Air New Zealand Air Points - AKL-HKG-LHR confirmed - open for sale now

Flights commence Oct 28 using 744. Flight number is, unsurprisingly, NZ88.

Air New Zealand announces second London service via Asia

Air New Zealand today announced plans to launch a second daily service between Auckland and London flying via Hong Kong to London Heathrow Airport.

Commencing on 28 October 2006, the second service doubles Air New Zealand’s current capacity between New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

“Demand for travel between the United Kingdom and New Zealand has grown significantly since we first launched a daily service in 1998, with annual arrivals to New Zealand increasing by more than 10 percent on average,” said Air New Zealand Group General Manager International Airlines, Ed Sims.

“Over this time we have invested heavily to promote New Zealand as a destination, and this year, we will be increasing our current advertising and promotional spend by 50 percent in the United Kingdom and Europe markets to ensure we drive further growth,” he said.

“The additional capacity will leave us better placed to take advantage of the demand we have created, especially during peak seasons when our flights are 90 to 100 percent full. More excitingly, we can stimulate new demand with higher frequency and new routing options, including the world’s only current round-the-world service on one airline.

“We will also be the only Star Alliance carrier to operate between Hong Kong and London, which is fantastic news for our Star partners and customers,” said Mr Sims.

Air New Zealand will operate the route utilising newly refurbished Boeing 747-400 aircraft. The 393-seat aircraft includes 46 lie-flat Business Premier seats, 23 Pacific Premium Economy seats and 324 seats in Pacific Economy.

Mr Sims said Air New Zealand’s research has found New Zealanders prefer to fly their national carrier to and from United Kingdom.

“Kiwis have recognised that one of the world’s longest journeys is more enjoyable on our new long-haul service featuring lie-flat beds in Business Premier, extra comfort and legroom in Pacific Premium Economy, and on-demand digital video entertainment and more personal space in every seat,” he said.

Air New Zealand will operate the following schedule, subject to timeslot, capacity and regulatory approvals:

Flight No. Schedule Flight Time
NZ88 Departs AKL 2359
Arrives HKG 0615+1 11:16
Departs HKG 0815
Arrives LHR 1330+1 13:15

NZ87 Departs LHR 2115
Arrives HKG 1700+1 11:45
Departs HKG 1900
Arrives AKL 1045+1 10:45

“These arrival and departure times offer favourable connectivity at Hong Kong and Heathrow airports. The transit time of two hours in Hong Kong is equivalent to our Los Angeles stopover, and is one of the shortest for travel between London and Auckland,” said Mr Sims.

Sales for the second United Kingdom service are available from today. Return economy class airfares from Auckland to London start from $2615 excluding airport taxes.

Excellent news, and its nice the schedule isnt too similar to NZ1 and NZ2 thus offering choice and convenience.

Strictly this statement is incorrect - SQ flies to New York over both Pacific (nonstop) and Atlantic (via FRA).

the world’s only current round-the-world service on one airline.

Mustnt be properly loaded on the NZ website yet. I see NZ39 AKL-HKG-LHR but nothing coming back. Edited to add "unable to price" error message.

That's great news.

I wonder if Air NZ will experience any drop in their load factors on the LAX route - I know that I for one would much rather transit via HK, particularly givent the proposed flight times !

As predicted here first @:-)

Just one point, AFAIK the flight numbers will be NZ38 and 39 (NZ3 and 4 would have had a much nicer ring to it)

Now the real question is - will NZ be building their own lounge in HKG ?

The 'NZ38/39' flight numbers in the system are I believe placeholders, as NZ88/87 was originally allocated to the TPE route, and is no doubt still floating around in the uploaded CRS data/programming somewhere. I guess it will be changed to NZ88 prior to the first service.

'8' is of course considered a fortuitous number in Asian culture (particularly Chinese) so NZ88 was chosen for a reason! (the number of '8's in airline flight numbers operating to Asian countries is staggering :D)

Further to that 4 is bad (and 3 is also a good number).

The 'NZ38/39' flight numbers in the system are I believe placeholders, as NZ88/87 was originally allocated to the TPE route, and is no doubt still floating around in the uploaded CRS data/programming somewhere. I guess it will be changed to NZ88 prior to the first service.I love the efficiency of that :rolleyes:

Seems that there will be some more crew based at LHR, and that the historically underfilled AKLHKG NZ85/86 will be upgraded to 772 on the 1st of July and then removed when this new service has begins.

Here's hoping to NZ lounges at both LHR and HKG @:-)

Must you be so negative all the time? :(

Must you be so negative all the time? :(A few successive posts which have comment's on where NZ have fallen behind (due to management decisions) is being negative all the time ?

A more "positive" view can be found in my 30 page trip report in the trip reports forum, or upon production of thread's about the airline answering call's promptly, the Koru Club staff, Gold Airpoints Koru Club Review prize draws, cabin service and the like.

You will not find me however be positive about things which one couldn't be positive about - such as waiting 30 minutes for domestic "priority" luggage in AKL

That is a really good route for me!! I can stop in Hong Kong on my way to London and still with StarAlliance..

The only problem is the airfare is shocking!!! The Air NZ website has the price
Total Taxes NZD 424.71
Total Airfare (including taxes) NZD 2723.71

That is a lot money compared with other airlines. Last year I paid $2200 for a return flights to LHR via Hong Kong with CX. Are there gonna be people willing to pay 2723.71 for a return flight to LHR?
:rolleyes:

For those who doesn't care getting airpoints, or quickest route but only airfare, will they fly with AIRNZ new route to LHR?

That is a really good route for me!! I can stop in Hong Kong on my way to London and still with StarAlliance..

The only problem is the airfare is shocking!!! The Air NZ website has the price
Total Taxes NZD 424.71
Total Airfare (including taxes) NZD 2723.71

That is a lot money compared with other airlines. Last year I paid $2200 for a return flights to LHR via Hong Kong with CX. Are there gonna be people willing to pay 2723.71 for a return flight to LHR?
:rolleyes:

For those who doesn't care getting airpoints, or quickest route but only airfare, will they fly with AIRNZ new route to LHR?


The fares quoted now might be "shocking" but as we all know, airlines do launch promotional rates closer to the departure date.

In any case, travellers here in the UK are welcoming the extra competition on the busy LHR-HKG route which is dominated by Oneworld carriers with high fares to boot.

If the experience of LHR-LAX is anything to go by, we can expect ANZ to offer some good deals for LHR-HKG seeing as it has (as with LHR-LAX) no brand identity on this route.

This is wonderful news. I made the point recently that the only reason I wouldn't fly LHR-AKL on NZ was because of the LAX stopover and the US customs and immigration nonsense. Now I can go via one of my favourite cities and one of my favourite airlines! ^

Great stuff! More RTW options, hurrah. I wonder if there will be any combination fares available ex-Australia, eg Virgin to HKG then NZ to LHR? There's certainly some high class competition on this route - BA, CX, VS, QF - so this will be a real challenge for NZ... let's hope they can pull it off! :)

Well, I'd love to fly to New Zealand via Hong Kong (and perhaps spend a bit longer in NZ next time - 5 days wasn't even enough for Auckland). This is a great option for those who don't want to go through the US immigration/security lottery. It's also a great option for anyone wanting to travel directly from LHR to HKG on *A (in any class)!

Excellent, we again have a civilised one stop service from LHR-AKL without having to pass through the police state and in to the bargain, a *A service from LHR-HKG that will be very useful too. I need to go to NZ in November and I'm so pleased I can't stop grinning. :D :D :D

Excellent, we again have a civilised one stop service from LHR-AKL ...
Says an SQ PPS member ... :confused: ;)

Says an SQ PPS member ... :confused: ;)

He said "without having to pass through the police state"...

He said "without having to pass through the police state"...

This is abosulutely cracking news. Here's hoping for some nice promotional opening fares :)

Whilst it may not affect many, lets say ANZ offer the same fare to AKL via HKG as they do LAX - will some opt for LAX so they can take 2 pieces of baggage vs 23kg via HKG??

Well, personally I can't see any reason to fly this.

Yes, it means we avoid standing in a line at LAX in transit.

But

1) The HKG route takes longer both eastbound and westbound than flying via LAX.

2) The baggage allowance is less than half of what it is on the LAX route.

3) The only online stopover available is HKG, whereas the LAX route offers the possibility of LAX, SFO, NAN, PPT, RAR and APW, as well as HNL.

Only blind anti-Americanism makes the HKG option attractive.

Excellent news, and its nice the schedule isnt too similar to NZ1 and NZ2 thus offering choice and convenience.

Strictly this statement is incorrect - SQ flies to New York over both Pacific (nonstop) and Atlantic (via FRA).



Actually.. it is technically correct - while SQ does offer a RTW itinerary, In NYC SQ requires you to change airports - from JFK to EWR (SIN-FRA-JFK / EWR-SIN). NZ allows you to make all RTW connections from the same arrival/departure airport on each leg (AKL-HKG-LHR-LAX-AKL). :D

Only blind anti-Americanism makes the HKG option attractive.

Speaking for myself, it's just anti having to actually enter the US comprising of pick up my luggage, go through immigration, go through customs and then go through the same (long) security line as those passengers that have just checked in. Fine if I want to spend a night or two in LA (always an agreeable option) but a right royal PITA if not.

1) The HKG route takes longer both eastbound and westbound than flying via LAX.


Huh? No, LHR-AKL is quicker via HKG (flying time 22:30 vs 24:05), and likewise, AKL-LHR is quicker via LAX - eastbound is always faster. NZ38(E) has exactly the same posted flight time as NZ2(E), while NZ39 is ~25 mins longer than NZ1. Savvy travellers would route AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL for the shortest possible flight times (I wonder if you'll be able to do this on most fares?)


3) The only online stopover available is HKG, whereas the LAX route offers the possibility of LAX, SFO, NAN, PPT, RAR and APW, as well as HNL.


HKG is awesome! I'd take a stopover there over most of those places any day (ok, maybe not PPT or RAR ;) )

*Great* news! I fly to Holland a lot and even though I may end up continuing to use SQ with their direct service (i.e. no stopover for me in LHR) this is great alternative and an excellent point to stop on the way!

NZ website says NZ037/038....

So I guess this will replace the existing 767/777 service then?

This is good news! Congratulations NZ. ^ :)

Only blind anti-Americanism makes the HKG option attractive.Oh, my...

NZ website says NZ037/038....

Its NZ38/39 in the booking system, and according to nz_crew, the flight numbers will change later on.

So I guess this will replace the existing 767/777 service then?

Yes.

Well, personally I can't see any reason to fly this.

Yes, it means we avoid standing in a line at LAX in transit.

But

1) The HKG route takes longer both eastbound and westbound than flying via LAX.

2) The baggage allowance is less than half of what it is on the LAX route.

3) The only online stopover available is HKG, whereas the LAX route offers the possibility of LAX, SFO, NAN, PPT, RAR and APW, as well as HNL.

Only blind anti-Americanism makes the HKG option attractive.
Nonsense. Not desiring to stand in line at immigration when merely transiting en route to a third country or to run the security gauntlet is not "anti-Americanism". Face the truth: the USA's ridiculous and ineffective so-called "security" precautions cause resentment even among citizens of allied countries.

Something funny is going on when we have reached a point where people are more repulsed by the USA and its practices than the People's Republic of China.

But that's another matter.

I have read the post on airliners.net and I can assure you that AKL-HKG-LHR-HKG-AKL takes slightly longer than AKL-LAX-LHR-LAX-AKL, even though it is marginally shorter.

I stand by my original reply: I'd rather fly the route which is quicker, allows double the baggage, and permits a wider range of on-line stopovers.

Mind you, if NZ management have any sense (unlikely) they will take A320s off the afternoon AKL-BNE and AKL-MEL route and replace them with 767s, which will then fly up to HKG to connect to the LHR flight. The planes would then return to BNE and MEL in time for the next day's BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL flight. The front 4 rows would remain Business (24 seats) while rows 7,8 and 9 would be Premium Economy (13 seats). Or, more radically, rows 1-4 could be sold as Premium Economy with no Business Class, but I think that that would harm yield.

This would offer a 24 hour BNE-HKG-LHR and MEL-HKG-LHR flight, competitive in flight time with Qantas, Singapore and Emirates, but with the only Premium Economy service to LHR from those cities, the biggest Economy Class legroom and the best Business Class seats.

SYD-HKG-LHR is a market already cornered by Virgin Atlantic. But those much maligned 767s could do the job for Air NZ from Melbourne and Brisbane.

Like everyone else here really pleased at this new route. Does anyone know what facilities there are in the United lounge at HKG? Specifically any showers, as we are looking at a trip later this year and will break the journey in one direction or the other. Looked on the Air NZ webiste and only a map of where to find the lounge. However I guess as *Gold we could access one of the other lounges - SQ or TG if their facilities are better.

Something funny is going on when we have reached a point where people are more repulsed by the USA and its practices than the People's Republic of China.


Well, there's something going on but I and countless others don't think it's funny. I have no wish to join endless queues to be interrogated in the middle of a long haul flight by self important immigration staff of a country I don't wish to visit simply because the aircraft needs to refuel - the way they are behaving ever again. Repulsed by the USA, that's an understatement. Just imagine, if some of the distances that are covered non-stop these days were not possible and perhaps one of the Gulf states or India brought in such a system - would the USA not have a lot to say about its citizens being harassed and demand that they travel freely? The land of the free - for some, but then it always was.

Says an SQ PPS member ... :confused: ;)

An LPPS member actually! :D There are still great attractions to me of flying on a one-stop service if it is painless at SIN - and NZ have always been one of my favourites. HKG is also my favourite city in SE Asia so for me, it's win all the way.

He said "without having to pass through the police state"...

I didn't mean SIN!

I didn't mean SIN!I get it now...

Nonsense. Not desiring to stand in line at immigration when merely transiting en route to a third country or to run the security gauntlet is not "anti-Americanism". Face the truth: the USA's ridiculous and ineffective so-called "security" precautions cause resentment even among citizens of allied countries.

I agree. That's why I go via Asia currently. An all NZ service via Asia will likely win some of my business over competitors.

Mind you, if NZ management have any sense (unlikely) they will take A320s off the afternoon AKL-BNE and AKL-MEL route and replace them with 767s, which will then fly up to HKG to connect to the LHR flight. The planes would then return to BNE and MEL in time for the next day's BNE-AKL and MEL-AKL flight. The front 4 rows would remain Business (24 seats) while rows 7,8 and 9 would be Premium Economy (13 seats). Or, more radically, rows 1-4 could be sold as Premium Economy with no Business Class, but I think that that would harm yield.

This would offer a 24 hour BNE-HKG-LHR and MEL-HKG-LHR flight, competitive in flight time with Qantas, Singapore and Emirates, but with the only Premium Economy service to LHR from those cities, the biggest Economy Class legroom and the best Business Class seats.

SYD-HKG-LHR is a market already cornered by Virgin Atlantic. But those much maligned 767s could do the job for Air NZ from Melbourne and Brisbane.

This doesnt make sense to me. VS is doing very poorly with SYD-HKG-LHR which would be the biggest market. Why would NZ do so much better, especially with the 767s on BNE/MEL-HKG vv legs?

From which city; akl,hkg,lax,lhr would be the cheapest starting point for an all anz biz rtw?

Actually.. it is technically correct - while SQ does offer a RTW itinerary, In NYC SQ requires you to change airports - from JFK to EWR (SIN-FRA-JFK / EWR-SIN). NZ allows you to make all RTW connections from the same arrival/departure airport on each leg (AKL-HKG-LHR-LAX-AKL). :D

According to a report posted by ntddevsys in the news thread, NZ is weighing up whether the new service will use LHR or LGW. Of course it could just be posturing as part of negotiations for a slot.

Of those probably AKL, but you could probably do even better starting in one of the south pacific islands that has service to LAX.

Something funny is going on when we have reached a point where people are more repulsed by the USA and its practices than the People's Republic of China.
DCF, I understand where you're coming from - back at the end of 2003 during my first visit to Australia, the Australian parliament heckled George Bush during his speech and then sat in respectful silence two days later when Hu Jintao visited and made his speech. Unbelievable moral unequivalence certainly.

But you're picking the wrong fight! US immigration and customs, when you're only stopping off there as a transfer pax, is a major pain in the butt. China don't do this, so for any pax travelling between LHR and AKL on NZ, the HKG route presents the path of least resistance.

This is a very simple "minimal hassle" argument, you shouldn't read too much else into it.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I cannot bring up these flights for booking (tried various dates and the various ways of booking online).

I`m just curious but what has happened with those of you have gone through immigration at LAX into the transit lounge? I`ve read that some of you hate it because of the hassle and smartypants officers.

I`ve gone through it several times and they have always been kind and never asked me silly questions. Just stamp my passport and that`s it.

But then again, maybe I`ve been lucky. :)

What silly questions have they asked you?

Its not the questions that are the issue.

Compare the transit process at LAX with that at say SIN or BKK, or for that matter any major airport in other countries. Most places, other than US, don't require you to enter the country if you are transiting to a third country (even on separate flights let alone a same plane service). Fingerprint and eye scan makes you feel like a criminal. Other places dont lock you up in an airside cell.

If you dare wish to use a real lounge, then by the time you clear immigration, clear customs, go upstairs, clear security (with the whole belt and shoes palaver) and make it to the lounge it is time to board - yup just wasted the best part of 2 hours queueing :mad:

Best lounges in hkg is the thai lounge and sq lounge both have good food. Ua is the only star lounge with showers.

But you're picking the wrong fight! US immigration and customs, when you're only stopping off there as a transfer pax, is a major pain in the butt. China don't do this, so for any pax travelling between LHR and AKL on NZ, the HKG route presents the path of least resistance.

This is a very simple "minimal hassle" argument, you shouldn't read too much else into it.

HKG certainly allow you to transit without passing through immigration or customs - a welcome change from LAX. Indeed, most countries allow for passengers in transit to wander the departure concourse at will.

Slightly OT, but unfortunately mainland China is a different story (though this is supposed to change, at PEK at least, once the new terminal opens there in time for the 2008 Olympics). At PVG for example, you don't need a visa to transit but you must clear immigration, AND reclaim your bag, AND recheck it in the check-in hall, and then clear outbound immigration, then security. This even applies if you fly in and out on the same carrier.

I've just confirmed booking on my HKG-LHR flight with Air New Zeland
a couple of hours ago. Am I the first passenger booking with NZ on
the HKG-LHR leg (not the whole journey)?

Btw, who's the first passenger of this route? In terms of booking-wise?

But you're picking the wrong fight! US immigration and customs, when you're only stopping off there as a transfer pax, is a major pain in the butt. China don't do this, so for any pax travelling between LHR and AKL on NZ, the HKG route presents the path of least resistance.



OK, I know Hongkong is now Chinese territory again but China has no involvement in any of Hongkong's air service agreements, immigration and economic policy, or running of airports and other infrastructure. As a HK native I would just would like to steer people in the right direction ! :)