Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will United Go To AKL Anyway?  
User currently offlinecosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 427 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10081 times:

Hi, Long time reader, first time poster.

I know with the merger and the IAH scuffle that United says they won't start IAH-AKL, (despite still showing it as a future route on their July route map.) but does any United insider know if there are any potential plans to start AKL from LAX or SFO? 787's are coming soon, and I hope it means more new routes than just DEN-NRT.

I know pmUA flew to AKL in the past, and it didn't last, but a 787 might be a lot more profitable on a route like this than the 744's they used to fly on that route. My wife and I were planning to go to New Zealand next August, so we have to book with our miles in the next month or so to ensure Business Class. I would really like to fly a 787 in pmCO's J than a 744 to SYD, which I have flown before, and its several hours out of the way and extra customs each way. (Side question, can you change planes in SYD without going through Australian Customs?)

Any insight anyone has, or just wishful thinking, would be welcome. Thanks!

45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10041 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
despite still showing it as a future route on their July route map

It is being removed from the August distribution.

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
so we have to book with our miles in the next month or so to ensure Business Class.

Unfortunately, you cannot book the direct flight on NZ with miles through UA. But you can, as you mentioned, book through SYD on UA then SYD-AKL on NZ.


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10039 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
(despite still showing it as a future route on their July route map.)

I noticed that too and that makes me think it isn't totally dead... I believe there is a chance we will still see IAH-AKL. I would be curious to know how many cities are served on UA via IAH that aren't served via SFO and LAX, I would imagine quite a few...


User currently onlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9819 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9940 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 1):

Unfortunately, you cannot book the direct flight on NZ with miles through UA. But you can, as you mentioned, book through SYD on UA then SYD-AKL on NZ.

When did that change? Availability can be tight, but with both UA and NZ as star alliance partners, I didn’t know there was an embargo on North America routes for miles redemption. NZ flights don’t show when you try to book online through the UA’s website, but I didn’t realize they won’t sell them at all.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9816 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):
When did that change? Availability can be tight, but with both UA and NZ as star alliance partners, I didn’t know there was an embargo on North America routes for miles redemption. NZ flights don’t show when you try to book online through the UA’s website, but I didn’t realize they won’t sell them at all.

I went in and searched award tickets LAX-AKL and it only came up with the connection through SYD. But if you search by price (non-award) and click Non-Stop only, then it will give you the option to book the direct LAX-AKL on NZ.


User currently offlinenyc2theworld From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9775 times:

While the new UA site is good I would suggest you search another site that caters to frequent travelers on how to search StarNet. ANA is a good membership to have in order to search *Net.


Always wonderers if this "last and final boarding call" is in fact THE last and final boarding call.
User currently offlinest530 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 139 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 9759 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 1):
It is being removed from the August distribution.


Is it also being removed from the web site route map, where it still shows as a future route more than a month after UA's hissy fit over the SW approval?


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1764 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 9561 times:

Quoting United787 (Reply 2):
I would be curious to know how many cities are served on UA via IAH that aren't served via SFO and LAX, I would imagine quite a few...

Sure, but how many with any significant demand to/from New Zealand or Australia? Most of those cities served by IAH and not SFO/LAX are going to be secondary markets, many of them in Mexico. Even from those, a lot of the demand is going to be tourists looking to go to Sydney who would either have to double connect XXX-HUB-SFO/LAX-SYD or XXX-IAH-AKL-SYD.


User currently offlinePA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 9448 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
Any insight

The NZ/UA codeshare agreement could have some relevance. The full details of the agreement were not disclosed, but altering or ending the agreement could have consequences neither party wants at this time.

Prior to the codeshare NZ and UA competed on AKL-LAX and SYD-LAX and some NZ services included a LAX-HNL sector. Under the codeshare agreement UA ceased AKL-LAX and NZ ceased SYD-LAX and LAX-HNL.

NZ now owns 20% of VA, but does not codeshare on any VA AUS-USA services.

IAH-AKL was announced by CO before the merger with UA. Postmerger the NZ/UA codeshare agreement would apply.

PA515


User currently offlinecivetfive From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 127 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9225 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 4):

thats because you can't book that online, but it doesn't mean it wasn't available as a Star Alliance Award. Online booking of awards is UA metal + a few partners; everything else requires a phone call.


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 9188 times:

Quoting civetfive (Reply 9):
everything else requires a phone cal

Don't they charge a fee for telephone reservations?


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 9143 times:

Quoting civetfive (Reply 9):
Online booking of awards is UA metal + a few partners; everything else requires a phone call.

More than just a "few". Other than the panic band-aid fix that blocks any SQ from showing and a certain bug that prevent nonstop NH from showing (they show up fine as the 2nd leg of a connection), nearly all non-embargo'ed flights from Star Alliance show up properly on the website.

Even QR, a non-star-alliance ex-partner, shows up bookable on the website. Phone calls are rare unless you're trying to stitch together a frankenstein more complex than the web engine could handle.


User currently offlinemd3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 8928 times:

There is no award embargo on NZ flights using United miles.

Having the ability to show partner inventory is very different than accurately producing true inventory for all the partners set up to run through the UA booking engine. Just compare with the results from SkyWeb, and you'll see UA.com results are less than 100% of what's actually available. Some award search engines are just better than others, whether it's programming or something else, I don't know.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 8903 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
I know pmUA flew to AKL in the past, and it didn't last, but a 787 might be a lot more profitable on a route like this than the 744's they used to fly on that route.

UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6733 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 8788 times:

Quoting md3 (Reply 12):
Having the ability to show partner inventory is very different than accurately producing true inventory for all the partners set up to run through the UA booking engine. Just compare with the results from SkyWeb, and you'll see UA.com results are less than 100% of what's actually available. Some award search engines are just better than others, whether it's programming or something else, I don't know.

You can easily find Y availability on NZ via the UA booking engine. However, getting J availability is a different story. NZ rarely releases it for UA and when they do it's often at the last minute. Hence, getting to AKL in J using UA miles is difficult....many are forced to fly UA to SYD, then make the hop over to AKL.


User currently offlinethegoldenargosy From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 8387 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003.

UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747.


User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3335 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6309 times:

Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003.

UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747.

But what I think that demonstrates is that even with a smaller more efficient aircraft, UA couldn't get the LAX-AKL route to work for it and chose to codeshare with its alliance partner NZ instead. oneworld too have now bowed out of this market and staralliance, via NZ, enjoy a monopoly position which will change, to some degree, when HA enters the market next March (initially with 763's).



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6101 times:

Keep in mind, a large portion of the United issue with AKL prior was the large cadre of staff it had at the station inherited from Pan Am.

As I recall the count was almost 75 counting the airport staff, city office, admin, cargo, reservations etc.

Quite costly venture to support on a single daily flight.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5359 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5733 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17):
As I recall the count was almost 75 counting the airport staff, city office, admin, cargo, reservations etc.

96

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 16):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003.

UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747.

But what I think that demonstrates is that even with a smaller more efficient aircraft, UA couldn't get the LAX-AKL route to work for it and chose to codeshare with its alliance partner NZ instead

Well it worked for 17 years and as I understood they did ok most of the time, when backrupcy and 9/11 hit they needed to rejig and AKL with 96 staff for 1 daily flight had to go when they could codeshare with NZ who inturn cut SYD-LAX.

Its hard to say weather they will try AKL from LAX/SFO I think not myself, but hope i'm wrong.


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 18):
Its hard to say weather they will try AKL from LAX/SFO I think not myself, but hope i'm wrong

Why would they with NZ doing a nice job for *A customers, that's quite a long route to the fly, just to compete with your own partner carrier on, I think NZ provides enough lift for the market, and TN, HA can fill the difference.



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinequiet1 From Thailand, joined Apr 2010, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5348 times:

If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no?

User currently offlinetraindoc From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5319 times:

NZ's CEO has said publicly that they are "looking" at flying AKL-IAH-AKL, since UA was dropping the route before it ever got started. The route could well work, just as QF has had success with SYD-DFW.

User currently offlineZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5359 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5175 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20):
If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no?

It was in the contracts that people couldn't be layed off since many of them at AKL were from the PA days at AKL whom UA brought the route from along with there other Pacific routes in 1986.

There is an article floating around saying UA may increase Australia services with 787s and it mentions in there that they are still looking or considering AKL from somewhere. I'm not sure where it originated or on a link though.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5093 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20):
If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no?

In essence the only way to get rid of the people contractually and within local regulations was to close the station.

Same with some other UA stations - for example SAL and GUA had similar ex Pan Am staffing issues which contributed to them getting shut also.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinespink From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 319 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5075 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20):
If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no?

There may of been various union issues that made it complicated to layoff people at that station. It was probably a lot less complicated to partner with NZ and just shutdown their station.


User currently offlinequiet1 From Thailand, joined Apr 2010, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5059 times:

And, if UA re-starts service to AKL (on UA metal), are they free from the PA contractual shackles so they could now staff the station at appropriate levels and/or sub-contract operations to a third party?

User currently offlineicanfly From Australia, joined Aug 2011, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4964 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
(Side question, can you change planes in SYD without going through Australian Customs?)

Yes. You just need to follow the signs for an international transfer, put your bags through the scanner and head to the gate. You don't pass through Australian immigration or customs. The transfer procedure to AKL is the same as if you were heading to MEL on UA.



United: please start SYD-IAH!
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 27, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4752 times:

I am hoping that sUA will reconsider and eventually go to AKL.....from DEN with the 787......    Here is to hoping!


A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently onlineAVENSAB727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 975 posts, RR: 1
Reply 28, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4691 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 27):

Maybe, but it depends on the marker, there was a small market for IAH-AKL.



Always look on the bright side of Life!
User currently offlinePA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4604 times:

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 22):
Quoting quiet1 (Reply 20):
If having 96 people on the payroll was too expensive for one daily flight, why not lay off or terminate some of those employees? In the end, by canceling that flight, they all got the axe anyway when the station closed, no?

It was in the contracts that people couldn't be layed off since many of them at AKL were from the PA days at AKL whom UA brought the route from along with there other Pacific routes in 1986.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 23):
In essence the only way to get rid of the people contractually and within local regulations was to close the station.
Quoting spink (Reply 24):
There may of been various union issues that made it complicated to layoff people at that station. It was probably a lot less complicated to partner with NZ and just shutdown their station.

Union issues were not the reason UA ceased AKL-LAX. The non management staff were paid redundancy according to length of service in accordance with the union contract.

UA could have contracted ground handling to Air NZ and just maintained a small sales and management presence. I believe the extent of the NZ/UA codeshare agreement was the reason.

PA515


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4547 times:

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
Any insight anyone has, or just wishful thinking, would be welcome. Thanks!

Is it worth it? LAX-SYD-AKL just to use miles. If you flew NZ LAX-AKL you'd save 6+ hours of travelling and get some extra miles. Avoiding UA's 744 service is a good thing too.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 8):
Prior to the codeshare NZ and UA competed on AKL-LAX and SYD-LAX and some NZ services included a LAX-HNL sector. Under the codeshare agreement UA ceased AKL-LAX and NZ ceased SYD-LAX and LAX-HNL.

Isn't that illegal collusion? Or did I mistake you.

[Edited 2012-07-29 17:32:57]

User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 31, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4519 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 30):
uoting PA515 (Reply 8):
Prior to the codeshare NZ and UA competed on AKL-LAX and SYD-LAX and some NZ services included a LAX-HNL sector. Under the codeshare agreement UA ceased AKL-LAX and NZ ceased SYD-LAX and LAX-HNL.

Isn't that illegal collusion? Or did I mistake you.

UA and NZ have ATI...they can coordinate pricing, routes and schedules with no issue.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 32, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4316 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 31):
UA and NZ have ATI...they can coordinate pricing, routes and schedules with no issue.

The ATI which commenced in 2001 has carve outs.

For example both LAX-AKL and LAX-SYD are both carve out markets where the carriers may not coordinate on.

[Edited 2012-07-29 22:19:57]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8505 posts, RR: 6
Reply 33, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4089 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 25):
And, if UA re-starts service to AKL (on UA metal), are they free from the PA contractual shackles so they could now staff the station at appropriate levels and/or sub-contract operations to a third party?

Its been over 25 years since United took over the PA Asian routes, what contracts are you referring to ? Whatever contracts PA had in force in NZ in 1986 when they sold to UA had to have expired by now.

Does NZ have onerous employee termnation costs like TWA and AA has been trashed with in the Israel press ? That is why AA does NOT fly to Israel. TWA's former employees in TLV were owed lots of money by TWA when that airline closed its doors.


User currently offlinecosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 427 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3802 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 30):
Is it worth it? LAX-SYD-AKL just to use miles. If you flew NZ LAX-AKL you'd save 6+ hours of travelling and get some extra miles. Avoiding UA's 744 service is a good thing too.

Yes, it is definately worth it. I would love to fly UA's 747 either in the nose or upstairs, unless 787 is an option to try it out. I also wouldn't mind trying out Air New Zealand's Business Class on a short route. Most importantly, our last trip to New Zealand was on QANTAS, through the old Continental partnership. Business Class for 2 people was 210k miles, not much more than Europe, but we priced those tickets at $36,000 (US)!! My company was not footing the bill. I don't have the money to spend more than my car is worth on a couple of plane tickets.


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3755 times:

Cuts down your options of NZ flights if you must have business - they only offer it on a wide body. I get $US4652 per person per direction for LAX-AKL, but still not cheap.

It doesn't sound right that you can't use miles for travel with NZ. But if you'd rather do that, each to their own.


User currently onlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3335 posts, RR: 9
Reply 36, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3694 times:

Quoting AVENSAB727 (Reply 28):
Maybe, but it depends on the marker, there was a small market for IAH-AKL.

The market of UA's feed from the South (including Houston), the East Coast and the Mid-West is not insignificant. Not forgetting that AKL is a gateway to both New Zealand and Australia.

BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 37, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3540 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36):
BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves.

I would doubt it. IAH-SYD is nearly 1k miles further at 8596mi on GCmap. You could see it running SFO-SYD as a second daily perhaps during high season, but I'd say you'll probably see some of the other SFO/LAX routes to Asia getting them first, as well as probably some IAH-Europe perhaps.


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 3
Reply 38, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

Just in case anyone didn't believe me before, AKL is now removed from the route map in Hemispheres:

http://www.ink-live.com/emagazines/h...ted-airlines/1153/jul-2012//#/132/


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1833 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3487 times:

What routes will the NZ 789s fly? These frames will have more range than the 788s.

User currently offlinespink From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 319 posts, RR: 1
Reply 40, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3464 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36):
BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves.

depends on what the official range ends up being. Right now is quoting 7650-8200 on their website. The GC route is roughly 7500 nmi, so the 7650 range probably doesn't cut it, the 8200 range however does. IAH-SYD would be one of the longest routes in service if someone did it. It is basically the same distance as LAX-SIN which SG has to use a ULH 345 for.


User currently offlineJoeljack From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3472 times:

Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15):
UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747.

I flew SYD-AKL in about 1990, it was a 747-400 and my family of 4 were the only ones in the upper deck, it was awesome!! We then flew AKL-HNL a week later, that was on a 747SP I believe and that flight was pretty full.

On a side note, we arrived HNL and we were placed in a huge room without food and held there for customs processing. We literally spent 8-10 hours in this room waiting for customs with several thousand other people, extremely hot, crowded, so crowded you couldn't even find a place to sit on the floor...it was the worst customs experience of my life by far!!! I will NEVER enter via HNL ever again!


User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5220 posts, RR: 5
Reply 42, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3300 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 36):
BTW, does the 788 have the legs for IAH-SYD return year round? There's always this option if NZ initiate the AKL-IAH route themselves.

I saw a flight plan from that put the airways distance at ~ 7500nm and a flight time at 16hr 09m. That is an ESAD of ~ 7800nm. A 789 should be able to do it with a bit over 30t of payload which if set up for 280-passengers would be max. passenger plus a bit. SYD can present problems with the need for more than usual diversion fuel reserves from time to time.

Quoting sweair (Reply 39):
What routes will the NZ 789s fly?

It is expected that they will be introduced on the Asian routes with ~ 300 seats replacing the 77E and the 763. There had been mention of a 250-seater version which may be a possibility for long haul.


User currently offlinePA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 924 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3257 times:

Quoting thegoldenargosy (Reply 15):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
UA was using the 772 on LAX-AKL, not the 744, when they dropped the route in March 2003.

UA used the 747 to AKL from 1986 when they started AKL to at least 2001 or 2002. The majority of the time AKL was served it was a 747.

The 744 flights were LAX-AKL-MEL, so had LAX-AKL and LAX-MEL pax. The 772 flights were LAX-AKL only.

PA515


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 44, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

Quoting Joeljack (Reply 41):
On a side note, we arrived HNL and we were placed in a huge room without food and held there for customs processing. We literally spent 8-10 hours in this room waiting for customs with several thousand other people, extremely hot, crowded, so crowded you couldn't even find a place to sit on the floor...it was the worst customs experience of my life by far!!! I will NEVER enter via HNL ever again!

Wow what a horrible experience, it's been a while 93 or 94, but my experience going through customs in HNL during the mid morning arrival bank from Asia, I breezed through in less than 30 minutes, and there were at least 5 other planes that came in just before or after our OZ 763. Maybe your arrival time had a lot to do with it, like at a time customs was closed, after all everything in Hawaii operates on Island time, except the fine folks at HA, where they are almost always on time.
 



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently onlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3335 posts, RR: 9
Reply 45, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 39):
What routes will the NZ 789s fly?
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 42):
It is expected that they will be introduced on the Asian routes with ~ 300 seats replacing the 77E and the 763. There had been mention of a 250-seater version which may be a possibility for long haul.

It's expected the long-haul configured version will take over AKL-YVR from the current 77E. I'm sure they'll also be analysing closely the potential for new North America AKL-IAH, South America AKL-GRU, AKL-EZE or AKL-EZE-GRU routes. Will AKL-HKG-LHR and AKL-SFO also get the new long-haul configured 789's?



come visit the south pacific
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...
Will Airlines Go To Bare Fuselages? posted Sat May 24 2008 19:37:35 by JetSetter629
Will JetBlue Go To Canada? posted Fri Jun 30 2006 05:04:48 by Noise
ZS-SPC.... Will It Go To Rand Or Not? posted Thu Mar 2 2006 14:46:17 by N754PR
Will Jetblue Go To Cancun? posted Fri Dec 9 2005 18:22:48 by Bigdrewfl
Which UK Airports Will LCC's Go To Next? posted Wed Jan 28 2004 21:20:35 by Capital146
United Back To AKL posted Thu Aug 28 2003 11:39:07 by Duff
Will BA Fly To AKL,BNE,ADE,PERTH Again posted Wed Mar 7 2001 10:52:28 by ZK-NBT
What Will United Fly To Hawaii? posted Sun Sep 10 2000 01:09:08 by Saluki777
Boeing Completes 1,000th 777, Will Go To Emirates posted Sat Mar 3 2012 11:31:04 by gothamspotter
Will QF's Soon-to-go Routes Be Back Again One Day? posted Sat Oct 8 2011 10:49:22 by United Airline