pa
49 Burj : So related to a theoretical NZ LHR-JFK-AKL-(MEL?) flight... would passangers from LHR have to go through US passport control/security at JFK if they w
50 DavidByrne : C'mon Koruman. I greatly value your contributions to this thread, but then you always go and spoil it by saying something that's totally unsupportabl
51 Legacyins : Yes, passengers would need to complete passport control upon arrival in JFK. This is a US Gov't requirement. The setup NZ has in LAX is passengers tr
52 DavidByrne : Hmm, I doubt this. I don't think that the 787 has the legs to do SYD-JFK non-stop. The Great Circle distance AKL-JFK is 7671 nm, which I think is abo
53 Viscount724 : The economics of those extremely long nonstop routes are also questionable. Apart from the additional fuel burned just to carry the weight of the fue
54 Zkpilot : No non-stop service currently. 17 hours flying time but add on transfers, boarding etc and comes up to about 19 to AKL and about 21 to SYD (23 to MEL
55 777ER : How about providing some backup to support what your saying, when you say things like that. I know people, from different towns, familys etc in Michi
56 VHVXB : True however the story is different with Auckland. Auckland is quite possibly the worst place in New Zealand to visit. Its also worth noting that pas
57 MotorHussy : I've always thought this was a compelling business case for this (proposed) service. Regards MH
58 NZ107 : Not that anyone would want to fly that distance in a Twin Otter.. It still has more to do than the likes of Hamilton, Tauranga, Palmerston North, Wel
59 VHVXB : I guess it all depends on personal preference Plenty to see in Wellington - Te Papa National Museum, Parliament Buildings & Beehive, Wellington Cable
60 TG992 : Auckland - War Memorial Museum, Rangitoto Island, Waiheke Island, High Street/Chancery/Parnell shopping precincts, Auckland Zoo/MOTAT, Piha or Bethel
61 Fly2CHC : I still maintained that NZ should reinstate the CHC-LAX non-stop services and ensure flights to/from SYD, MEL, and BNE connect with this. That would r
62 Gemuser : Yeah it is, the following day! That's what he said "if you stop over in LAX". Gemuser
63 DavidByrne : Lots of things may be possible with the 789s, and there's the potential to have multiple connecting flights onward from LAX to European ports. Just a
64 Zkpilot : Yeah you have to stopover, it arrives into LAX to late to connect the same day. QF is allowed to pick up its own pax and take them to JFK even if the
65 NZ107 : Wellington more so if you like fog and wind. Koruman's views on this was to link flights from all over NZ (WLG, CHC, DUD, ZQN) using A320s to SYD, wh
66 Post contains links Burj : Which airline and what mix of people visit NZ? Europeans, Asians, North Americans, etc? But doesn't CO fly NYC to Hawaii? According to farecompare: "
67 Alangirvan : More thoughts about Phoenix. A quick look at Great Circle Mapper shows that PHX is 256 miles further away from AKL than LAX. PHX is a hub for US Airwa
68 Koruman : You're absolutely, right, it could be a west coast hub for Air New Zealand. Except the airline has already got two (LAX and SFO) which serve an ident
69 DavidByrne : My proposition is that if the a/c operate according to the present HKG schedules, then they'll arrive in the Australian East Coast in the early morni
70 MotorHussy : For folks from the Big Apple, Hawai'i is a long haul destination that competes with closer and more exotic tropical destinations like - the Bahamas,
71 Burj : This is interesting, and sounds a lot like what 9W is doing, using Brussels to connect different Indian cities with various North American cities. Ho
72 Koruman : The beauty of Hong Kong (compared with Shanghai for example) is that the administration is totally supportive of growth, and not beholden to the priv
73 Burj : Wow! That is good! Considering how good their product is, NZ should really exploit this opportunity.
74 Alangirvan : I have written without having visited the airport - when AirNZ has 787s with a smaller number of seats it would not matter if there are three gateway
75 Koruman : I like the idea, but the lodges basically cater for tiny numbers of high-yield visitors, not a large enough market for wide-body aircraft. Unfortunat
76 Alangirvan : There are lots of people in Australia who do not know where the major towns in NZ are. They do not know that NZ is two hours ahead of Sydney time (the
77 Post contains images Jamincan : There do seem to be stronger ties with eastern Canada than I would have thought considering the geographic barriers. Within the past year, two friends
78 Aerojoe : Koruman I respect your views greatly and think you are bang on the mark about HK and NZ's need to build critical mass. But on the US east coast marke
79 Burj : O.K. WOW there are a lot of different points in this paragraph that should be addressed. FIRST let me say that a lot of Americans have this nagging f
80 Burj : *sigh* sorry for all the typos and spelling mistakes etc...
81 Koruman : Thanks. I probably should state my own bias here. I was really disappointed that Air New Zealand did not accept the Air Tahiti Nui offer to codeshare
82 Koruman : And please don't take offence - I love America and Americans, I'm just pointing out that their education and values are quite different to other west
83 Post contains images FXramper : If QF doesn't get with the program and hit up DFW soon with a codeshare on AA, I'd see NZ taking new a/c and using a codeshare to make a DFW run.
84 Gemuser : QF will be at DFW just as soon as Airbus/Boeing deliver enough A380/787 aircraft. Gemuser
85 DavidByrne : Very unlikely that NZ would return to DFW in my view - they would want to go for a Star hub, and DFW is a One World hub. So ORD (UA hub) is much more
86 LAXdude1023 : No, NZ wont be back at DFW probably ever. QF will make a run at DFW at some point. From what I keep hearing JFK is a larger priority that ORD. Im not
87 Alangirvan : The AirNZ flight to DFW was a once weekly stop on a flight that went AKL-PPT-DFW-LGW. I think PPT became a stop in HNL because AirNZ decided that is w
88 Burj : Interesting point, but what about PHL? Many of us on the east coast of the US have to go through PHL almost everytime we fly because US routes us thr
89 Burj : Oh no offence taken at all. Everything you wrote in your post I've heard many times from my fellow Americans. Also, regarding the UK and NZ...(as my
90 Eastern023 : Would they ever fly to IAD?
91 DavidByrne : Sounds like a really good reason NOT to fly to PHL . . . ! I've wondered this myself, as it's a UA hub, where JFK is not.
92 Post contains images FXramper : Bah. UA will increase frequencies from ORD, IAD, and SFO to DFW, to link a NZ flight from DFW's terminal D. It could happen.
93 Alangirvan : Advantage of flying into DFW or ORD or some other airports in that part of US is that AirNZ or Qantas could use codeshares into Washington National or
94 Koruman : It's more convenient for inbound businessmen rather than outbound (American) travellers. The nature of the US economy already means that: 1) There ar
95 Post contains images Burj : Of course that doesn't keep US from using (abusing) PHL! Hm...read your options and thought about it quite a bit. Here is one issue that is becoming
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Carriers Without Service To S.America posted Wed Sep 26 2007 01:48:39 by USAirALB
New Greek Airline To N.America posted Thu Jun 28 2007 17:33:00 by GARUDAROD
QF & Air NZ 747s To Test "glide Descents" posted Wed Mar 28 2007 01:47:10 by Jbernie
Randys New Blog: Podcasts & A380 Comes To America! posted Mon Mar 19 2007 19:52:37 by EI321
NZ Reports To The NZ Share Exchange posted Fri Feb 9 2007 04:28:07 by SunriseValley
NZ Looks To Recruit Laid Off Workers posted Tue Dec 19 2006 13:11:02 by Pilotdude09
Why Not Many BA To S. America posted Thu Nov 23 2006 14:29:14 by Amirs
NZ A320 To Cairns posted Sun Nov 19 2006 10:22:36 by 777ER
2 Pieces Allowed Only To N. America. Why? posted Fri Jun 23 2006 16:27:39 by TurkishWings
Air NZ Threat To Cut Flights posted Tue Jun 13 2006 17:17:19 by Magyarorszag