789 on Singapore route
Apr 15, 2015, 4:46 pm
#16
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: New Zealand
Programs: NZ Elite, QF Platinum (LTS), VA Platinum
Posts: 1,672
I wonder if one of the 777 flies the IAH route then the 789 will take over a slightly lower loaded route to LAX in the future. Or even take out the 767 that flies AKL - HNL and replace with a 789 to go AKL - HNL - LAX. Wishful thinking.
Apr 15, 2015, 5:33 pm
#18
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QFWP (LTSG), NZ (Jade), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,669
They have historically done AKL-HNL-LAX before.
Foreign airlines can do this but are not alowed to pick up domestic passengers eg. HNL-LAX, they must have an international fare.
IIRC the flight was timed with the NZ1/2 to allow UK passengers to use this service to/from HNL.
Foreign airlines can do this but are not alowed to pick up domestic passengers eg. HNL-LAX, they must have an international fare.
IIRC the flight was timed with the NZ1/2 to allow UK passengers to use this service to/from HNL.
Apr 15, 2015, 5:46 pm
#19
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: QF LTG, VASG, NZ*S, OZD, IHG SpireAMB, HHD
Posts: 1,421
They have historically done AKL-HNL-LAX before.
Foreign airlines can do this but are not alowed to pick up domestic passengers eg. HNL-LAX, they must have an international fare.
IIRC the flight was timed with the NZ1/2 to allow UK passengers to use this service to/from HNL.
Foreign airlines can do this but are not alowed to pick up domestic passengers eg. HNL-LAX, they must have an international fare.
IIRC the flight was timed with the NZ1/2 to allow UK passengers to use this service to/from HNL.
I can't see the US granting such now as it effectively deprives the US3 from a portion of passengers travelling between HNL-LAX, despite them being foreigners. For example, currently UK residents on NZ1 would have to pick up a US3 flight from LAX to HNL - under the scenario above they could miss out on that revenue.
Apr 16, 2015, 6:44 am
#20
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: milesdownunder.com
Posts: 94
It does seem odd to be operating an aircraft with so few premium seats to IAH so perhaps you are right.
Apr 16, 2015, 1:05 pm
#21
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: NZ Koru
Posts: 6,415
Apr 16, 2015, 7:02 pm
#22
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QFWP (LTSG), NZ (Jade), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,669
Yes, but that was back in the olden days when all SWP flights had to stop somewhere in the Pacific to get to LAX.
I can't see the US granting such now as it effectively deprives the US3 from a portion of passengers travelling between HNL-LAX, despite them being foreigners. For example, currently UK residents on NZ1 would have to pick up a US3 flight from LAX to HNL - under the scenario above they could miss out on that revenue.
I can't see the US granting such now as it effectively deprives the US3 from a portion of passengers travelling between HNL-LAX, despite them being foreigners. For example, currently UK residents on NZ1 would have to pick up a US3 flight from LAX to HNL - under the scenario above they could miss out on that revenue.
The rights exist as NZ and US are signatories to MALIAT, refer to Article 2.
Apr 17, 2015, 4:50 am
#23
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: QF LTG, VASG, NZ*S, OZD, IHG SpireAMB, HHD
Posts: 1,421
No NZ1/2 was operated by 747-400 this was NZ9/10 IIRC operated by the 767.
The rights exist as NZ and US are signatories to MALIAT, refer to Article 2.
The rights exist as NZ and US are signatories to MALIAT, refer to Article 2.
Apr 17, 2015, 6:09 pm
#24
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: milesdownunder.com
Posts: 94
Apr 17, 2015, 9:51 pm
#26
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Usually Auckland, NZ
Programs: NZ Elite (*G), QF S (OWR), UA 0.14MM
Posts: 690
787-9: J = 18 ; PE = 21 ; Y = 263 ; Total = 302
772 (old): J = 26 ; PE = 36 ; Y = 242 ; Total = 304
77R (Refit 772): J = 26 ; PE = 40 ; Y = 246 ; Total = 312
773: J = 44 ; PE = 44 ; Y = 244 ; Total = 332
One could say the 789 and 772/77R are "somewhat interchangeable" to adjust for seasonal changes in loadings, by sacrificing seats in the premium cabins (around 40% less).
772 (old): J = 26 ; PE = 36 ; Y = 242 ; Total = 304
77R (Refit 772): J = 26 ; PE = 40 ; Y = 246 ; Total = 312
773: J = 44 ; PE = 44 ; Y = 244 ; Total = 332
One could say the 789 and 772/77R are "somewhat interchangeable" to adjust for seasonal changes in loadings, by sacrificing seats in the premium cabins (around 40% less).
Apr 17, 2015, 10:13 pm
#27
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Auckland NZ
Programs: NZ Gold Elite, AS, AC, QF
Posts: 748
But this only allowed for either through travel (on direct but not non-stop service) or stopover travel. NZ couldn't sell HNL LAX as a stand-alone fare to any pax.
They also had the painful LAX HNL RAR flight once a week. That was milk run, but at least in Y class you were almost guaranteed 3 or 4 seats to yourself for stretching out.
They also had the painful LAX HNL RAR flight once a week. That was milk run, but at least in Y class you were almost guaranteed 3 or 4 seats to yourself for stretching out.
No NZ1/2 was operated by 747-400 this was NZ9/10 IIRC operated by the 767.
The rights exist as NZ and US are signatories to MALIAT, refer to Article 2.
The rights exist as NZ and US are signatories to MALIAT, refer to Article 2.
Apr 23, 2015, 4:08 pm
#30
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: Air NZ Elite *G, Honors Gold, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 6,119
I wonder what BP loadings are like to Fiji and how many seats are actually revenue earning? Many seats to suit leisure destinations are often just people flying on upgrades, so swapping out the aircraft type is unlikely to impact revenue in any way.