Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CX/NZ Form Alliance+Air NZ Drops HKG-LHR  
User currently offlinealitaliadc10 From Australia, joined Dec 2008, 240 posts, RR: 1
Posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1676 times:

Air NZ and Cathay Pacific will form a strategic partnership and code-sharing from March 2013.

Air NZ will drop HKG-LHR services.

More details at:

http://www.airlinehubbuzz.com/air-ne...uspend-hong-kong-heathrow-flights/


Orbis non sufficit
87 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4863 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1631 times:

Another bites the dust!

This just adds more fuel to the fire between QF/CX...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently onlineleftyboarder From Turkey, joined Apr 2008, 693 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

And another kick in the a** of alliances... A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG). The year of treason  

User currently offlineSYDSpotter From Australia, joined Oct 2012, 153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2):
And another kick in the a** of alliances... A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG). The year of treason

Are there any competition issues with the proposed alliance (the NZ-HKG portion rather than the HKG-LHR bit) given NZ and CX are the two carriers flying direct between NZ-HKG.

I thought one of the reasons why a CX/QF partnership would never get off the ground was because any proposed extensive alliance would cause massive competition issues as they are the only two flying direct b/w OZ and HKG (with the exception of VS to SYD).



319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8283 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1620 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What happens to the LHR slot at 1145 which is the arrival of the ANZ flight via HKG ?

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4863 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1626 times:

Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 3):
I thought one of the reasons why a CX/QF partnership would never get off the ground was because any proposed extensive alliance would cause massive competition issues as they are the only two flying direct b/w OZ and HKG (with the exception of VS to SYD).

The relationship between the 2 is sour full stop...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineual777uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1627 times:

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2):
A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG). The year of treason

Yes but SQ and TG are no good on the non stop from HKG to LHR. I suspect NZ was bleeding heavily on this route and this exit plan makes so much more commercial sense. I would love to know what NZ average LF was on the london route.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4):
What happens to the LHR slot at 1145 which is the arrival of the ANZ flight via HKG ?

I would love to know the answer to that as well....SFO - LHR maybe?


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8866 posts, RR: 75
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1621 times:

Quoting alitaliadc10 (Thread starter):

I know for a long time CX has been looking at other ports in the area, maybe there is more to this announcement yet to come ?

This will free up additional equipment for NZ, where will they deploy that capacity ?

Will this means a daily 747 and A340 services to AKL by CX ? Will the freighter tag on from SYD ?

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2):

QF/AF were code sharing for a long time as well on SIN-CDG.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4):

Maybe they sold it ? or using their 777s made available by this on a different route to LHR ?



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5168 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1620 times:

Wow - interesting... I knew the dropping of the LHR-HKG was on the cards, but thought they would partner with VS on the route as they do with PVG/SFO-LHR

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8866 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1621 times:

A bit more info in this article http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/790987...r-NZ-axes-Hong-Kong-London-flights

NZ government approval for the arrangement have been grated from December 2012, the change will come into effect in March 2013
ANZ capacity to redeployed to North America



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5168 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1615 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 9):
ANZ capacity to redeployed to North America

I guess this might allow the last 747 to be retired?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8283 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1626 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting zeke (Reply 7):
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4):
Maybe they sold it ? or using their 777s made available by this on a different route to LHR ?

WHY would ANZ sell it ? They need slots at Heathrow and are not in financial straits. The AKL to LHR via LAX is about 3 hours shorter then via Asia.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8866 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1620 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 11):

WHY would ANZ sell it ?

It is an asset worth money. They have indicated in the article that they are dismissing 70 LHR based crews, that is a clear indication that they will not be using that slot.

Maybe CX purchased the slot from the as part of the deal so they can accelerate the 744 retirement on the route and have no drop in ASKs. Offer ANZ a guaranteed number of seats as well as access to the network out of HKG ?

Don't know, just guessing.....



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineota1 From Germany, joined Apr 2008, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1622 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There have been rumors popping up more or less frequently that CX is not happy with oneworld anymore.Other rumors were suggesting CX was looking to jump ship to Star Alliance.
Could this alliance be the first step of their withdrawal from oneworld?


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8866 posts, RR: 75
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1621 times:

Quoting ota1 (Reply 13):

Do not know. Given the way QF is courting China Eastern, and Emirates, more likely I would think they leave oneworld, or maybe BA/TK and CX/CA will be part of Star.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineleftyboarder From Turkey, joined Apr 2008, 693 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1620 times:

Quoting ota1 (Reply 13):
There have been rumors popping up more or less frequently that CX is not happy with oneworld anymore.Other rumors were suggesting CX was looking to jump ship to Star Alliance.

CX in Star? How many SE Asian carriers does *A need anyway? I doubt SQ would like that. Or even CA for that matter.


User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4336 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1618 times:

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2):
A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG).

I disagree, none of the three carriers you mentioned offer as much cooperative benefit (and/or likelihood of regulatory approval) as Cathay Pacific.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8866 posts, RR: 75
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1617 times:

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 15):
Or even CA for that matter.

CA and CX already own around 20% of each other.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4865 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1624 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 11):
The AKL to LHR via LAX is about 3 hours shorter then via Asia.

Many NZ'ers have are unjustifiably paranoid about transiting via LAX to LHR even though it is seamless. The HKG transit is more pleasant given that the HKG terminal is much more attractive and has designated space for transit. In LAX NZ's transit passengers are confined to a transit lounge.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1623 times:

CX / HKG is unique from the rest of SE Asia is that it's (a) the southern most city that could profitably fly nonstop to North America and (b) closest to the great circle routing between SYD and LHR.

The only major partnerships CX has are JL and AA, which could easily be switched to NH and UA with minimal connectivity loss, if any. CX also code-share with LAN, but the daily hand-off is limited given the distances involved.

If Star manages to win CX over (however remote the possibility), that would be a major coup.


User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1504 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1621 times:

So one less carrier now circumnavigating the globe I assume?

User currently offlinedocpepz From Singapore, joined May 2001, 1969 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1625 times:

CX is the most natural choice for NZ. NZ fly daily into HKG, NRT and PVG.

PVG would have a problem with transit visas - plus the connections are not great, you require 4-6 hours to connect to BA, VS or MU

NRT's also not great for connections, the Air NZ flights arrive after 4pm, the LHR flights depart before noon.

HKG is the best, because CX offers 4 flights a day to LHR, and the connections to and from LHR to the NZ AKL-HKG-AKL flights are seamless.

SQ and TG are useless to NZ, because NZ does not fly to either SIN or BKK and won't be able to feed its own metal.


User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

Quoting docpepz (Reply 21):
NRT's also not great for connections

Amen to that. My xfr experiences in NRT were horrendous last week. Never again.

Quoting zeke (Reply 14):
Do not know. Given the way QF is courting China Eastern, and Emirates, more likely I would think they leave oneworld, or maybe BA/TK and CX/CA will be part of Star.

The situation is all about game-changing strategies now. The QF+EK move has essentially spurred a "domino affect" among individual network carriers, which has resulted in major alliance re-think. It's no longer about the airline planning strategic moves within the context of their respective alliance membership; rather, it's all about maximizing whatever opportunities, as they present themselves, to better position the airline to compete in the global realm.

Most interestingly, all of these structural changes are revolving around the Middle East/GCC: Australia/Asia on one side, Europe on the other. BA+Qatar+OW, AB/EY+AF-KL, QF+EK. Now, we have the distinct possibility that LH+TK may tie-up.

Some of these decisions have definitely rocked the boats, but nothing has over-turned the ships quite yet. Personally, I think this is all too natural: these alliances have added so many partner carriers over the years and not accounted for conflicts with national pride and differences in cultural/operating strategies. There will inevitably be consequences from that, with individual carriers taking actions that put their best interests at heart, and not necessarily benefiting the greater good of the whole alliance and/or strategic partners. Without question, the largest shocks will start to occur IF a major network carrier chooses to switch/ditch an alliance upon seeing diminished value in membership.



next flights: msp-phx-slc, msp-mdw, ord-sju, sju-dfw-ord, msp-dfw, dfw-phl, phl-msp, jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1113 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1626 times:

Interesting development. One by one, airlines seem to be dropping out of the Kangaroo route, at least on routings transiting via East/SE Asia.

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 15):
How many SE Asian carriers does *A need anyway?
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 19):
CX / HKG is unique from the rest of SE Asia

HKG is not part of Southeast Asia, which is why it is unique. And yes, Star Alliance does desperately need more Chinese presence especially given ST's dominance of Southern/Eastern China and the likelihood of Hainan going to OneWorld which may erode CA's dominance up north.

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 15):
I doubt SQ would like that.

But who seriously cares what SQ thinks?

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 15):
Or even CA for that matter.

CA would be more than happy to have CX in bed. Their Beijing masters would applaud too.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 19):
closest to the great circle routing between SYD and LHR.

The likes of EK has shown that it doesn't really matter that much.



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2950 posts, RR: 28
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1628 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 7):
This will free up additional equipment for NZ, where will they deploy that capacity ?
Quoting zeke (Reply 12):
It is an asset worth money. They have indicated in the article that they are dismissing 70 LHR based crews, that is a clear indication that they will not be using that slot.

NZ have been saying for some time that they will focus on the Pacific rim. ORD/IAH have been rumoured for the 789s due early in 2014 and S. America seems to be on the agenda (note that N.Z. is one of the leads for the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement).

On the other hand, LAX-LHR is NZ's most profitable international sector. If they keep the LHR slot, they might think about AKL-SFO-LHR.



Note à moi-même - il faut respecter les cons.
25 avek00 : I disagree. This year, the only carriers to embrace "unorthodox" tie-ups thus far are those for whom the existing global alliance frameworks carry li
26 IrishAyes : Economic factors are indeed the primary driving factor, but one cannot overlook some of the more subtle under linings which do indeed incur differenc
27 nicode : The only one !
28 sunrisevalley : It is difficult to see them starting any additional services to the UK from North America soon. Their 77E's need refurbishing which is not happening
29 aklrno : When NZ moves to the new TBIT building at LAX will that change the transit experience? I'll be flying AKL-LHR in about 5 months. I'd be happy to do i
30 Kaiarahi : I don't disagree. But if they let the LHR slot go, it will be extremely difficult to get back.
31 BA174 : BA would never leave OW, the AA/IB/JAL fits them perfectly. Maybe NZ will jump to OW as they mulled the idea a few years ago.
32 avek00 : I don't dispute this assertion, but I don't see the recent developments as the beginning of a larger trend, but rather the reaction of a few airlines
33 leftyboarder : Don't they (NZ) own part of DJ? Them being in the same alliance with QF would raise competition issues on Australia-NZ, right?
34 ytz : WOW. What is with all these alliances disintegrating in the Pacific?[Edited 2012-11-05 12:03:19]
35 Kaiarahi : Do you have any facts (numbers) to back this up? Last time I checked, RyanAir and EasyJet were European carriers.
36 avek00 : I'm referring only to legacy carriers with substantial longhaul operations -- Ryanair and EasyJet are irrelevant to this entire discussion.
37 NZ107 : That'll be the end of the only round-the-world service. No other airline meets up around the world (SQ comes close but the direct A345 flight goes to
38 IrishAyes : Good point. And it does bring into play the larger, global dilemma: for however much US airlines have diluted their overall product, they seem to be
39 sunrisevalley : Agreed ! Are they allows to rent it out?
40 NZ107 : What sort of time would a flight have to leave YVR/SFO/LAX in order for that slot to be used?
41 sunrisevalley : I would say about 1425 PST . Typical timetable time is 10hr 20min.
42 PA515 : That should be 1445. LAX-LHR arrives 1045, or 1115 Northern Summer 2013. ANZ35 HKG-LHR is 0905/1445, was going to be 1000/1615 Northern Summer 2013.
43 Kaiarahi : So maybe an exchange with CX, if they have a suitable slot.
44 NZ107 : But surely there'd be no harm in staying a couple of extra hours in LAX/SFO/YVR? ie make a flight depart AKL for the West Coast at midnight.. As some
45 Post contains links 777ER : Another article about NZs axing of LHR-HKG. Article talks about more deals by NZ in regards to codeshares http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...ore-A
46 Jetstar315 : It seems strange to me that Air NZ didn't come to a code-share arrangement with Virgin Atlantic HKG-LHR. After all, NZ is very involved with Virgin Au
47 xiaotung : I don't really think this arrangement is about London. I think it's all to do with Mainland China and a direct response to CZ. With the forever expan
48 aerorobnz : - There will be no onward AKL-Xxx-LHR extension flights to replace it - NZ will continue to find partners which suit it best regardless of alliance -
49 NZ107 : Axing the HKG-LHR sector alone would only free up one 772, right? And if it's not for HNL services year round, I suppose EZE falls into the scope?
50 NZ1 : Both 744's are likely to remain until March 2015 at this stage. The capacity is needed while the 77E is going through the upgrade program. In regards
51 huaiwei : I would love to agree with you...but only if my fellow Asians flock to American carriers when flying to the US, and even on intra-Asian routes instea
52 cx flyboy : Apparently there are still LHR slots availaible at the moment and if an airline wants one, they can get one. CX isn't launching more LHR flights right
53 neveragain : What transit lounge? NZ is a Visa Waiver Program country. The connecting passengers from AKL to LHR spend their time just like connecting passengers
54 Lutfi : Indian airlines have been given 5th freedom rights from PRC. And Taiwan give out lots of 5th freedom flights, as does HK (both part of China....)
55 IndianicWorld : Some things just never make sense. I fully agree that it would have likely been an option that aligned with its JA partnership, but I guess CX appear
56 aerorobnz : Maybe not in only the terms of HKG-LHR flights, but given that the JV will likely end up including all of China, some of India and places like MNL/TP
57 aklrno : I'm always doing a connection to or from a domestic flight when I'm at LAX T2, but I do see a transit lounge for NZ 1/2 passengers near where the 777
58 ZK-NBT : I guess this news isn't to surprising really, it is sad though but a sign of the times. I'd imagine 772s year round to HNL aswell with this additional
59 deconz : That is EXACTLY what happens!!! Once they have completed arrival documentation, waiting in a queue that sometimes extends back into the airbridge, fi
60 koruman : Is this a joke post? Air NZ passengers from London to Auckland and vice versa most definitely DO spend 2 hours in a transit pen at T2. They go throug
61 sunrisevalley : If true, a most compelling reason to institute US pre-clearance in AKL. I have sounded off on this before . NZ should welcome it but it would be up t
62 cslusarc : I would rather see NZ extend AKL - YVR to LHR or launch AKL - HNL - LHR. By routing over YVR, NZ could save fuel by traveling about 190 miles less tha
63 neveragain : No, I seriously had no idea. Is it really a requirement? Why wouldn't the flight be treated as a traditional international-international connection?
64 NZ107 : Think about the layout of the terminals at LAX (excluding TBIT); actually probably most US airports' domestic terminals which also house internationa
65 neveragain : But if you've been through passport control, what does it matter? It's just like someone flying LHR-IAH-MEX on UA, with the only difference being tha
66 koruman : That would work if Customs and Immigration were properly staffed, but unfortunately nowadays the last ten times I have arrived at T2 on Air NZ I have
67 neveragain : So the transit lounge arrangement is not mandatory? Also if you have to go through immigration, the only additional step would be Customs, no? I thin
68 Kaiarahi : That would be ideal, but the likelihood of persuading U.S. CBP to post staff in AKL for 4-5 flights per day (LAX, SFO, HNL) is minimal.
69 sunrisevalley : My rationale for this suggestion is that it was reported that Porter by adding addition flights at Toronto Island to the U.S.expected to reach the 40
70 neveragain : Close, but no. I think you may be thinking of a 2-way (enplaned and deplaned) number. Enplaned passengers for 2011, on all airlines: HNL: 23,466 LAX:
71 sunrisevalley : Thanks for this. Close but no cigar ! I guess these numbers include Australian passengers who are transiting in AKL.
72 neveragain : Yes, any passenger onboard leaving AKL on a route to the U.S.
73 aerorobnz : I don't think there is any doubt that with extra frequencies coming that 400000 is not far away for AKL. It would only take JQ to start with a 787 or
74 neveragain : I would agree that it's within "firing distance." What I don't know is for how long that figure must be maintained (I would assume more than one year
75 koruman : No, pre-clearance would also provide a massive competitive advantage for the Australia-USA routes. The AKL stop would be like BA's Shannon stop betwee
76 jfk777 : Are there 5 flights from Shannon to the USA daily ? Aer Lingus one each to Boston and JFK, then what ? close to 5 maybe 6 or 7 but not 10 or 20.
77 sunrisevalley : Then NZ have 5 77W probably none of which they would need. In fact based on present frequency the 77E would suffice and the 789 when it follows. In m
78 lightsaber : Any update on the LHR slots? I read through and it looks like NZ won't use them, but who will? I hope they lease them out rather than sell them (just
79 Kaiarahi : According to the BCP, upwards of 900,000 pax are pre-cleared annually at DUB. I couldn't find any numbers for SNN, but it also offers pre-clearance f
80 neveragain : According to DoT (T100), approximately 730k passengers enplaned from DUB on flights to U.S. airports in 2011. JFK was the busiest destination, with a
81 Viscount724 : Only the earliest of the two BA LCY-JFK flights now pre-clears at SNN. Due to cut backs in the opening hours of SNN pre-clearance facility last month
82 neveragain : BTW, passengers enplaned on these flights would not be included in the 165k number quoted above. But with fewer than 40 seats, that's not going to ge
83 cofannyc : I understand the 400k threshold as being a guideline for CBP to open a new station (for example, in a Canadian airport), not their guideline for keep
84 neveragain : SNN was over 400k enplaned passengers to the U.S. in each year only up until 2007. So the only way I can explain it is that either the application wa
85 cchan : IMHO, this signals the demise of AKL-HKG for NZ, and I would expect a gradual take over of this route by CX metal. This deal benefits CX a lot more t
86 Post contains links mariner : Maybe. But I think it is one of the smartest things Air NZ has done in a while. The CAPA article pretty much expresses my view: http://centreforaviat
87 ZKOJH : I can't see how this with improve the goal of NZ turning the long haul market round, all there doing is using the extra aircraft to increase LAX and h
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...
NZ A380 AKL-HKG-LHR posted Sun Jun 9 2002 01:19:16 by ETA Unknown
QF/NZ: Doing Well On The HKG-LHR Run? posted Sat Aug 4 2007 06:24:20 by United Airline
NZ 5th Freedom Rights HKG - LHR? posted Fri Aug 29 2003 06:19:10 by Motorhussy
Air NZ AKL HKG LHR posted Wed Aug 6 2003 11:44:31 by Drew172
Air NZ Earns Rights For HKG-LHR posted Mon May 21 2001 22:47:38 by Johnnybgoode
NZ 744 Stuck At LHR - Photo's posted Sun Dec 19 2010 17:16:38 by NZ1
CX's Proposed HKG-LHR-JFK Route posted Fri Dec 12 2008 18:31:11 by United Airline
NZ 744 IN HKG posted Sat Aug 12 2006 06:33:30 by TG992
CX A346 HKG-LHR posted Fri Mar 31 2006 09:55:35 by Carlcowkau
Air NZ Business Class AKL-LHR posted Mon Mar 20 2006 10:25:25 by Ants